The UK government is pushing ahead with plans to update surveillance laws, despite criticism from privacy activists, communications firms and three parliamentary committees.
Earlier today, the Home Office published the latest version of its Investigatory Powers Bill, nicknamed the 鈥渟nooper鈥檚 charter鈥�, which had been released in draft form last November. 鈥淭he revised bill is both clearer and stronger in protecting privacy,鈥� said home secretary Theresa May.
The attempts to clarify that a company will only be forced to remove 鈥渆lectronic protections鈥�, such as encryption, that it has applied to users鈥� messages when it is 鈥渢echnically feasible鈥� to do so. The earlier version suggested firms could be required to decrypt messages for which they do not have a key, which is impossible.
Advertisement
This may still be the case, and will hinge on whether firms like Apple are deemed to apply end-to-end encryption to messages, or if a user does it themselves. End-to-end encryption means that even the software author (in this case Apple) does not have access to the key, only the two users communicating. But given the communication takes place on Apple鈥檚 platform, the government may be leaving itself some wiggle room.
Heavily criticised
The government has also not stepped back from its heavily criticised plans requiring communications firms to hold 鈥渋nternet connection records鈥�, detailing users鈥� web history, for 12 months, for use by police and security services in investigations. The scope of these powers has actually been , not just illegal websites or communications services.
Security services will also still be permitted to hack phones and computers en masse to gather surveillance data in the new bill. The government refers to this as 鈥渂ulk equipment interference鈥� and it is a key issue for the new legislation, which seeks to clarify the legal basis for the kind of actions revealed by Edward Snowden.
Critics say their concerns have not been listened to, and the government is attempting to rush through the legislation without proper scrutiny. 鈥淭he bill published today continues to adhere to the structure and the underlying rationale that underpinned the draft IP bill, despite the criticism and lengthy list of recommendations from three parliamentary committees,鈥� said Gus Hosein of Privacy International.
鈥淭he Home Office is treating the British public with contempt if it thinks it鈥檚 acceptable to rush a bill of this magnitude through Parliament,鈥� said Jim Killock of the Open Rights Group. 鈥淚f passed, it would mean that the UK has one of the most draconian surveillance laws of any democracy with mass surveillance powers to monitor every citizen鈥檚 browsing history.鈥�
