Online Safety Bill must not weaken encryption, experts tell Sunak
Encryption is critical to building economic security through a pro-business UK economy, they argue
In an open letter to UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, several security experts and human rights groups have expressed their worries about the danger that the UK's Online Safety Bill presents to end-to-end encryption (E2EE).
The letter's signatories contend that since UK residents and companies now rely more heavily than ever on E2EE to secure themselves, the government must ensure that the Online Safety Bill does not impair encryption in private communications.
"Encryption is critical to ensuring Internet users are protected online, to building economic security through a pro-business UK economy that can weather the cost of living crisis, and to assuring national security," the letter to the Prime Minister states.
"As you begin your new role as Prime Minister, the undersigned civil society organisations and companies, including members of the Global Encryption Coalition, urge you and your government to ensure that encryption is not weakened."
Campaign groups caution that the Online Safety Bill's current provisions will erode encryption in private communications, reducing internet safety for UK citizens and businesses, including the very groups that Online Safety Bill seeks to protect.
They further argue that these proposals will compromise freedom of speech, which they claim is a crucial aspect of free society that sets the UK apart from aggressors that use oppression and force to achieve their objectives.
The Online Safety Bill may be up for discussion in the British Parliament again as early as next week.
Legal but harmful speech
Parliamentary debate on the Bill was put on hold throughout the summer and once again in October as a result of political unrest within the ruling Conservative Party.
The government has hinted that it wants to make amendments to the draft, although these changes are expected to be focused on clauses related to so-called 'legal but harmful' speech.
During the Conservative Party leadership race this summer, Rishi Sunak voiced concerns about the potential for the Bill to stifle freedom of expression, since the Government would have the ability to designate information as 'legal but harmful'. He promised to amend Clause 14, which would have given social media companies the right to delete offensive comments they did not agree with.
The case against government backdoors
Privacy advocates claim that the various proposals put forth by different governments in recent years to scan user-to-user communication for criminal content are flawed because they are based on the false assumption that a backdoor or other workaround to read encrypted messages can only be created for use in beneficial ways.
"That isn't the case, and never will be," they argue, adding that criminals, domestic abusers, and authoritarian regimes would take advantage of backdoors like those suggested by the Online Safety Bill.
"We all deserve the protection that end-to-end encryption provides, but the most vulnerable in society - children and members of at-risk communities - need it most of all."
A welcome for the Bill
Meanwhile, the return of the Online Safety Bill in the parliament has been welcomed by child safety groups.
The return of the Bill was hailed as a "relief" by Susie Hargreaves, CEO of the Internet Watch Foundation, which organises efforts to combat child abuse images online.
"We've seen that the threats facing people, particularly children, online are not going away, and we know strong and unequivocal action will be needed if the UK is to realise its aim of being the safest place in the world to be online," she said.
"Now, we need to see lawmakers pull together with a common aim. Police, charities, and big tech businesses are all doing a phenomenal amount of work, and a clear direction from government will be a welcome boost."