"I don't need to understand how encryption works to understand how it's helping the criminals," Rudd said during a fringe event at the Conservative party conference this week (2 October). "I will engage with the security services to find the best way to combat that." http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/amber-rudd-doesnt-understand-how-strong-encryption-works-pledges-break-it-anyway-1641658
I am not sure which is worse-Rudd's arrogance that despite being ignorant of how encryption works she is determined to break it anyway or the fact that this is yet one more attack by Amber Rudd on our civil liberties. In this respect she is continuing in the 'proud' tradition of her predecessor Teresa May, the Prime Minister (a position currently being coveted by Rudd-the Gods help us if this woman is ever successful in achieving her aims!) Rudd fails to understand that without encryption every single person who uses the Internet would be vulnerable to hacking, attacks by criminals and fraud. Apparently catching at the most one or two enemies (if she is lucky) of the state is more important to her than the safety of millions of British Internet users.
"Rudd is proposing to make the public safer from terrorists – with no proof that removing encryption will have an impact – while leaving them at the mercy of cybercriminals."
According to Rudd:
" Rudd wrote that "real people" are not interested in secure end-to-end encryption on messaging services in an article in The Telegraph, arguing that its one billion daily users are more interested in its ease of use.
"Who uses WhatsApp because it is end-to-end encrypted, rather than because it is an incredibly user-friendly and cheap way of staying in touch with friends and family?" she wrote, arguing that secure encryption isn't a must-have for regular users.
"Companies are constantly making trade-offs between security and 'usability', and it is here where our experts believe opportunities may lie," she said. "Real people often prefer ease of use and a multitude of features to perfect, unbreakable security." http://www.itpro.co.uk/security/29148/amber-rudd-claims-real-people-arent-interested-in-encryption
I am unclear as to who Rudd has in mind when she says "real people". She is inferring that people at large do not care if their privacy and safety from both criminal and government snooping (sometimes these two are the same thing) is compromised so long as they have ease of communications. If these be "real people" then they must by interpretation be idiots. Perhaps in true elitist fashion she really means the "little people".