* Posts by PRL

3 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Aug 2009

UK.gov is launching an anti-Facebook encryption push. Don't think of the children: Think of the nuances and edge cases instead



The way the terminology is used is a bit rubbish - I mean all encryption in transit has 2 ends and all VPN tunnels or transports have 2+ endpoints.

The only distinction is whether both ends are on users own devices or one end is controlled by a [social media] company.

Whenever governments or TLAs talk about this it always comes across as wanting all the benefits of VPNs for themselves just not in the hands of civilians.

It's silly as the you can demonstrate methods purely on paper so they ultimately arrive at defending a position where you say a particular branch or application of maths is not allowed, or at least "when you do this type of maths on a computer you have to let us see all your working on demand or else it's unlawful".

Besides I thought the various authorities has already decided they would have legally backed rights to gain access to data on a device after it's already decrypted and collect it in the cleartext there rather than trying to access it en-route.

NASA moon-bomb probe strikes rich seam of fruitcake


Re: What's the square root of -100?

±10i (where i² is defined as -1)

IBM UK facing 'backlash' over pension snuffing


Employee contributions?

If the employees have been paying contributions and IBM unilaterally revoke the final salary pension - I think IBM should be obliged to offer (as a minimum) a full refund of all contributions to date (less tax, but with compound interest added).

An employee's contributions are part of pay so if the scheme was wound up I'd want them back, or the benefits accrued to date (whichever is greater).

If as is usual, the IBM-provided schemes (past and future) are optional, the employees should be free to move their contributions [past and future] to a pension / savings / investment of their choice.