Prominent backbench MP Sarah Champion launched a campaign against VPNs previously, saying: “My new clause 54 would require the Secretary of State to publish, within six months of the Bill’s passage, a report on the effect of VPN use on Ofcom’s ability to enforce the requirements under clause 112.

"If VPNs cause significant issues, the Government must identify those issues and find solutions, rather than avoiding difficult problems.” And the Labour Party said there were “gaps” in the bill that needed to be amended.

  • minorkeys@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    3 days ago

    Funny how its always so important to ban useful and empowering things for citizens in the name of safety but someone we can’t ban business practices that cause mass extinctions, change the climate, impoverish the working class or kill enough of us to only be seen as a statistic instead of people. If they actually cared about safety, they would be banning the things that cause mass suffering and death, not VPNs. We should be opposed to these kinds of bans on the principle that it further disempowered us so we are less able to deal with the threats of all the mass suffering and death that they refuse to keep us safe from.

  • GreenBottles@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Yeah, businesses will not accept this. Remote work and remote connections rely on VPN for ALL KINDS OF SHIT. If you must adhere to some kinds of government compliance, it is even MANDATED BY THE FUCKING GOVERNMENT. Explain to me how the hell that is going to just poof and not cause all kinds of problems.

  • Iambus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    3 days ago

    Lol what is going on over there. The UK is becoming more dystopian by the day.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    3 days ago

    If VPNs cause significant issues, the Government must identify those issues and find solutions, rather than avoiding difficult problems

    Your law is the difficult problem you daft cunt

  • npcknapsack@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    3 days ago

    People are “at risk”… of what? What a terrible article to not even clarify what the risk is. Because it sounds to me like the government is who put those people at risk by making them go look for solutions to a draconian policy.

  • commander@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    To me it looks like every government in the world is pro-surveillance and anti-privacy; they’re just all at different stages of depth into those ideologies done in practice. Privacy and anti-surveillance against foreign governments and corporations, pro for domestic. And I continue decade after decade to say that you should fear your domestic government far more than any foreign unless you’re a country that may have US and allies bombing/droning and paratrooping your country. Countries with a modern enough military mostly have to worry about their own government rather than foreign governments

  • TimewornTraveler@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 days ago

    this is obviously such a dumpster fire that I can’t help but wonder, “When will they realize how dumb this is and back out of it?”

    then i remember that Brexit happened

    fuckin stubbornness is a national identity for you blokes innit

  • muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    112
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    If they outlaw VPNs then all internet-connected businesses will flee and everyone will just move to the dark net. Then you’ve got a whole other problem.

    These ancient tyrants are in over their heads.

    • PastafARRian@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Selfishly, I think this is great for I2P/Snowflake/Tor. The incoming legitimate traffic helps to protect its most vulnerable users.

    • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      Honest question but what makes you think that would happen? Do most businesses use VPNs?

      • skisnow@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        ·
        3 days ago

        VPNs are one of the core security measures of all large companies.

        VPNs aren’t just a “hide your IP” tool, they’re a way of giving someone access to an organisation’s internal network. Sensitive servers such as databases, wikis, scheduling tools etc don’t have publicly exposed IPs, they only have connections that are accessible from inside that VPN. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_in_depth_(computing)

        • Blemgo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          3 days ago

          Not only that, but they are crucial for network security. VPNs allow all network traffic (with a few necessary exceptions) to be routed through the company’s network and benefit from its security measures, mainly monitoring traffic for suspicious and malicious behaviour. Without it, finding compromised PCs is much harder and enforcing company policies regarding web use would be impossible outside the office.

      • muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        4 days ago

        Damn near every business uses VPN technology. They literally cannot exist in the modern world without it. It would be incredibly expensive and impractical to do without.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      The UK has long championed writing legislative checks that their emaciated state infrastructure can’t cash.

    • LinyosT@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      If they do outlaw it will likely be banned solely for non-business use for this reason alone.

  • Rob T Firefly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    The linked story has been updated. The headline now reads:

    Labour rules out VPN ban in UK but issues warning to UK households

    Labour won’t ban the use of Virtual Private Networks

    And the story begins:

    Labour has ruled out a possible VPN ban after reports thousands of UK households were at risk following the Online Safety Act kicking in under the government. Labour Party Tech Secretary Peter Kyle has revealed that the Government is “not considering a VPN ban” - after reports in Guido Fawkes suggested it was possible.

  • TheOrionArm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    How is this even feasible? People need them for work, business, school etc. The UK is going nuts with the attempts to regulate the internet.

  • MudMan@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    364
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Just to fast-forward this dumb cat-and-mouse thing, the next step is people go back to torrenting their porn and deeper down the rabbit hole of garbage “free” websites skirting the rules.

    As always, the UK is useful on the international stage because sometimes you need to be able to point at some idiot trying dumb stuff to explain to people why dumb stuff is dumb.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      109
      ·
      4 days ago

      It does feel that way. UK bureaucracy is just one giant guinea pig stunting it’s own commonwealth.

      Next someone will try enforcing paper umbrellas as a solution for climate action. We’ll all say, “That won’t work”. They’ll still do it; it won’t work. We’ll say, “We told you so”, and it won’t get reversed because they’re already aiming at the next foot to shoot.

      • Whostosay@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        4 days ago

        There has to be a logical next step for the information age. Old school government is not fucking working, and we can all see it.

        The fact that there aren’t large scale riots already is astounding.

      • Saleh@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        I am pretty sure they would consider tor as using a VPN.

        Probably they would demand ISPs to run lists of known VPN addresses and if you connect to them, they will forward the information to the anti-terrorism unit and you will get SWATed.

          • Tiger@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            I believe China can stop any kind of access at any time, they just choose to allow a certain percentage of folks to get through above a certain bar of sophistication and need.

          • Saleh@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            Don’t the people in those countries use a proxy to access tor first? probably that means cycling through the proxies regularly as they become known. I have no doubt that it is impossible to prevent truly tech savvy people from access. Also Russia, Iran and China all run state sanctioned hackers, so the governments have a vested interest in allowing these groups to obscure where they are coming from.

            But i am not sure how much that transpires to a broader public.

            • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              4 days ago

              That’s what things like snowflake and bridges are for. Because, at least with snowflake, it just looks like a webRTC phone call. But it’s actually tor traffic. And snowflake proxies are ephemeral, since you can just run them in your browser and help anyone connect.

    • thatonecoder@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 days ago

      Their next strategy will be to keep a list of websites that are “government approved”, I’m afraid. Long live the Great UK Firewall!!

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 days ago

    You cant ban vpns, its easy for tech people to set up a vpn server on any server on the internet and connect to it. Wireguard for example, super simple.