If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. By now, we’ve all heard the familiar refrain: “It’s for your safety.” It’s the soothing mantra of every government official who’s ever wanted a peek behind your digital curtains. This week, with a move that would make East Germany blush, the UK government officially confirmed its intention to hand Ofcom  (yes, that Ofcom, the regulator that once investigated whether Love Island was too spicy) the keys to your private messages. The country, already experiencing rapidly declining civil liberties, is now planning to scan encrypted chats for “bad stuff.” Now, for those unfamiliar, Ofcom is the UK’s communications regulator that has recently been given censorship pressure powers for online speech. It’s become the government’s Swiss Army knife for everything from internet censorship to now, apparently, full-blown surveillance. Under the Online Safety Act, Ofcom has been handed something called Section 121, which sounds like a tax loophole but is actually a legal crowbar for prying open encrypted messages. It allows the regulator to compel any online service that lets people talk to each other, Facebook Messenger, Signal, iMessage, etc to install “accredited technology” to scan for terrorism or child abuse material. More: Starmer Adds To UK Civil Liberties Decline With Reckless iCloud Backdoor Demand The way this works is by scanning all your messages. Not just the suspicious ones. Not just the flagged ones. Every single message. On your device. Before they’re encrypted. This is “client-side scanning,” which is a clever euphemism for “we’re turning your phone into a government informant.” Let’s be clear about what’s at stake. End-to-end encryption is what keeps your private messages private. But the UK’s plan effectively makes that encryption irrelevant. If the message gets scanned before it’s encrypted, the whole thing is about as useful as putting a padlock on a door that’s already wide open. This isn’t some consequence. This is the point. Lord Hanson of Flint, the man chosen to deliver this particularly Orwellian update in the House of Lords, confirmed that Ofcom is expected to start using these powers just as soon as it finishes its report. “We have set a date of April 2026,” he said, presumably while polishing his best ‘nothing to see here’ smile, “and we expect to act extremely speedily once we have had the report back.” Baroness Butler-Sloss, clearly tired of waiting for this dystopia to arrive on schedule, pushed for Ofcom to get on with it. “Work to do this now,” she said. Meanwhile, Baroness Berger popped up to promote something called “upload prevention technology.” It sounds like an antivirus program crossed with a puritanical school principal, and she claimed it can stop harmful content before it spreads. Lovely idea. Also, exactly how Chinese censorship works. She also accused tech companies of lying when they say scanning encrypted messages isn’t possible. And maybe they are. But when your answer to that is “Well, we’ll just force them to comply by law,” you’re not solving the problem. You’re building a digital panopticon with the grace of a sledgehammer. Here’s the problem. Once you install the infrastructure to scan for one kind of content, however vile, it’s there forever. And that tool, like every government tool, will be “repurposed.” It starts with child abuse material, because who’s going to defend not catching that? Then maybe a few terrorist memes. Then maybe “hate speech.” Then “misinformation.” Then a joke about the Prime Minister’s haircut. And suddenly, you’re far from a democracy. You’re just renting space in an open-air digital prison where your every word is silently filed away in a database next to your Amazon shopping history and that one embarrassing search from 2013. We’ve been yelling about this for years. You cannot build a scanning system that only finds “the bad stuff.” The government is playing the long game. Ofcom will issue its report by April 2026, followed by a “consultation,” which, let’s be honest, only ever goes one way, and then the Home Office will act “extremely speedily,” whatever that means in bureaucratic time. What’s certain is this: if they get their way, private messaging in the UK will be gone. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post UK Orders Ofcom to Explore Encryption Backdoors appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. A major expansion of the UK’s Online Safety Act (OSA) has taken effect, legally obliging digital platforms to deploy surveillance-style systems that scan, detect, and block user content before it can be seen. The government’s new Online Safety Act 2023 (Priority Offenses) (Amendment) Regulations 2025, which came into force on January 8, 2026, designates “cyberflashing” and “encouraging or assisting serious self-harm” as priority offenses, categories that trigger the strictest compliance duties under the OSA. This marks a decisive move toward preemptive censorship. Services that allow user interaction, including messaging apps, forums, and search engines, must now monitor communications at scale to ensure that prohibited content is automatically filtered or suppressed before users can even encounter it. To meet the law’s demands, companies are expected to rely heavily on automated scanning systems, content detection algorithms, and artificial intelligence models trained to evaluate the legality of text, images, and videos in real time. The UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) unveiled the changes through a promotional video showing a smartphone scanning AirDropped photos and warning the user that an “unwanted nude” had been detected. https://video.reclaimthenet.org/articles/dRJzfC3aJ8OGsKqQ.mp4 This visual captures the law’s core requirement: platforms must implement continuous background surveillance to identify and block flagged content, effectively converting private communication spaces into monitored environments. In its official press release, DSIT said the new rules compel firms to “take proactive steps to prevent this vile content before users see it,” describing the measure as part of the government’s strategy to halve violence against women and girls within a decade. Technology Secretary Liz Kendall stated, “We’ve cracked down on perpetrators of this vile crime – now we’re turning up the heat on tech firms. Platforms are now required by law to detect and prevent this material. The internet must be a space where women and girls feel safe, respected, and able to thrive.” Platforms that fail to comply face severe penalties, including fines of up to 10% of global turnover or £18 million, whichever is greater, and potential service blocking in the UK. “Safeguarding” Minister Jess Phillips said, “For too long, cyberflashing has been just another degrading abuse women and girls are expected to endure. We are changing this.” She added, “By placing the responsibility on tech companies to block this vile content before users see it, we are preventing women and girls from being harmed in the first place.” Behind this framing, however, lies a bigger structural change: routine surveillance of user-generated content. Compliance will require platforms to perform mass scanning of messages, images, and uploads across their networks, even in spaces traditionally regarded as private. Such measures risk capturing lawful communications and chilling legitimate expression, as automated filters often misjudge intent or context. By requiring companies to predict and prevent “illegal content” before it appears, the UK is embedding a model of proactive censorship at the infrastructure level of online communication. This positions large sections of the internet under continuous monitoring, with user privacy treated as a secondary concern rather than a fundamental right. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post UK Expands Online Safety Act to Mandate Preemptive Scanning of Digital Communications appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Iran’s connection to the global internet largely collapsed on Thursday as nationwide demonstrations intensified, according to several organizations that monitor online traffic. Independent data showed that the country’s digital links to the outside world dropped almost to zero within minutes, leaving citizens unable to communicate or share updates as protests spread. NetBlocks, Cloudflare, and Georgia Tech’s Internet Outage Detection and Analysis system all recorded the same sudden plunge in connectivity. “We continue to see a small amount of traffic, but the country is effectively completely offline,” said David Belson, Cloudflare’s head of data insight. The mass outage follows renewed unrest triggered by a severe decline in the value of Iran’s currency, which has driven up prices and emptied store shelves. By late December, strikes and protests had erupted in multiple cities, and many merchants in Tehran’s traditional bazaar kept their doors closed for over a week. Iranian officials have a long record of turning off the internet during political flashpoints. The current disruption appears to mirror tactics used in June during Iran’s brief conflict with Israel, when authorities blocked access nationwide, claiming it was necessary to prevent “Israeli infiltration.” Street protests have expanded across major cities, including Tabriz, Mashhad, Isfahan, Kerman, and Tehran. Security officials have promised severe punishment for anyone participating in the unrest. Iran has restricted digital freedom since at least 2005, maintaining long-term bans on platforms such as Facebook and Instagram. Millions of Iranians have relied on VPNs to bypass those restrictions, but a full nationwide blackout leaves those tools useless. The latest disconnection not only prevents coordination among protesters but also blocks the flow of independent reporting. With state-controlled media offering little information, the blackout conceals both the scale of dissent and the government’s response. The outage shows how censorship now operates as a technological weapon. When access to communication itself becomes conditional on political obedience, public truth and private liberty vanish together. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Iran Cuts Internet Nationwide as Protests Spread Across Major Cities appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Kentucky has introduced a new Mobile ID app that allows residents to carry a state-issued digital ID on their smartphones. The credential can currently be used at TSA checkpoints in select airports and is described as a voluntary digital version of a driver’s license or state ID for limited verification purposes. The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, which is overseeing the rollout, says the program is part of the state’s adoption of mobile driver’s license technology. The digital ID is stored securely on the user’s phone and relies on encrypted Bluetooth connections for verification, removing the need to hand over a physical card. At this stage, the credential is accepted only for TSA identity checks. The state has not indicated when or if it will expand to other uses such as traffic stops, public service access, or age-restricted purchases. Kentucky officials have also stated that the app is not meant to serve as a full digital wallet but as a narrowly defined identification tool. Governor Andy Beshear described the Mobile ID as “a secure and convenient option” for residents who wish to use it. Transportation Cabinet Secretary Jim Gray noted that the digital version “reduces exposure of personal information” compared with showing a physical license. The state has published detailed guidance explaining how to enroll, verify, and use the credential during airport screenings. Kentucky’s Mobile ID app is not an isolated gadget for airport lines. It fits into a broader state effort to rethink how identity and age are confirmed in both physical and online settings. This comes at a time when Kentucky lawmakers are actively expanding legal frameworks around age verification and digital identity across multiple fronts. The Mobile ID lets residents carry a secure digital version of their driver’s license or state ID on a smartphone, currently usable at TSA checkpoints in participating airports. The app’s design stores credentials locally on the device and uses encrypted Bluetooth to transmit only the necessary details for a verification task. At the same time that the state is embracing mobile identity technology, lawmakers have enacted age verification legislation that applies to online activity. Under House Bill 278, websites hosting adult content must verify that users are at least 18 years old before allowing access, which in practice has led some major adult sites to block access for Kentucky users rather than collect ID data online. This law took effect in mid-2024 and reflects a legislative move to enforce age checks on digital platforms. Kentucky’s digital identity initiative and its age verification law point toward a future where proving age and identity electronically may become more common in many contexts. Today, the Mobile ID is limited to TSA security checks, but the underlying technology could be extended to support requirements like online age verification for adult content, other regulated services, or retail age-restricted sales. States exploring mobile IDs often highlight age checks among the first “real-world” use cases once the technology is in place. Officials have not announced firm plans to integrate the Mobile ID with Kentucky’s online age verification requirements or other digital services, but the technical model being built is consistent with broader trends and a long-term agenda. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Kentucky Launches Mobile ID App Amid Broader Push for Digital Identity and Age Verification Law appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. A confrontation now unfolding between the UK’s communications regulator and a US-based website is ultimately less about the merits of certain online content than about jurisdiction. At stake is whether British authorities can fine and disrupt a company that operates entirely in the US and under US law for speech that is legal in the United States and protected by the First Amendment. On January 6, Ofcom disclosed that it had issued a “provisional notice of contravention” under the controversial Online Safety Act to an unnamed suicide discussion forum, suggesting a path toward financial penalties and court-ordered service blockades. More: UK Speech Regulator Ofcom Claims First Amendment Doesn’t Protect Americans From Its Censorship Law Attorney Preston Byrne has stated that the forum is wholly owned and operated from the United States and has already blocked UK users. The regulator framed its action as part of a compliance process under the UK’s censorship law, the Online Safety Act, citing alleged failures to respond to statutory information requests and to maintain required internal documentation related to illegal content risk assessments. Ofcom said it is preparing a formal decision in the first quarter of the year and warned that unresolved concerns could lead to penalties of up to £18 million or 10 percent of global revenue, whichever is higher. More significantly, Ofcom stated that it is prepared to ask courts to compel “third parties to withdraw services from, or block access to, a regulated service in the UK.” That would allow the regulator to pressure internet service providers, search engines, or other intermediaries into cutting off access to a site, even if the site itself has no UK presence and the UK has no jurisdiction. What makes the case unusual is that the platform has already implemented UK IP blocking. More: 4chan and Kiwi Farms Tell Ofcom It Can’t Censor and Run From Lawsuits The dispute is not about harm prevention but about whether UK regulators can enforce domestic speech rules against foreign speakers who are outside their legal reach. Byrne said that the site “will not entertain foreign censorship codes that violate rights secured by the Constitution.” In a separate post on X, Byrne described the case as politically driven, writing that “the entire UK censorship-industrial complex needs a ‘win’ for the Act so badly (having not had one in a year), they’ll manufacture one.” The Online Safety Act says that Ofcom has wide latitude to regulate user-to-user platforms, but Ofcom seems to think it has power beyond the UK border. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Pro-Censorship UK Regulator Pesters a US Forum Already Blocked in Britain appeared first on Reclaim The Net.