UK lawmakers tell government to retool surveillance bill

British lawmakers on Thursday told the government it must retool a proposed bill that would give law enforcement greater access to online data and encrypted communications.

Paul Murphy, who heads a parliamentary committee that has been reviewing the bill, said the government “has a significant amount of further work to do before parliament can be confident that the provisions have been fully thought through,” according to multiple reports.

{mosads}The committee’s concerns center on provisions that would require companies to supply information about people’s “Internet connection records” and to potentially retain the ability to crack their encryption.

The government has argued the clause is a necessary tool to counter criminals’ increasing use of encrypted online platforms to hide from authorities.

But privacy advocates, Internet service providers and tech companies have strongly rejected the argument, insisting that maintaining an ability to crack encryption — called a back door — for the good guys also leaves open a door for the bad guys, the company said.

Apple made this argument in extensive comments submitted to the British Parliamentary Scrutiny Committee during its investigation.

British lawmakers didn’t completely side with these opponents, but said it understood their fears.

“We heard a good case from law enforcement and others about the desirability of having such a scheme,” said their report. “But we also heard strong concerns, in particular from some of the [Internet service] providers themselves, about the lack of clarity over what form the [Internet connection records] would take and about the cost and feasibility of creating and storing them.”

Internet privacy groups rejoiced at the report’s finding.

The committee “is absolutely right to oppose encryption backdoors and to tell the UK government it shouldn’t try to get away with using ‘targeted’ surveillance to monitor large groups of people who have no meaningful connection to any wrongdoing,” said Sarah St. Vincent, a human rights and surveillance legal fellow at digital rights advocate Center for Democracy & Technology.

“The committee’s frank recognition of the ways these powers can threaten privacy rights, as well as its clear concern about government overreach, are on the right track,” she added.

The debate echoes one that has been raging on Capitol Hill in the wake of the terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, Calif.

The FBI and other law enforcement officials have pressed companies to provide guaranteed access to encrypted data.

In response, a number of lawmakers are drawing up legislation that would ensure that desired access.

But a separate coalition has vocally opposed such measures, saying any bill that affects encryption standards would merely drive criminals to overseas encryption products.

The heated back-and-forth has created a temporary stalemate, as lawmakers try to figure out whether any encryption bill could gain traction.