Broadly-defined "hostile acts" in UK national security law

Reasoning:

* Original report behind the article: "State Threats Legislation in 2024" [0], i.e., UK national security law

* Article focuses on an example from section 6.17 where developing an encrypted messenger app is given to show how broad the definition of "hostile act" is

* Snippets from the article:

> In his independent review of the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act and the newly implemented National Security Act, Hall KC highlights the incredibly broad scope of powers granted to authorities. > > He warns that developers of apps like Signal and WhatsApp could technically fall within the legal definition of "hostile activity" simply because their technology "make[s] it more difficult for UK security and intelligence agencies to monitor communications."

[0] Original report: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/69411a3eadb57...

"Creating apps like Signal could be considered 'hostile activities' under new Counter-Terrorism and National Security Acts, UK watchdog warns"

The language changes here are slight (claims -> warns) and includes more context about the reason this watchdog is speaking out (current debates around the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act, new implementation of the National Security Act), using language from the first 4 paragraphs (may be considered, could be considered, stark warning, report warns, etc).

You could also leave out the specific names of the acts—they're not super helpful to me as a non-UK news consumer, but I suspect they might be more crucial to someone who's tapped into the UK political news cycle:

"Creating apps like Signal could be considered 'hostile activities' under new laws, UK watchdog warns"

"Independent review of UK national security law warns of overreach" - this, apart from the addition of "UK", is verbatim from the article and much more accurately describes the event being reported.