Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

European Parliament approves mass surveillance of private communication

patrick-breyer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 434 posts

Re: European Parliament approves mass surveillance of private communication

#271

Post by throwaways885 »

estaseuropano wrote: post #231
throwaways885 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As somebody who was somewhat in-favour of Brexit (not popular here, admittedly), my view is that it's easier to fight for privacy against just the UK government, rather than the entire EU bloc. I think if an entity as powerful as the EU puts this into legislation, it's game over. I have a similar view on federal laws in the United States - they don't tend to repeal federal surveillance laws without violence.

But every member has a veto. You never needed to convince 28 countries, you only needed to convince your own government to vote against. Plenty of laws stuck in limbo because one country doesn't like it - but exactly zero laws on the books that sosme country really hates.

How does a group of citizens get a motion tabled to repeal mass surveillance laws in the EU? Just by sheer scale, it's harder to get the attention of the EU than it is the UK government.

Re: European Parliament approves mass surveillance of private communication

#272

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

petercooper wrote: post #5

I wonder how this meshes with GDPR as this seems like a huge violation of it. Law enforcement being able to dig into messages with a warrant is one thing, but delegating responsibilities to platforms to look for crime is quite another.

My understanding is that this explicitly creates an exception from one of the EU privacy laws (not sure if GDPR or something else) so that providers can scan your content.

While this doesn't seem to oblige providers to scan your content, that is expected to come in a next step.

Re: European Parliament approves mass surveillance of private communication

#273

Post by raverbashing »

shoeffner wrote: post #222
bitdivision wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not been able to find anything about final legislation either, though I did find some references [0] to the chat control legislation from June: [1]. I haven't read through it all, but the notable paragraph seemed to be: This Regulation therefore provides for a temporary derogation from Article 5(1) and Article 6 of Directive 2002/58/EC, which protect the confidentiality of communications and traffic data. 'der…

In [1], pages 10 and 11 are the actual directive, the rest is the reasoning. And, although I don't know the previous directives and regulations, it reads as if this is essentially an extension of an exception to the ePrivacy directive for another five years. Birgit Sippel says in her statement to the president of the parliament [2]: > Dieses Gesetz ist eine Übergangslösung für drei Jahre. Die Kommission hatte verspro…

Yeah, this is a fair assessment.

The main article is sensationalistic and overblown.

Re: European Parliament approves mass surveillance of private communication

#275

Post by cachvico »

gary_0 wrote: post #54
cachvico wrote: post #29

Warning - this is a work of fiction, or satire. Mods - perhaps you want to adjust the title.

How is it satire? Wikipedia[0] says that Patrick Breyer is a real MEP and this is his official blog. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Breyer

Appreciate the correction. I assumed it because of the last line "More Information on Chatcontrol: www.chatcontrol.eu" - that link literally redirects back to his own website.

Re: European Parliament approves mass surveillance of private communication

#276

Post by fogihujy »

rich_sasha wrote: post #119
filmfact wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right, the Stasi would be so proud of what Europe is about to become.

I’m not saying this is a good idea, only that it’s not in the brink of falling apart. And I reckon this is the last thing that would break it. Farming subsidies or carbon credits if anything. Again, the boring stuff.

Yeah, farming subsidies alone could keep the EU afloat for years - we simply can't get by without them.

Re: European Parliament approves mass surveillance of private communication

#277

Post by zajio1am »

estaseuropano wrote: post #231
throwaways885 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As somebody who was somewhat in-favour of Brexit (not popular here, admittedly), my view is that it's easier to fight for privacy against just the UK government, rather than the entire EU bloc. I think if an entity as powerful as the EU puts this into legislation, it's game over. I have a similar view on federal laws in the United States - they don't tend to repeal federal surveillance laws without violence.

But every member has a veto. You never needed to convince 28 countries, you only needed to convince your own government to vote against. Plenty of laws stuck in limbo because one country doesn't like it - but exactly zero laws on the books that sosme country really hates.

> But every member has a veto.

No, most EU legislation is decided on by ordinary legislative procedure, using qualified majority voting rules in council of EU ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_the_Council_of_the_E... ).

Re: European Parliament approves mass surveillance of private communication

#279

Post by goodpoint »

oblio wrote: post #142
goodpoint wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

xkcd is a just a comic - please don't make it a conversation killer.

Well, to revive this conversation. States have access to "a monopoly of legitimate violence". We grant them that in order for them to be able to keep the peace, you know, law and order. Everything else can be boiled down to this. No matter how many bits of encryption keys are used, someone with a chloroform infused rag and a wrench can visit any of us at any moment. And it's actually part of what we, collectively, as…

> someone with a chloroform infused rag and a wrench can visit any of us at any moment.

Phrased like this it sounds like you are implying that the legal system in any EU country has no power over goons with wrenches, and everybody is effectively living in a police state. Why even bothering to pass laws around encryption?

Re: European Parliament approves mass surveillance of private communication

#280

Post by autoexec »

aksss wrote: post #179
perihelions wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think you're glossing over the distinction between compelling material (by warrant, subpoena, &c.) -- what the Fourth Amendment covers -- and private entities voluntarily giving the government material that third parties have entrusted them. Nothing regulates the latter: that's the third-party doctrine.

This is true.. not much to be done with the major providers are all in bed with the Feds. I mean, the telcos literally allow the Feds to port mirror all their traffic. End to end encryption on your own encrypted storage perhaps.

I'm not sure if "allow" is the right word here. Really the NSA can set up another Room 641A at any company they want regardless of that company's wishes and with a national security letter the company can be prevented from even telling anyone (like their customers or the media) about it. I was furious when Obama granted telecom companies immunity from prosecution for their role in the warrantless spying, but really it's not exactly fair to pushing people who are strong-armed into compliance.
Post reply on HN