The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever • Hacker News Board

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#191

Post by emmelaich » Sun, Feb 06, 2022, 2:38 AM UTC

t-3 wrote: post #107

emmelaich wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the paranoidal view you're placing yourself outside the realms of sensible discussion. You can't really think that some politicians are knowingly and deliberating proposing an existential threat to "free society and democracy."

> You can't really think that some politicians are knowingly and deliberating proposing an existential threat to "free society and democracy." Why not? Many people oppose free society, and democracy has never been popular among elites.

OK I should have changed 'some politicians' to 'most of those politicians proposing this law'

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#192

Post by heartbeats » Sun, Feb 06, 2022, 2:39 AM UTC

devwastaken wrote: post #19

eikenberry wrote: post #9

This seems like it could have a significant upside if passed. That it would help promote federated and peer to peer free software systems with no centralized, commercial target to sue. Might even require some of the current giant social networks to pair back significantly to avoid liability. I'm not saying I want it to pass, just think the unintended consequences might be interesting and even beneficial in some ways.

Decentralized does not mean lack of liability. That's a marketing ploy. P2P filesharers and tor hosted sites are taken to court on the daily because of this one little trick called the IP address. Everything you send has your external IP. It doesn't matter that they "can't prove it was you". Courts have continually upheld that an IP address is grounds for either civil discovery or further criminal investigation. And…

Sites hosted behind Tor do not reveal your external IP address.

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#193

Post by nine_k » Sun, Feb 06, 2022, 2:42 AM UTC

javajosh wrote: post #187

We have to give them something for CSAM, or they'll keep coming at free speech in general using CSAM as cover. I strongly recommend considering the invention of a sticky, client-side program that scans all images passing through your network interfaces. It is also allowed to send red flagged images to a jury that will be a first hurdle to doing anything: determining it's really a CSAM matter. I've proposed this befor…

Two questions: how do we know that the program only scans images, and only exfiltrates CSAM-suspect content?

Otherwise looks fine, as long as the traffic is never encrypted.

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#194

Post by guy98238710 » Sun, Feb 06, 2022, 2:46 AM UTC

kragen wrote: post #41

mrandish wrote: post #10

While this bill is strongly opposed by the Internet Society, ACLU, CDT, and EFF, the critiques I've read don't get much into the real "why" behind this legislation continuing to be pushed so forcefully. The pretext is, of course, "protect the children" and more generally law-and-order with a bonus side-helping of "stop those awful social media giants." While these justifications are (hopefully) obvious misdirection t…

> These people seem incapable of understanding the existential threat to free society and democracy posed by limiting everyone's ability to communicate private thoughts. The existential threat this bill poses to free society and democracy is exactly why they're supporting it. It's not some accidental side effect. They're opposed to the existence of free society and democracy because it limits government power, which…

> They want the police to have all the power they can get because, as far as they're concerned, they're the good guys, and giving the good guys more power helps them win against the bad guys.

But we all know that giving excessive power to good guys turns them rather reliably into bad guys.

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#195

Post by javajosh » Sun, Feb 06, 2022, 2:46 AM UTC

nine_k wrote: post #193

javajosh wrote: post #187

We have to give them something for CSAM, or they'll keep coming at free speech in general using CSAM as cover. I strongly recommend considering the invention of a sticky, client-side program that scans all images passing through your network interfaces. It is also allowed to send red flagged images to a jury that will be a first hurdle to doing anything: determining it's really a CSAM matter. I've proposed this befor…

Two questions: how do we know that the program only scans images, and only exfiltrates CSAM-suspect content? Otherwise looks fine, as long as the traffic is never encrypted.

You hit on the feature that makes it viable: you would always know if an image is flagged, and as what. It doesn't stop your nation state from flagging you as a problem because you're gay, but it also doesn't hide the fact that they're looking for that. I think that's the best we can do right now.

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#196

Post by logiczero » Sun, Feb 06, 2022, 2:48 AM UTC

cyberlurker wrote: post #7

No matter your opinion on the issue, the firearm lobby would probably serve as an effective model for fighting legislation like this on a long term basis.

If encryption is treated as a munition[0], does it mean that the Second Amendment could actually be used to protect the right to use it? If the intent of the Second Amendment is to protect citizens' ability to combat government overreach, it seems like it should...

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th...

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#197

Post by catlifeonmars » Sun, Feb 06, 2022, 2:49 AM UTC

oceanghost wrote: post #190

catlifeonmars wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is how it's supposed to be. According to you, which is OPs point exactly. The discussion needs to be framed in a way that stakeholders are walking in common ground, not yelling at each other at a distance from their respective ideological ivory towers. FWIW I happen to agree with you, but IMO “this is how it’s supposed to be” is not a productive argument.

You're exactly wrong. The Constitution Of the United States, which I believe in unswervingly-- was written at a time when privacy was the DEFAULT. Any person could walk into any building or any field and speak, anonymously to another person. It cost quite a bit to spy on someone and that was a natural limit to how much spying could be done. The argument from the other side is always-- the framers didn't imagine a wor…

I think you misunderstand my position as well as who you need to convince. It’s not angry people who vehemently believe that we need more surveillance. It’s apathy. Why should I care?

(I do care, and like I mentioned in my original comment, I agree with the parent).

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#198

Post by guy98238710 » Sun, Feb 06, 2022, 2:58 AM UTC

E2EEd wrote: post #36

mrandish wrote: post #10

While this bill is strongly opposed by the Internet Society, ACLU, CDT, and EFF, the critiques I've read don't get much into the real "why" behind this legislation continuing to be pushed so forcefully. The pretext is, of course, "protect the children" and more generally law-and-order with a bonus side-helping of "stop those awful social media giants." While these justifications are (hopefully) obvious misdirection t…

E2EE is offered to all users, whether or not they are law-abiding. More precise is to say that E2EE is offered to users who are primarily law-abiding. Your points are well-heard, even by those in the IC. What isn't occurring, is a good-faith discussion on solving the issues faced by law enforcement and the IC related to the growing entropy of E2EE wielded at scale by folks, a large subset of whom are engaging in crim…

> It just misses the bigger picture - that most folks in govt are just doing their job.

Any office with excessive power will be a magnet for assholes. Excessive power will be abused.

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#199

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Feb 06, 2022, 2:59 AM UTC

TameAntelope wrote: post #40

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> While this bill is strongly opposed by the Internet Society, ACLU, CDT, and EFF, It's worth noting that the companies destroying democracy that this bill regulates (Google, Facebook, etc.) are major donors to all of these organizations.

None of those companies are destroying democracy, that's needless hyperbole...

[deleted]

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#200

Post by guy98238710 » Sun, Feb 06, 2022, 3:03 AM UTC

E2EEd wrote: post #36

mrandish wrote: post #10

While this bill is strongly opposed by the Internet Society, ACLU, CDT, and EFF, the critiques I've read don't get much into the real "why" behind this legislation continuing to be pushed so forcefully. The pretext is, of course, "protect the children" and more generally law-and-order with a bonus side-helping of "stop those awful social media giants." While these justifications are (hopefully) obvious misdirection t…

E2EE is offered to all users, whether or not they are law-abiding. More precise is to say that E2EE is offered to users who are primarily law-abiding. Your points are well-heard, even by those in the IC. What isn't occurring, is a good-faith discussion on solving the issues faced by law enforcement and the IC related to the growing entropy of E2EE wielded at scale by folks, a large subset of whom are engaging in crim…

> E2EE wielded at scale by folks, a large subset of whom are engaging in criminal behavior

You cannot really engage in criminal behavior exclusively via E2EE communication. Victim would use the communication as evidence. All the crimes you are talking about have an essential component outside E2EE communication, which means that detection and evidence gathering is possible without breaking E2EE.