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

Fight Chat Control

fightchatcontrol.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 528 posts

Re: Fight Chat Control

#181

Post by ymir_e »

andrewinardeer wrote: post #162

Can someone explain how they could read my e2e Signal chat messages to my wife about what I'm cooking for dinner? Can someone explain how they could read my e2e Sessions chat message sent via TOR to my wife about what I'm cooking for dinner? Genuinely curious. Can those that are in power break this encryption?

Definitely wouldn’t break the encryption itself.

I think the way it could work is to send a letter to each of the messaging apps saying that they are now legally required to use the EU’s encryption keys and make the messages available to the EU.

Then they would make it so that the apps that don’t comply are not available in the app stores by pressuring google and apple respectively.

I think this is the reason why for example telegram is not end to end encrypted by default - as some regions require them to be able to access users info.

Software you’re using on your own wouldn’t be effected, but wouldn’t necessarily be legal either.

People who are technically savvy could get around it, but the vast majority of people just assume that their private messages are private.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#182

Post by JumpCrisscross »

Vinnl wrote: post #81
Disposal8433 wrote: post #9

I'm French and every idiot supports it, even the so-called left. There is nothing I can do except donate money every month to GrapheneOS ( https://grapheneos.org/donate ). Democracy is dead for me.

That sounds like contacting your MEPs could at least be worth it. Usually when it comes to things like this, the parties that I'd consider voting for already vote the way I'd like them to do. (In this case it's even better - my country opposes, even though the governing parties are not mine.)

The original sin are ad-based social media.

Everyone (except China) failed to regulate that. So now we see overcorrection.

The solution is to regulate Meta and TikTok and YouTube. Until that is on the table we’ll get performative stupidity from both sides.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#183

Post by JumpCrisscross »

Centigonal wrote: post #25

In the US, we have government programs like PRISM and unchecked oligopolies that surveil us and use that information to identify dissent, sell us ads, and alter our behavior. In the EU, there are these initiatives to surveil us in the name of safety. Is there any regime out there who's not trying to mass-surveil their citizens for one reason or another?

> Is there any regime out there who's not trying to mass-surveil their citizens for one reason or another?

The one where citizens don’t regress into comfortably lazy nihilism as a first response.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#184

Post by josh2600 »

This is actually one of the major fights of our generation.

If signal/whatsapp/e2ee are desecrated, only criminals will have encryption for a short period of time until we all come to our senses and realize that some semblance of personal privacy is a human right.

IMHO, we should fight for the maximum amount of privacy possible within the context of a civil society.

In every generation there is a battle, sometimes quiet, other times a dull roar, and occasionally a bombastic. This battle is who can oversee who.

Surveillance should be the last resort of a free society.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#185

Post by JumpCrisscross »

isaacremuant wrote: post #161
Centigonal wrote: post #25

In the US, we have government programs like PRISM and unchecked oligopolies that surveil us and use that information to identify dissent, sell us ads, and alter our behavior. In the EU, there are these initiatives to surveil us in the name of safety. Is there any regime out there who's not trying to mass-surveil their citizens for one reason or another?

> Is there any regime out there who's not trying to mass-surveil their citizens for one reason or another? Covid authoritarian policies were hugely successful and supported by mainstream people by and large. Not enough protests. Not enough dissent. Now politicians know they can turn the power knob as high as they want and nothing will happen. Less and less dissent will be allowed, just like during covid. If you fail…

> Covid authoritarian policies were hugely successful and supported by mainstream people by and large. Not enough protests. Not enough dissent

America has been trashed not by Covid but by the precedence being set that partisan violence can and will be pardoned.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#186

Post by AnthonyMouse »

BlueTemplar wrote: post #148
OldfieldFund wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

probably they call "so-called left" the liberals

Nobody would call them "left", especially not during Macron's 2nd term, the Walkers (or whatever is their new moniker) have firmly solidified as liberals in the right-wing sense (rather than in the bottom-wing sense).

Is there some way we can get people to abandon this entire premise?

You have a law that requires age verification. Does the right oppose this because they oppose government regulation? You have a law that spends more tax dollars on law enforcement, lobbied for by the police unions. Does the left support this because they support government spending and unions?

There is no consistency in their positions, it's all just whatever happens to be in their coalition right now and it changes over time.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#187

Post by cobbzilla »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #35
cobbzilla wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US, at least, has a Bill of Rights that would make this illegal, it would definitely violate the 4th Amendment and maybe the 1st too.

The 1st, 4th and 5th have been repeatedly and systematically weakened both in practice and through the courts though. 1st - gag orders issued by secret courts, no trial, no apeal, can't even talk about it (can't even talk about the gag orders themselves, basically a gag order on a gag order). We only found out about it because Yahoo (out of all of them, the least you'd think would fight this) briefly tried to fight i…

You might not like this example, but the relatively recent evolution of 2nd Amendment jurisprudence, significantly strengthening gun rights, is the result of many impassioned, dedicated groups, lobbying the public and the government for decades.

The lesson is: stay active, stay vocal, stay in the media, and prepare for a very long haul. And file lots of lawsuits challenging everything!

Re: Fight Chat Control

#188

Post by layer8 »

mettamage wrote: post #176

So as a Dutchie that opposes this, is there still something for me to do? The Netherlands opposes this, so... should I sway them to oppose it even more? Not really sure what my role should be.

See https://www.chatcontrol.eu/#WhatYouCanDo under “Is your government opposing?”.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#189

Post by einarfd »

101008 wrote: post #38

I was very pissed at this, and when I read this part I couldn't continue, it boiled my blood. > *EU politicians exempt themselves from this surveillance under "professional secrecy" rules. They get privacy. You and your family do not. Demand fairness.

That they exempt politicians is basically admitting that the security problems that detractors bring up is true, and is something that should be used against them.

After all exempting some police, that work on investigating child molesting, from the scanning, that is understandable.

Exempting prime minster Mette Frederiksen, on the other hand. Means either that they understand that it undermines security, or that she or some other top politicians are child molester. So which is it?

Re: Fight Chat Control

#190

Post by SilverElfin »

Disposal8433 wrote: post #9

I'm French and every idiot supports it, even the so-called left. There is nothing I can do except donate money every month to GrapheneOS ( https://grapheneos.org/donate ). Democracy is dead for me.

The left and the right stopped being about liberal values (like traditionally liberal or whatever) at some point, which are the backbone of democratic societies. I don’t see how you can have democracy without the ability to freely communicate. And that means freedom of speech but also the right to anonymity and privacy.
Post reply on HN