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

End of "Chat Control": EU parliament stops mass surveillance

patrick-breyer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 324 posts

Re: End of "Chat Control": EU parliament stops mass surveillance

#261

Post by Saline9515 »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #209
nickslaughter02 wrote: post #3

> Despite today’s victory, further procedural steps by EU governments cannot be completely ruled out. Most of all, the trilogue negotiations on a permanent child protection regulation (Chat Control 2.0) are continuing under severe time pressure. There, too, EU governments continue to insist on their demand for “voluntary” indiscriminate Chat Control. > Furthermore, the next massive threat to digital civil liberties i…

"> Furthermore, the next massive threat to digital civil liberties is already on the agenda: Next up in the ongoing trilogue, lawmakers will negotiate whether messenger and chat services, as well as app stores, will be legally obliged to implement age verification. This would require users to provide ID documents or submit to facial scans, effectively making anonymous communication impossible and severely endangering…

So you are against paid services? Who manages the servers, updates apps, and distributes them?

Re: End of "Chat Control": EU parliament stops mass surveillance

#262

Post by matheusmoreira »

gzread wrote: post #252
sveme wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a fairly non-invasive way to do age verification: ID cards that connect to a smartphone app that only provide a boolean age verification to the requesting service. Requesting service can be anonymous to the ID app and the requesting service can only receive a bool. That most implementation will try to collect far more data is the real concern.

There's an even easier one: When you buy a phone, the salesman checks your ID and sets the phone to child lock mode or unlocked mode.

Phones should have no locks unless the user installs them and holds the keys.

Re: End of "Chat Control": EU parliament stops mass surveillance

#263

Post by Saline9515 »

sveme wrote: post #220
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"> Furthermore, the next massive threat to digital civil liberties is already on the agenda: Next up in the ongoing trilogue, lawmakers will negotiate whether messenger and chat services, as well as app stores, will be legally obliged to implement age verification. This would require users to provide ID documents or submit to facial scans, effectively making anonymous communication impossible and severely endangering…

There's a fairly non-invasive way to do age verification: ID cards that connect to a smartphone app that only provide a boolean age verification to the requesting service. Requesting service can be anonymous to the ID app and the requesting service can only receive a bool. That most implementation will try to collect far more data is the real concern.

The goal isn't child protection but surveillance and profits for kyc companies.

Re: End of "Chat Control": EU parliament stops mass surveillance

#264

Post by siilats »

Mole 1 inside Microsoft poisons the PhotoDNA database with hashes of screenshots containing highly specific text—such as internal Russian military jargon, the name of a specific European defector safehouse, or a niche secure communication protocol. • To Meta’s automated monitoring tools photoDNA api returns false, but with slightly different formatting. Mole 2 inside Meta monitors these formatting errors and looks up the UserIDs. • No Bulk Queries: Looking up 3 UserIDs in the internal demographic database over the course of a month will not trigger the "Abnormal Access Pattern" alarms. • Analog Exfiltration: Mole 2 doesn't need to use a USB drive or send an email to get the phone numbers out of the building. With only a few targets, Mole 2 can simply memorize the accounts. PhotoDNA does not read text; it matches the visual structure of an image. For this attack to work, the defected officer must: 1. Receive or write the targeted keyword. 2. Take a screenshot of it. 3. Send that screenshot over the platform. 4. The screenshot must visually match the exact font, size, and layout that Mole 1 used to generate the poisoned hash. However Mole 1 can create thousands of matching keyword hashes for different font variation. PhotoDNA is a one way hash so it’s easy to generate a thousand colliding images for every font by adding a custom border on real photos. This will fake the audit log at Microsoft.

Re: End of "Chat Control": EU parliament stops mass surveillance

#265

Post by Saline9515 »

krapp wrote: post #200
dmitrygr wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need a double-jeopardy-like constitutional amendment for legislation. Legislation once-tried and failed cannot be tried again.

That would be antithetical to democracy. The people must be allowed to introduce any legislation they want, as often as they want. Otherwise it would be trivial for a government to intentionally fail to pass anything they disagree with, and thus act as a de facto dictatorship.

The current institution where the parliament is not able to choose which laws it votes is already not democratic. Such limitation would at least avoid the blatant gaming of the system.

Re: End of "Chat Control": EU parliament stops mass surveillance

#266

Post by Saline9515 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #237
dmitrygr wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When have "the people" been last consulted on this? Do you really think Chat Control has high public support? Given how most "democracies" work in our world today (which is to say with no consultation of the people), i think limiting their ability to do further harm might be worth it.

> Do you really think Chat Control has high public support? Yes, I can absolutely see a majority in certain countries ( e.g. Hungary) believing this is a fair compromise between security and privacy.

Hungary is small and an outlier in the EU.

Re: End of "Chat Control": EU parliament stops mass surveillance

#267

Post by School-Cotton »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #262
gzread wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an even easier one: When you buy a phone, the salesman checks your ID and sets the phone to child lock mode or unlocked mode.

Phones should have no locks unless the user installs them and holds the keys.

Why?

Re: End of "Chat Control": EU parliament stops mass surveillance

#268

Post by siilats »

siilats wrote: post #264

Mole 1 inside Microsoft poisons the PhotoDNA database with hashes of screenshots containing highly specific text—such as internal Russian military jargon, the name of a specific European defector safehouse, or a niche secure communication protocol. • To Meta’s automated monitoring tools photoDNA api returns false, but with slightly different formatting. Mole 2 inside Meta monitors these formatting errors and looks up…

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ASPqVAAV2oR9ZzsIO0tlqV0a...

Re: End of "Chat Control": EU parliament stops mass surveillance

#269

Post by zoobab »

miohtama wrote: post #106

Here is the EPP's plea to get this passed earlier. They even used a teddy bear image. https://www.eppgroup.eu/newsroom/epp-urges-support-for-last-... "Protecting children is not optional," said Lena Düpont MEP, EPP Group spokeswoman on Legal and Home Affairs. "We call on the S&D Group to stop hiding behind excuses and finally take responsibility. We cannot afford a safe haven for child abusers online. Every delay lea…

Facebook and Microsoft are foreign companies.

Re: End of "Chat Control": EU parliament stops mass surveillance

#270

Post by lenerdenator »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #229
nickslaughter02 wrote: post #3

> Despite today’s victory, further procedural steps by EU governments cannot be completely ruled out. Most of all, the trilogue negotiations on a permanent child protection regulation (Chat Control 2.0) are continuing under severe time pressure. There, too, EU governments continue to insist on their demand for “voluntary” indiscriminate Chat Control. > Furthermore, the next massive threat to digital civil liberties i…

> further procedural steps by EU governments cannot be completely ruled out In a democracy, we don't kill our opposition. If they hold views we don't like, e.g. that security trumps privacy, they're going to litigate them. Probably their whole lives. That means they'll keep bringing up the same ideas. And you'll have to keep defeating them. But there are two corollaries. One: Passing legislation takes as much work as…

Read about the paradox of tolerance.

I'm not saying you unalive your opposition, but you do need to make them suffer consequences if they push the boundaries to get what they want.

Post reply on HN