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

EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

cyberinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 467 posts

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#191

Post by garaetjjte »

microtonal wrote: post #56
applfanboysbgon wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is folly. You cannot communicate this level of nuance at scale, especially when faced with opposition that actively lies to achieve their goals. Quoting an older post... > In a benevolent dictatorship, sure, go for a zero-knowledge proof verification as your solution. In the reality of democracy, where politicians are corporate puppets who cloak surveillance laws in "think of the children" to rally suppo…

In a benevolent dictatorship, sure, go for a zero-knowledge proof verification as your solution. In the reality of democracy, where politicians are corporate puppets who cloak surveillance laws in "think of the children" to rally support from the masses I do not (completely) agree with this. This seems like the very typical US-centric view of politics. A lot of members of the European Parliament are not corporate pup…

>They should have used AOSP device attestation

No, they shouldn't have used any attestation. If they are using sound cryptosystem for their ZKPs, they don't need to care at all about what hardware and software I'm using.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#192

Post by drysine »

pembrook wrote: post #135
drysine wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? In Russia we have gosuslugi.ru (state services), which nowadays requires 2FA and hasn't been compromised in any major way so far. Among other things they provide a way for a third party to use it as identification service and a user chooses which data about himself he wants to share. No anonymity, though, and I don't see how it can be implemented so that the verification provider doesn't know which service is re…

You seriously think Russia's state services are not compromised by intelligence? Also, yea, no anonymity is the problem. Why would you want your government to be able to track every single website you've ever visited -- especially considering we're talking about an autocratic regime? I'm astonished at the naivety on display on a community called "Hacker news."

>You seriously think Russia's state services are not compromised by intelligence?

The state services are required to assist intelligence and law enforcement in lawful investigations, the intelligence don't need to compromise anything.

>Why would you want your government to be able to track every single website you've ever visited

I don't want anyone to track every single website I visited.

>considering we're talking about an autocratic regime

Glad you see the EU for what it is.

The problem is that verifying age requires disclosing your identity and the fact that you use a certain service. Whoever is the provider of such verification, it learns too much about you.

Is the state a worse choice for that than a commercial entity that has fewer resources to secure itself against hacking and might even sell the data itself?

I would rather not have age verification at all and glad there is no such thing in Russia (yet?).

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#193

Post by leonidasrup »

rvnx wrote: post #146
Roark66 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Believe me, in some EU countries (like my country Poland) people are very sensitive for this kind of bullshit. Last two times they tried to push other censorship/tracking laws (claiming as always "we have to, EU is making us") there were mass protests in every city and town. In my own town of 5k people there were several hundred (500 people at least, probably more). And the previous govt backed down. This topic seems…

It's because it's not about the opinion of voters, but about existing political powers that want to retain their power. No matter what you (as population) say it will get implemented. If you don't, then they will put sanctions on Poland, withdraw financial partnerships, etc. Like with migrants, they are going to be sent there, even if Polish people vote against. No matter if you are in favor or against, raising the t…

Poland and other nations should be carefull with handling of imigration, as history shows.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1938_expulsion_of_Polish_Jews_...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emigration_of_Jews_from_Nazi_G...

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#194

Post by buran77 »

leonidasrup wrote: post #178
nirui wrote: post #109

In case people no longer remember, when China started to require websites to register for a license before be allowed to operate, it was for "protecting the children" too. This simple policy then goes on to silence most individual publisher(/self-media) and consolidated the industry into the hands of the few, with no opportunity left for smaller entrepreneurs. This is arguably much worse than allowing children to wat…

You always hear the argument "protecting the children", because anyone oposing the regulation/laws can be labeled at best "exposing the children to danger" or at worst "pedofile". So as a consequence at best the oponents of such regulation/laws should not be listened to, or at worst they should be put into prison. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children

The excuse has to be something nobody can appear to be supporting (pedophilia, terrorism, nazis, etc.). It's not only an appeal to emotion, it's also a false dichotomy, a loaded question, guilt by association.

Others look at this recipe and can't help but notice its effectiveness. Eventually nobody is beneath pulling this kind of logic, even if they were the ones crucifying it just a few short years ago. The weaker the leader, the more likely that that they forget where they wrote down those principles of theirs and resort to this crap.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#195

Post by spixy »

u8080 wrote: post #145
nirui wrote: post #109

In case people no longer remember, when China started to require websites to register for a license before be allowed to operate, it was for "protecting the children" too. This simple policy then goes on to silence most individual publisher(/self-media) and consolidated the industry into the hands of the few, with no opportunity left for smaller entrepreneurs. This is arguably much worse than allowing children to wat…

Just a recap how it happened in Russia: 1. First, year ~2015 legal framework was created under disguise of banning pirated media(specifically torrents.ru)(legislative push). State-wide DNS ban introduced. Very easy to circumvent via quering 8.8.8.8 2. Then, having legal basis, govt included extra stuff in banned list(casinos, terrorist orgs, etc)(executive push). IP bans introduced, applied very carefully. 3. Legal e…

DPI = Deep packet inspection?

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#196

Post by drysine »

christophilus wrote: post #163
delusional wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is arguably much worse than allowing children to watch porn online, because this will for sure effect people's whole life in a negative way. I would like you to make that argument.

Parents can protect their children. Source: I’m a parent. My kids haven’t seen porn and can’t access the internet. This doesn’t affect the free exchange of ideas that my fellow countrymen enjoy. Governments getting involved absolutely, unequivocally will be used to clamp down on the free exchange of ideas.

>My kids haven’t seen porn and can’t access the internet.

You sure about that? )))

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#197

Post by [deleted] »

jraby3 wrote: post #5
chii wrote: post #2

How come tax loopholes aren't as scrutinized? Mandatory age verification online is a blight imho. It should be outlawed.

Why? Isn't your age verified when you renew your drivers license? Purchase something on Amazon? When I was a kid, child programming and commercials were heavily scrutinized. Now any kid can access porn, violence, and scams on the internet. That's a blight. Not age verification.

[deleted]

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#198

Post by dvtkrlbs »

u8080 wrote: post #145
nirui wrote: post #109

In case people no longer remember, when China started to require websites to register for a license before be allowed to operate, it was for "protecting the children" too. This simple policy then goes on to silence most individual publisher(/self-media) and consolidated the industry into the hands of the few, with no opportunity left for smaller entrepreneurs. This is arguably much worse than allowing children to wat…

Just a recap how it happened in Russia: 1. First, year ~2015 legal framework was created under disguise of banning pirated media(specifically torrents.ru)(legislative push). State-wide DNS ban introduced. Very easy to circumvent via quering 8.8.8.8 2. Then, having legal basis, govt included extra stuff in banned list(casinos, terrorist orgs, etc)(executive push). IP bans introduced, applied very carefully. 3. Legal e…

Similar stuff is happening in Turkey as well. Afaik with ipv6 adoption goverment mandates DPI hardware at ISPs. It was voluntary for ipv4 traffic.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#199

Post by pronik »

zero-hp wrote: post #125
nirui wrote: post #109

In case people no longer remember, when China started to require websites to register for a license before be allowed to operate, it was for "protecting the children" too. This simple policy then goes on to silence most individual publisher(/self-media) and consolidated the industry into the hands of the few, with no opportunity left for smaller entrepreneurs. This is arguably much worse than allowing children to wat…

Not only in China. Russian internet cenzorship also started as a "children protection" measure.

Ursula von den Leyen has been pushing internet blocks in Germany for the sake of the children since 2009. Which is when "Zensursula" nickname has been coined. You don't need to look far to find the same thinking by the people in power.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#200

Post by card_zero »

palata wrote: post #160
ionwake wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

guy on website called hackernews, tries to convince everyone more restrictions are good

As a hacker, I want antitrust to break TooBigTech such that they can't cryptographically lock me out of everything. Those who want less regulation are not hackers, but rich and powerful assholes.

Hey, I'm not rich and powerful, how dare you.
Post reply on HN