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

EU now one step away from reviving private message scanning rules

cyberinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 194 posts

Re: EU now one step away from reviving private message scanning rules

#121

Post by MaKey »

joe463369 wrote: post #67
pton_xd wrote: post #17

I don't understand the EU's position on privacy. On the one hand, they enacted GDPR to give you control over access to your personal data. On the other, they need access to all of your data.

The unquestioned view in certain circles - including here - is that when the EU/UK does something that chips away at people's online privacy, there's un ulterior motive. It's entirely possible that politicians just want to do something about CSAM and young people having their mind twisted by social media. The electorate do seem to be keen on some sort of action.

This is being heavily pushed by certain actors so it's not just politicians wanting to do something about CSAM: https://balkaninsight.com/2023/09/25/who-benefits-inside-the...

Many abuse survivors and youth advocates strongly oppose Chat Control; here is one voice detailing why: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-i-dont-support-privacy-in...

Re: EU now one step away from reviving private message scanning rules

#122

Post by QuantumNomad_ »

inigyou wrote: post #62
layer8 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Chat Control”, along with the version numbers, is a naming invented by the opponents, not by the proponents.

and they should not have done that

I guess calling it Chat Stasi would be too on the nose :/

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

Re: EU now one step away from reviving private message scanning rules

#123

Post by bellowsgulch »

McDyver wrote: post #117
bellowsgulch wrote: post #92

lol, say someone publishes an E2E distributed extension to an existing chat protocol. Are you going to arrest someone for writing code? Are you going to arrest people who use private communications? Sounds like a legislator carve out hot and ready to happen. I get the point, ban E2E, OK sure, but what if some software is designed in such a way that the company doesn't provide it, but it just happens to be compatible…

It's all coming together: Even if an open protocol was developed and published, and everyone would just use AI to create their own app in order to be private, Google is shutting down that path by preventing "unsanctioned" apps from being installed (not to mention Apple, which already does it). People wouldn't be arrested for writing code, but as it happened in Spain, people with Pixels and GrapheneOS are already trea…

The government's worse nightmare: People who own Pixels talking to their family members.

Re: EU now one step away from reviving private message scanning rules

#125

Post by matthewdgreen »

slg wrote: post #120
budududuroiu wrote: post #91

The Internet Watch Foundation, an organisation funded by almost all of big tech, is already at work pushing for client side scanning next [1], for the children, of course. [1] https://www.iwf.org.uk/policy-work/preventing-the-upload-of-...

I feel like if people wanted to counter this push, the more effective route would be addressing the "for the children" motivations seriously rather than fully dismissing them. You could cut the legs out of this effort by capturing the part of the population that does have an honest desire to protect children by offering an alternative that actually protects children. Instead, that concern is treated as 100% disingenu…

I know a number of people who have gone down this route, including Senators. For example, here's Senator Wyden's proposal to add $5 billion in mandatory funding to investigate and target sexual abusers [1]. The problem with these efforts is that they're expensive: fighting child exploitation requires enormous amounts of funding.

Guess what doesn't require billions of dollars? Mandatory scanning paid for by tech companies, followed by dumping the billions of hits they produce [2] on overworked police and clearinghouses that mostly ignore them.

[1] https://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/wyden-eshoo... [2] https://www.hstoday.us/subject-matter-areas/cybersecurity/su...

Re: EU now one step away from reviving private message scanning rules

#126

Post by bee_rider »

xienze wrote: post #119
budududuroiu wrote: post #91

The Internet Watch Foundation, an organisation funded by almost all of big tech, is already at work pushing for client side scanning next [1], for the children, of course. [1] https://www.iwf.org.uk/policy-work/preventing-the-upload-of-...

> for the children, of course. Kind of surprised they don't just pitch it as a way to root out Russian propaganda and right-wing extremism. Public opinion would shift overnight. They'd practically demand it!

Actually, what are the partisan leanings of the parties actually actively pushing this, since you’ve brought it up?

Despite being fairly left-leaning I wouldn’t automatically blame the right for this particular type of invasive nonsense… is this a centrist spawned nuisance, or something?

Re: EU now one step away from reviving private message scanning rules

#128

Post by slg »

matthewdgreen wrote: post #125
slg wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like if people wanted to counter this push, the more effective route would be addressing the "for the children" motivations seriously rather than fully dismissing them. You could cut the legs out of this effort by capturing the part of the population that does have an honest desire to protect children by offering an alternative that actually protects children. Instead, that concern is treated as 100% disingenu…

I know a number of people who have gone down this route, including Senators. For example, here's Senator Wyden's proposal to add $5 billion in mandatory funding to investigate and target sexual abusers [1]. The problem with these efforts is that they're expensive: fighting child exploitation requires enormous amounts of funding. Guess what doesn't require billions of dollars? Mandatory scanning paid for by tech compa…

Then fund the initiative by taxing those same tech companies. "This problem is hard or expensive to address" does not assuage the desire to fix the problem.

There are countless reasons to be against these chat controls, but it's easy for a layperson to understand how they would address their specific concerns. The only way to effectively counter that is providing an alternative that does a better job.

Re: EU now one step away from reviving private message scanning rules

#129

Post by fragmede »

haywalk wrote: post #64
sscaryterry wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, it is mostly a reaction to how society has evolved, for the worse. Rock and hard place. The worst thing I have to hide is knowledge about my intentions, none of which are bad/illegal/immoral. Scan away, I'd rather try to protect my children, other children from unscrupulous characters.

> The worst thing I have to hide is knowledge about my intentions, none of which are bad/illegal/immoral. Correction: None of which are bad/illegal/immoral _right now_. The "I have nothing to hide" crowd will surely change their tune the moment any of their data starts to be used against them.

That would have to happen, and by then it's too late. The best historical example is, not to Godwin the thread, but Dutch Jews who registered with the government and then when the Nazi's took over, that information was used against them. Political expression online is relatively safe under the current regime, but who knows if a future regime will also feel that way. If you posted something online about immigrants or criticizing a politician that became illegal to express, where would you be? Seems far-fetched, but in the history of the world, it isn't. People would rather not get persecuted for saying something they said 30 or more years ago because a lot can change in that kind of time. What once was acceptable becomes not in the different light of decades later. I'm sure if you go back to the very first comments I've made here, you'll find something embarrassing, though maybe not illegal. (An ernest plea that information wants to be free, probably.)

Communication wasn't digitally indexed and recorded forever, historically, and something intimate I whisper to a lover or very close friends doesn't ever need to see the light of day.

The guise that there's a predator out there, trying to cocerce 13 year old children to have sex with them is a good cover by the government to gain this control, because how do we refuse that? Won't somebody think of the children? So we have to acknowledge that yes, there are bad people out there, and no, I don't support Prince Andrew or the Epstein class, but at the same time, in the history of government and abuses of power, Chat control is going to be used against you and I, and not the Epstein class.

Re: EU now one step away from reviving private message scanning rules

#130

Post by nekusar »

anonym29 wrote: post #113
peyton wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. It would be easy to detect hate speech client-side too I’d imagine. My phone already listens for certain words.

Why stop there? This system can easily be used to target welfare recipients, immigrants, LGBT+ people, black/brown/indigenous people, pretty much any disfavored group of choice! You're just one election away from "that was during the previous term of office" https://media.mullvad.net/web/chatcontrol2_en.jpg

[flagged]
Post reply on HN