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

EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

patrick-breyer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 947 posts

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#91

Post by BSDobelix »

preisschild wrote: post #79
carlesfe wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU politicians are exempt from this measure. They thought it all the way through. (Edit: seems that the statement above applies to ChatControl 2.0, not the approved text. Apologies.)

Can you cite the text where it says this?

In Chatcontrol 2.0 not this one:

>*EU politicians exempt themselves from this surveillance under "professional secrecy" rules. They get privacy. You and your family do not.

https://8bitsecurity.com/posts/chat-control-2-0-%E2%80%93-ho...

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#92

Post by bombcar »

lrae wrote: post #24
mrtksn wrote: post #14

FTA: What changes with the return of Chat Control 1.0—and what stays the same: *What is coming back:* US tech companies are once again allowed to scan private messages without a warrant or prior suspicion. This affects direct messages on platforms like Instagram, Discord, Snapchat, Skype, and Xbox, as well as emails via Google’s Gmail and Apple’s iCloud. *What remains unchanged:* Public social media posts and files h…

Yes. Chat Control 2.0 was the big one in those regards. (Also, LOL @ Skype mention.)

Don't downplay Skype, as Teams is still just rebranded Skype for Business (LYNC).

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#94

Post by weberer »

vrganj wrote: post #23

Brought to you - as always - by the Conservatives. Conservatism is just fascism with a slightly nicer image.

This was overwhelmingly approved by "The Left in the European Parliament" (that's their actual coalition name) as well as the Greens. It was overwhelmingly rejected by the European People's Party (AKA "The Right"). And mixed among other groups (S&D and Conservatives).

https://howtheyvote.eu/votes/195775

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#95

Post by mrtksn »

stavros wrote: post #87
mrtksn wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then I'm not very moved about this. I always assumed that anything unencrypted is scanned one way or another. What I care is not having a backdoor for E2E, i.e. like client-side scanning telling me what I am allowed to talk about like with the LLMs. CSAM excuse is a great excuse to turn every conversation to what we have with AI today.

And the temperature of the frog pot rises by one degree.

[flagged]

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#96

Post by Vinnl »

budududuroiu wrote: post #63
Vinnl wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To understand whether/to what extent this is brazen, I'd be interested to learn the reasoning why urgency procedures are possible, and in particular, why the apparent majority against shouldn't have been enough, and what is needed to classify something as urgent.

Afaik, EU rules provide for urgent procedure only for proposals at first reading, while here it was used to compress a second reading vote and skip committee, just perfectly timed for the last sitting before recess. The absolute majority seems to be an anti-paralysis instrument, where the onus is on the Parliament to reject something put in motion by the Council. I think the the asymmetry is that a vote to trigger th…

Thanks. Do you know then why of the majority that voted against today, enough people voted in favour of the urgency procedure?

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#97

Post by codedokode »

There are at least two options to verify age without humiliating procedure of taking a selfie with a passport like a porn actor.

First, there are USB tokens that can hold a private key and sign messages. Such tokens could be sold at places accessible only to adults and verify that they are indeed adult. Obviously every token should hold the same private key.

Second, OS could implement "parent mode" which allows installing only white-listed, government approved apps (no Telegram or Whatsapp or other dangerous apps, but school apps are ok) and opening only white-listed government-approved websites. Put in jail the parents who did not set up a parent mode. Problem solved without passports and verifications.

If, however, the government insists on selfies, it means they just want to identify users and compile lists of "untrustworthy", "rebelious" and other persons of interest.

Also, employees who do verification, sometimes create internal chats where they post pictures of clients and mock their appearance. We had such case with Alfa-Bank in Russia, where the photo of a funny client with a passport and third-grader level comments leaked to Instagram account of employee's friend. The bank paid approximately $20 as a compensation.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#98

Post by miroljub »

dbdr wrote: post #89
miroljub wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this basically means the EU pushed a new censorship regulation using lawfare tricks without ever having a majority vote for the proposal. If it's not a dictatorship, a regime, a shithole, a kleptocracy, or whatever name they use for a government they don't like, I don't know what it is.

It's absolutely legitimate to be upset. However, identifying a lawfare trick in a close vote to a dictatorship is serious hyperbole. I'm afraid that's counterproductive.

Close vote?

They passed a regulation with 276 votes in favor, 314 votes against, and 17 abstained. The minority decided instead of the majority.

If this is not a dictatorship, what is it then? In any case, it has nothing to do with the democracy.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#100

Post by dmichulke »

xaitv wrote: post #77
teekert wrote: post #38

This is a nice piece of democracy right here: "a measure it had rejected twice in March. Although a majority of voting Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) actually opposed the regulation (314 against, 276 in favor, 17 abstentions), the motion to reject it failed to secure the required absolute majority of 361 votes. As a result, mass scanning is now permitted again until 2028." "Oh no we can't get a majority to…

What I don't understand, based on this: https://howtheyvote.eu/votes/195775 the votes are the other way around, with the majority being for. I'm guessing that site has it reversed then or I don't fully understand the proposal? Looking at which politicians from my country voted "no" on this site it seems to be mostly the ones that I'd expect to vote "yes", so that would support this site just having the options revers…

Found this, source: https://fightchatcontrol.eu/

On 7 July, MEPs voted 331–303 to fast-track the return of Chat Control 1.0 mass scanning. A binding vote follows Thursday, 9 July, where an absolute majority of 361 MEPs is needed to stop it. Take action now to demand they defend your private messages.

"Yes" means stop control, because it's a "proposition de rejet" we're looking at. rejet = reject. Parties in favor of chat control were:

- European People’s Party and

- Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats.

Countries in favor of chat control were:

Spain, Poland, Romania, Sweden, Hungary, Portugal, Greece, Ireland, Lithuania, Latvia, Cyprus

If you look at the initial vote from July 7, there are a few countries who actually wanted to make it an "urgent decision" (other than the countries above):

France, Czechia, Finland, Croatia, Luxembourg

Post reply on HN