Canada’s Bill C-22 would weaken protections on private messages
opencivics-labs.github.io
Canada’s Bill C-22 would weaken protections on private messages
1–10 of 31 posts
Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 would weaken protections on private messages
#2> Only you, and the person you're talking to, hold the key. Not the app. Not the company. Not the government.
I feel like this was fundamentally disproven during the US/Canada response to India's Sikh assassinations. The US and Canada both very clearly used lawful intercept to break secure messaging systems and track the killers to their handlers.
Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 would weaken protections on private messages
#3 Multiple threat vectors. One pattern.
A "threat vector" is the path a surveillance harm takes to reach you. They look unrelated on the surface. The shape underneath is the same.
With Bill C-22, the government would hold the copy. The lock you trust would no longer be a lock only you can open. It would be a lock the locksmith was ordered to duplicate.
Not only that, but when you can just generate everything, pacing goes out the window. Fifteen hundred word blog posts. The food is terrible but hey, at least the portions are large!
Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 would weaken protections on private messages
#4Multiple threat vectors. One pattern. A "threat vector" is the path a surveillance harm takes to reach you. They look unrelated on the surface. The shape underneath is the same. With Bill C-22, the government would hold the copy. The lock you trust would no longer be a lock only you can open. It would be a lock the locksmith was ordered to duplicate. The copy is so incredibly bad. Everything is a blend of movie trail…
That's Claude for you :(
Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 would weaken protections on private messages
#5I feel like most of those AI generated websites follow the same pattern of repeating the same comparison (today vs after it passes, now vs future)
Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 would weaken protections on private messages
#6too many words and the design is all over the place - you want people to listen, try shortening the length by about 80% and stop with the font changes, block text and then you have text boxes, dumb little AI headers... jesus christ
i get the message and agree this sounds awful but holy shit.
Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 would weaken protections on private messages
#7The weird thing about surveillance is it's targets. If you want an orderly society and to enforce the law, there are easy ways to do so w/ no additional resources or powers. You can just start by enforcing the law. Open air illegal drug use, retail theft and illegal encampments are issues that plague many big cities. Addressing them would greatly improve the lives of nearly everyone, but for whatever reason there is just no political will. You can even just start keeping these repeat criminals in prisons longer.
I imagine these surveillance powers won't be used to address any of these issues, like cracking the network of retail theft. Rather they'll be used to arrest people for mean tweets. Canada is not as bad as UK at the moment, but consider the scope of what's tolerable these days in a Western society. For instance UK police reportedly made ~12,000 arrests, or about 30 per day, in one year over online communications offenses.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/police-make-30-arrests-a-...
Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 would weaken protections on private messages
#8What's Signal's planned response to this? Or what about older tools like GnuPG or OMEMO for XMPP?
Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 would weaken protections on private messages
#9Sloppy McSlopface.
Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 would weaken protections on private messages
#10The weird thing about surveillance is it's targets. If you want an orderly society and to enforce the law, there are easy ways to do so w/ no additional resources or powers. You can just start by enforcing the law. Open air illegal drug use, retail theft and illegal encampments are issues that plague many big cities. Addressing them would greatly improve the lives of nearly everyone, but for whatever reason there is…
[deleted]