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

New EU Chat Control proposal moves forward

techreport.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 27 posts

Re: New EU Chat Control proposal moves forward

#11

Post by layer8 »

getcrunk wrote: post #3

How would these types of proposals deal with foss non centralized/fully p2p messaging system? Just make them illegal? What if the foss app has the “scanning” but can be disabled with a compile time flag Is my email client going to have to implement this scanning if I use pgp?

The proposals apply to “providers” of “hosting services“, of “interpersonal communications service”, and of “software application stores” (you can look up the definitions for yourself in the published texts). It’s hard to see how that would apply to purely P2P systems, except that distributing an app for it via app stores would likely require user age verification.

Re: New EU Chat Control proposal moves forward

#12

Post by thewebguyd »

layer8 wrote: post #11
getcrunk wrote: post #3

How would these types of proposals deal with foss non centralized/fully p2p messaging system? Just make them illegal? What if the foss app has the “scanning” but can be disabled with a compile time flag Is my email client going to have to implement this scanning if I use pgp?

The proposals apply to “providers” of “hosting services“, of “interpersonal communications service”, and of “software application stores” (you can look up the definitions for yourself in the published texts). It’s hard to see how that would apply to purely P2P systems, except that distributing an app for it via app stores would likely require user age verification.

Flathub, the snap store, gnome software, etc. all technically meet the definitino of software application store.

Makes me wonder (and worry) if they can stretch the definition to apply to standard package repos as well. Are we going to be entering an era where you have to verify your identity & age to apt-get software?

Re: New EU Chat Control proposal moves forward

#14

Post by layer8 »

thewebguyd wrote: post #12
layer8 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The proposals apply to “providers” of “hosting services“, of “interpersonal communications service”, and of “software application stores” (you can look up the definitions for yourself in the published texts). It’s hard to see how that would apply to purely P2P systems, except that distributing an app for it via app stores would likely require user age verification.

Flathub, the snap store, gnome software, etc. all technically meet the definitino of software application store. Makes me wonder (and worry) if they can stretch the definition to apply to standard package repos as well. Are we going to be entering an era where you have to verify your identity & age to apt-get software?

Or switch to P2P distribution.

The real danger is if hardware becomes dongled by firmware that doesn’t allow you to install anything you want anymore.

Re: New EU Chat Control proposal moves forward

#15

Post by jononor »

ryandrake wrote: post #8
dataking wrote: post #2

https://fightchatcontrol.eu/ As far as I understand, people using this site to contact their elected officials were instrumental in making lawmakers back down from ChatControl v2.0. Hoping the same will be true this time around.

On the contrary, it doesn't seem to have had any effect at all. Nobody actually defeated anything if it just gets re-proposed a few weeks later.

Winning a battle and living to fight another day is useful. Does not mean the fight is over, of course.

Re: New EU Chat Control proposal moves forward

#16

Post by thewebguyd »

layer8 wrote: post #14
thewebguyd wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flathub, the snap store, gnome software, etc. all technically meet the definitino of software application store. Makes me wonder (and worry) if they can stretch the definition to apply to standard package repos as well. Are we going to be entering an era where you have to verify your identity & age to apt-get software?

Or switch to P2P distribution. The real danger is if hardware becomes dongled by firmware that doesn’t allow you to install anything you want anymore.

I think that real danger is a very real possibility with legislation like this. Not in the way that you won't be able to buy "unlocked" devices, but that web services and government services just flat out won't be accessible to you if you aren't on a sanctioned device (with the sanctioned spyware).

Think things like requiring play integrity attestation to access banking, or an equivalent service baked into macOS, Windows, iOS. If you aren't on one of those proprietary and spied on OSes, you can't access most of the web.

So technically the hardware will remain relatively open, but they'll make it so you can't interact with the rest of society with it.

Re: New EU Chat Control proposal moves forward

#17

Post by layer8 »

thewebguyd wrote: post #16
layer8 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or switch to P2P distribution. The real danger is if hardware becomes dongled by firmware that doesn’t allow you to install anything you want anymore.

I think that real danger is a very real possibility with legislation like this. Not in the way that you won't be able to buy "unlocked" devices, but that web services and government services just flat out won't be accessible to you if you aren't on a sanctioned device (with the sanctioned spyware). Think things like requiring play integrity attestation to access banking, or an equivalent service baked into macOS, Win…

That would still be the relatively benign outcome. You can have one device for all the official stuff, and another device for your own software, “free“ OSs and the “free” internet. However, I could see a future where anything that accesses the internet is required to be an iPhone-like clamped down device.

Re: New EU Chat Control proposal moves forward

#18

Post by izacus »

danaris wrote: post #10
ryandrake wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the contrary, it doesn't seem to have had any effect at all. Nobody actually defeated anything if it just gets re-proposed a few weeks later.

Every time we stop it from becoming law, that is a victory . Viewing it as anything else is actively counterproductive. The fact that they will keep bringing it back until we have better people in the EU Parliament just means that we have to win more victories.

They haven't yet dared to bring it to the parliament because then they'd have to let it be defeated.

Re: New EU Chat Control proposal moves forward

#19

Post by Am4TIfIsER0ppos »

varispeed wrote: post #5

The EU has been taken over by terrorists and law enforcement does nothing. People behind Chat Controls should be arrested. These proposals are against German laws and other EU countries. It can be treated as terrorist attack attempt. It creates psychological and physical harm, indiscriminately for ideological gain. Textbook terrorism, except done by nice people in suits and there is no blood (yet).

The germans would love it most. Gotta find those people guilty of Wrong Think like nuclear power being safe.

Re: New EU Chat Control proposal moves forward

#20

Post by captain_coffee »

Legit question: if this disaster of a legislation passes, what are the alternatives to provide secure messaging / comms when you are inside the EU? The only 2 options that I can think about are:

- The Dark Web: TOR, I2P (- VPN outside the EU and access a secure messaging system via the VPN exit point. This would assume that the system would have E2EE / some kind of at least superficial privacy guarantees.

Am I missing any major category / tech combination?

Post reply on HN