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

111–120 of 467 posts

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

#111

Post by pimterry »

rswail wrote: post #99

Governments already have everyone's ID, including DOB. They say that the problem is non-adults accessing adult sites and services. So therefore, the sites need to know that users are over 18 (or the selected government age). There should be a standardized government ID service/API that allows a person to let it disclose their age (or other user selected information) to a requesting site/service. That's all that is ne…

This has been widely discussed, and initial implementations exist: the EU digital wallets are doing exactly this. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-building-blocks/sites/spaces/EU....

In theory, every EU state will have to support this soon so users can use it to verify age privately online. Still work to do to roll this out for real, but the technological part is very much already happening and I think the rollout plan is committed.

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

#112

Post by thrance »

rswail wrote: post #99

Governments already have everyone's ID, including DOB. They say that the problem is non-adults accessing adult sites and services. So therefore, the sites need to know that users are over 18 (or the selected government age). There should be a standardized government ID service/API that allows a person to let it disclose their age (or other user selected information) to a requesting site/service. That's all that is ne…

> There should be a standardized government ID service/API

Most European country already have one, some are still testing theirs. They're required by the EU to make one accessible to their citizens by the end of this year, in the context of the eID project [0].

[0] https://commission.europa.eu/topics/digital-economy-and-soci...

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

#113

Post by GlacierFox »

eowln wrote: post #73
AlecSchueler wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only we were all privileged enough to believe that the problems in the world today weren't real.

I was talking about the first world. And yes, I think most if not all of the problems in the first world are gratuitously self-inflicted.

Where is the cushy insulated bubble you're living? Can I join?

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

#114

Post by oytis »

palata wrote: post #85
oytis wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These dimwits (and I don't just mean those in EU) seriously want to stop adolescents from watching porn, and are ready to mess with internet infrastructure for that. That's a depressing manifestation of aging society

Adolescents, or kids? Would you say it's completely stupid to want to stop kids from watching porn, or accessing social media? Did you grow up with free streaming platforms? Pretty sure many adolescents were accessing porn before those, though it was slightly less accessible. I personally don't have a definitive opinion about porn (I feel like young kids obviously shouldn't have access to it, but it shouldn't be ille…

I dunno, you have experience being a kid, right? Young kids are just not interested enough to look for porn, not to say figure out how to use VPN to access it. Lax restrictions like we have today are enough to stop porn from being forced on children who are not interested in it

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

#115

Post by salawat »

ionwake wrote: post #96
palata wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it is possible to "pretend that they want something reasonable", it means that there is something reasonable somewhere. Maybe some want more control, but most certainly not everybody. > so that pervasive monitoring If you haven't gotten the memo, pervasive monitoring already exists. To sell ads. > or permission and/or deanonymization is normalized For age verification, it's possible to do it in a privacy-preservin…

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

Website called "Hacker News" has had zilch to do with the Hacking community for almost a decade now. It's VC and corporate apologist news.

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

#116

Post by inglor_cz »

qnpnpmqppnp wrote: post #19

This title seems misleading. The EP paper appears to be highlighting the existence of a debate regarding VPN. Relevant quote: "Some argue that this is a loophole in the legislation that needs closing and call for age verification to be required for VPNs as well. In response, some VPN providers argue that they do not share information with third parties and state that their services are not intended for use by childre…

This is how waters are tested and potential negative reactions are probed.

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

#117

Post by Hikikomori »

pembrook wrote: post #103
rswail wrote: post #99

Governments already have everyone's ID, including DOB. They say that the problem is non-adults accessing adult sites and services. So therefore, the sites need to know that users are over 18 (or the selected government age). There should be a standardized government ID service/API that allows a person to let it disclose their age (or other user selected information) to a requesting site/service. That's all that is ne…

> if the government ID service has appropriate 2FA and security. You're kidding right?

These already exist in several eu countries. Imagine that there are governments that is not America and that actually work.

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

#118

Post by Mad_ad »

oytis wrote: post #55
qnpnpmqppnp wrote: post #19

This title seems misleading. The EP paper appears to be highlighting the existence of a debate regarding VPN. Relevant quote: "Some argue that this is a loophole in the legislation that needs closing and call for age verification to be required for VPNs as well. In response, some VPN providers argue that they do not share information with third parties and state that their services are not intended for use by childre…

These dimwits (and I don't just mean those in EU) seriously want to stop adolescents from watching porn, and are ready to mess with internet infrastructure for that. That's a depressing manifestation of aging society

it's not about porn, it's about power over all citizens.

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

#119

Post by Jtarii »

applfanboysbgon wrote: post #82
Jtarii wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politicians do things that are likely to get them reelected, e.g, passing legislation that is broadly supported by their voters. Passing legislation that their constituents do not like will not increase the chances of them getting reelected. If you could link a piece of legislation that has little support among voters, but was passed due to corporate money, I would be interested.

> cloak surveillance laws in "think of the children" to rally support from the masses Politicians lie to voters to get them to accept things they would otherwise not accept. That was literally central to the entire comment you were replying to. "But the children" and "But national security" are essentially a free pass to enact any legislation a dishonest politician wants with support from a population that cannot sta…

>Off the top of my head, Trump's corporate tax cuts in 2017 might be one of the most clearcut examples of something that benefitted corporations over individuals, was lobbied for by corporations, and was high profile enough to have public polling while being so blatantly unjustifiable that said polling demonstrated the public was clearly against it.

The 2017 tax cut law was extremely popular among republican voters, so I think that goes towards what I am saying.

Post reply on HN