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

Chat Control Must Be Stopped – Now

threema.ch

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 341 posts

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped – Now

#131

Post by henry_pulver »

blowski wrote: post #28

I too instinctively bristle at this kind of legislation. It's likely to be abused, with many false positive that make it more effective at sweeping up innocent people, while the guilty just find workarounds. But all coming on here and saying "ooohh, this is bad, innit!" is not very interesting, and unlikely to prevent it. Why is the EU doing this? Which political groups are supporting and opposing it? Why now? How ar…

> But all coming on here and saying "ooohh, this is bad, innit!" is not very interesting, and unlikely to prevent it.

I disagree - this is how the internet can strengthen democracy.

Upvoting and commenting makes this post hit the top of HN and stay there. This makes it visible to many EU citizens who can reach out to their MEP's to ask them to vote against it. Seems a pretty effective strategy to me as someone living in a non-EU country.

Although agree that we should also be discussing the questions you raised.

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped – Now

#132

Post by uyzstvqs »

drdebug wrote: post #46

The wording in the current draft seems to indicate that it applies to "providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available interpersonal communications services". So unless this includes ISPs, I wonder if that means a decentralized P2P service is not covered.

Not applicable, nor enforceable. If this were to pass then the next Signal will be P2P. There are already some good protocols like Tox.

Ironically the pervs will still be using WhatsApp, and just put their CSAM in a password-protected zip file before sending.

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped – Now

#133

Post by bowsamic »

loftsy wrote: post #68

It should be possible to have a private chat without spying. However I have an unpopular opinion, interested to hear what others might think: We should eliminate anonymity online. If you go on the internet everything you do should be tied back to your name. This can be done using device attestation. Everyone gets a private key tied to their name/address. This is compatible with free speech. In fact it promotes free s…

Surely then the government can easily censor anyone who disagrees with them

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped – Now

#134

Post by robjan »

neugiergiraffe wrote: post #58

Can someone explain to me why, over time, democratic states tend to drift into mass surveillance ? Is it beacuse a lot of people feel unsafe or is it because the people supposed to ensure our security see it as the "easiest" or most effective way to do their job? Is there so much benefit to having a fuctioning mass surveilance apparatus, and if yes, who benefits of it if not the people for whom these rules for in the…

When you have democracy the democratic process is now available to undermine it.

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped – Now

#135

Post by prmoustache »

Hbruz0 wrote: post #117
nope1000 wrote: post #12

"Fun" Fact: it's currently the European championships in football (soccer) in Europe (probably the biggest event of the year), so it's the perfect opportunity to sneak this through without too many people noticing.

How does this allow for it to be sneakily applied, as you suggest ?

Many unpopular laws are passed during major sports events, soccer world cup, olympucs and/or during summer holidays season.

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped – Now

#136

Post by latexr »

Hbruz0 wrote: post #117
nope1000 wrote: post #12

"Fun" Fact: it's currently the European championships in football (soccer) in Europe (probably the biggest event of the year), so it's the perfect opportunity to sneak this through without too many people noticing.

How does this allow for it to be sneakily applied, as you suggest ?

It creates a diversion. Classic move from cartoons.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzYOdO4pEyI

It works in real life too. Distract the public for long enough that few people make a stink and the law gets through. When people complain later it’s “Oops, we didn’t know, no one seemed to care. Well, nothing we can do now”. Much harder to do that if everyone is shouting at you to not do the thing.

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped – Now

#137

Post by cherryteastain »

ironSkillet wrote: post #106
WhackyIdeas wrote: post #102

PGP encryption should be taught in school. Ingrained. Data privacy used to be trampled on with the fear of ‘terrorism’, but the Americans blasted the airwaves with the word so much that it diluted the word to the point it instills zero fear. Now the new words of the times to trample on privacy is CSAM. And like utter fools, the public fall for the same crap time and time and time again. The truth is, the world will a…

Please give examples of how the authoritarian, repressive, conformity-demanding CCP is less awful and soul destroying than Western democracy, as flawed as it is.

Want to check how many died in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria between 2001 and now as a direct consequence of Western military action, versus how many people the PLA killed in foreign interventions in the same period?

Hint: the former - hundreds of thousands, the latter - zero

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped – Now

#138

Post by raxxorraxor »

sprash wrote: post #90
FabHK wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, is there any evidence that E2EE eg in WhatsApp, Signal, etc. is routinely broken? I am not talking about exceptional hacking of phones of individual high-value targets for surveillance by nation-state-level actors, but mass surveillance.

If there was public evidence allowed to be released nobody would be using those algorithms obviously. The point of those algorithms is to make them hard to break for the public and easy to break for the agencies . E.g. None of your mentioned products use quantum hard encryption. It is not far fetched to assume that all the relevant agencies have access to a working quantum computer. But I doubt you need even sophisti…

I seriously doubt that agencies have more capabilities than the scientific community of mathematicians. Perhaps there are weak points in implementations, but I don't believe any agency has the capabilities to crack encryption, even some of the older algorithms.

There is no evidence that a quantum computer can break classic encryption yet. Even if the agencies tried, they would not have the means to stop the spread of such information.

And finally, we wouldn't get laws like this.

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped – Now

#139

Post by loftsy »

piva00 wrote: post #79
loftsy wrote: post #68

It should be possible to have a private chat without spying. However I have an unpopular opinion, interested to hear what others might think: We should eliminate anonymity online. If you go on the internet everything you do should be tied back to your name. This can be done using device attestation. Everyone gets a private key tied to their name/address. This is compatible with free speech. In fact it promotes free s…

> This would also reduce the need for govt monitoring because any chat online could be "turned in" by an informer and then any criminals identified. This is where you completely break your premise, this is Stasi levels of informing, asking for the population to spy on each other. It's not healthy to society when you feel that any other person you interact with might be informing on you to the State, you leave a very…

Maybe.

How is it different from now when you can record a conversation you have? or forward an email to the police?

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped – Now

#140

Post by robjan »

sprash wrote: post #90
FabHK wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, is there any evidence that E2EE eg in WhatsApp, Signal, etc. is routinely broken? I am not talking about exceptional hacking of phones of individual high-value targets for surveillance by nation-state-level actors, but mass surveillance.

If there was public evidence allowed to be released nobody would be using those algorithms obviously. The point of those algorithms is to make them hard to break for the public and easy to break for the agencies . E.g. None of your mentioned products use quantum hard encryption. It is not far fetched to assume that all the relevant agencies have access to a working quantum computer. But I doubt you need even sophisti…

Signal uses post-quantum encryption
Post reply on HN