161–170 of 780 posts
The brexit crowd is probably feeling vindicated.
I'm in my early 40s. Up until I was ~35 I was very strongly against this, sort of like most you. Now I feel the EU in general (some member states a lot worse than others) has backed itself into a corner because of the utterly failed integration efforts, union-wide. I live in a EU nation that has seen a very high rise in violent (and sometimes frankly horrible) crime over the past decade. As a dad of a 1-year old daug…
It's common that people become much more concerned about possible threats to physical safety after having children. That strikes me as reasonable, even if it leads someone to take a different side than I would in a freedom/safety question. With that out of the way, how do you propose stopping criminals from using encrypted chat? You can make it illegal, of course, but making it impossible for someone who doesn't care…
1. Police finds e.g. a 19 year criminal gang member doing something mildly illegal.
2. Police inspects their phone
3. Police finds illicit encrypted chat app
4. Criminal gang member refuses to cough up password
5. Criminal gang member gets sentenced and cannot hurt the public while they are contained.
The EU is slowly starting to show their true face. We probably have left at the last minute. I personally think this is an attempted assault on human rights and such ideas should be nipped in a bud and people proposing that banned from any office. My blood boils.
I agree save for the attack on the EU at the start. I'm assuming you're English (or an Irish Unionist), and will point out that the UK has been entirely onboard with the EU's most egregious abuses of power. Hell, some of them were the UK's idea. (EUCD Article 17 comes to mind.) In this particular case the UK already has local laws which establish a legal duty to decrypt data on command of the government. As far as I'…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like TSA luggage keys.... there's no way those would leak online, and no way anybody would be able to download them from https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1687424 and 3d-print them... no way something like that'd happen!
Luckily, you can't 3D print an encryption key that would be useful in any way. Although, now I wish the guy from Lavabits had handed in his SSL cert as 3D printed letters and numbers like a puzzle.
We live in a dangerous world. We cannot control everything. I don't mind a slight risk of terrorist attack on myself or my family (caveat lector: I am young), if that means greater freedom.
In my book this is the first step towards authoritarianism: ensure that the state survives at all costs. And being able to spy on the whole population to track outlaws and dissidents is part of this. There is an invisible barrier between what's legal and what's not. Crossing it isn't hard, look at extinction rebellion and other civil disobedience protestors. Yet, on the other side, your trusted options are very limited, and encryption is one of those. I'd argue that letting citizens communicate and organize privately is a vital component of democracy, even allowing citizens to seize control of the state if they deem it necessary. More so than U.S.A.'s "Second amendment", encryption is an arm citizens should legally be able to bear.
Now, it is obviously hypocritical to offer such a thing, as politicians certainly wouldn't want their texts to be snooped on, would they? Any bill that requests backdoors should request them from everyone.
And don't get me started on how governments recommend their own to use Matrix and Signal, the very apps they aim to backdoor, because they are secure. You can't both have your cake and eat it, too.
A useful thing to explain encryption backdoors is the TSA master keys: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12177079
Their very existence made locks less secure (possibility of a key leak), and those are worthless against thieves now that master keys have leaked (you can 3D print them).
I was told that this only happens in authoritarian regimes like China. Turns out that while everybody was talking about China exact same things were happening here in the West. It's as if the whole focus on China was specifically designed to distract people from what's happening in their own countries.
Security services always demand total access to communications. It requires constant democratic pushback.
We need to establish the use of encryption as a basic human right. I'm so tired of this cropping up every couple years.
It pretty much is, section 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: > No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. I mean wearing my programmer goggles it doesn't state privacy AND correspondence but OR, but sti…
E2e encryption that is "safe from courts" isn't protected.
I don't have a nice name for people in EU parliament that write these things, they don't really understand what encryption is. It's not a technology. You can't ban encryption. Terrorists can just use unencrypted chat and either use their own encryption or they can use predefined words and sentences that actually have a totally different meaning.
EU commission chose signal as official chat app and has been pushing E2E encryption for everybody for a long time.
A law proposal has been presented to enforce mandatory E2E encryption in 2017
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/procedure/EN/2017_3
UK particularly opposed to it.
Also Germany.
This is another proposal, and that's just what it is, a proposal, it has no other value than that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lol, what?
Ehm... https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/03/edward-snowd...