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

ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

metalhearf.fr

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 656 posts

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#181

Post by NoahZuniga »

SamuelAdams wrote: post #72
lovelearning wrote: post #45

Is CSA really that widespread in Europe that everyone's chat messages have to be monitored? And if it is that widespread, shouldn't they try to address it socially to prevent CSA as much as possible rather than try to catch just the subset of tech-savvy abusers, that too after they've already committed CSA?

It’s not about CSA, it’s about illegal content. And laws change all the time. For example, an individual can generate AI images of Hollywood actors using Stable Diffusion and a decently powerful computer. Said individual had the right to share those images online with a community. Now however the sharing and distribution of said images is considered illegal in my USA state. So, are the images said individual created…

> Even if the law went into effect 3 months ago?

No. The right not to be tried for actions that weren't crimes at the time is pretty universally applied in the west (I am not aware of the legal situation in other parts of the world, but I imagine it's honored there too). (Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights for the EU, Article I, Section 9 & 10 of the constitution for the US)

> So, are the images said individual created and shared three years ago subject to prosecution?

Generally, criminal acts are judged according to the rules of the jurisdiction where they happened, so I wouldn't be too worried about this. This isn't a universal rule though, so you won't find it enshrined in constitutions or treaties.

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#182

Post by matthewdgreen »

brabel wrote: post #107
iLoveOncall wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem it's trying to solve is mass surveillance...

The motivation in Denmark was some big cases where organized crime was only caught due to a huge hacking operation where the police was able to monitor communication on the apps commonly used by the criminals. That allowed them to take very dangerous people off the streets and now they want to do more of that, more easily. I think the discussion can never be in terms of absolutes. If your family was murdered by some…

But the CSAM regulation under discussion doesn't do any of the things you're claiming. It mandates content scanning for CSAM and other related messages. It does not call for key escrow and decryption of messages involving organized crime. So it's not clear how you would do much against serious organized criminals with this law.

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#183

Post by ihsw »

tomkarho wrote: post #84
haolez wrote: post #3

I think the challenge for society here is not to simply reject attempts like this, but how to prevent them from being pushed over and over until a specific context allows it to be approved.

The only way I see to prevent the constant pushing is that every single time some council or committee presents something like this every single of one of their private communication gets leaked for everyone to peruse at their leisure from whatsapp to bank statements. They want to erode people's privacy? Let them walk their talk first and see how that goes.

[dead]

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#184

Post by nikkwong »

Xelbair wrote: post #167
nikkwong wrote: post #151

Imagine a future where it becomes easier to commit terrorism because of some technological advancements—like smaller, less traceable bombs, or chemical weapons that are easily accessible and lead to higher casualties—like in the 1,000s or more. Imagine in that scenario, that the likelihood of you or someone you know becoming the victim of a terrorist attack is now non-trivial in your society. In a future where this b…

this also assumes that criminals or terrorists will just follow the law. you can always establish encrypted channel via DH over stenography in plaintext messaging, and just use any encrypted protocol. if hardware is compromised a black market for such devices will surface. Worst case scenario you create gigantic one time pads and just use them. the whole idea is flawed as you get neither security nor privacy. in fact…

> a black market for such devices will surface

Probably, but I think you are giving most bad actors too much credence. Tyler Robinson took several precautions to cover his trail in his assassination of Charlie Kirk—but he also told many individuals about his plan on discord, as well as other non-encrypted channels, etc. Not all bad actors are sophisticated in the same way.

I wouldn't trust the government with the power. If the scenario I'm posing were to actually occur, it's only a matter of time until the gestapo starts showing up at the houses of innocent individuals. This sort of thing happens in China.

Still, again, if the threat is big enough, I am curious to ponder what role individuals would want government to take in using surveillance to reduce actual human deaths in terror attacks (or any type of attack, for that matter).

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#185

Post by ihsw »

tremon wrote: post #100
quotemstr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or as someone put it, "People shouldn't fear the government. The government should fear the people." I feel like we've lost the vocabulary we ought to be using to talk about the legitimacy and role of the state. More people need to read J.S. Mill (and probably Hobbes.) Even today, works by both are surprisingly good reads and embed a lot of thoughtful and timeless wisdom.

But isn't the government fearing the people exactly why they're relentlessly pushing ChatControl?

[dead]

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#186

Post by matthewdgreen »

nikkwong wrote: post #151

Imagine a future where it becomes easier to commit terrorism because of some technological advancements—like smaller, less traceable bombs, or chemical weapons that are easily accessible and lead to higher casualties—like in the 1,000s or more. Imagine in that scenario, that the likelihood of you or someone you know becoming the victim of a terrorist attack is now non-trivial in your society. In a future where this b…

>Imagine a future where it becomes easier to commit terrorism because of some technological advancements

Imagine a future where aliens invade, and all of our civil rights have to be suspended in order for society to be re-focused on fighting an existential war against the invaders. I suppose this sci-fi hypothetical could happen and if it did happen then the sacrifice might even be necessary. But it's not happening now, and it's entirely reasonable to classify it as both (1) unlikely, and (2) an incredibly bad outcome we should hope that we never have to face.

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#187

Post by Aloisius »

quotemstr wrote: post #40
fsckboy wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i think making your argument on free speech grounds would be stronger

How so? My point is that US constitutional protections on firearm ownership have undeniably eroded. The presence of text on the page did not prevent this erosion. I'm using gun rights as an example of a situation in which text granting a right becomes irrelevant if people stop believing in the values behind the text. People do believe in freedom of speech in the US, thankfully, even if they've stopped defending gun r…

This simply isn't true. If anything, constitutional protections have dramatically expanded since the amendment was passed.

This is because until the 14th Amendment and the incorporation doctrine, the Bill of Rights only restricted the Federal government, not the States. Prior to the that, state and local governments could (and did) restrict not just firearms, but other rights as well.

Hell, the Bill of Rights still hasn't been fully incorporated, so for instance, despite the 7th Amendment stating otherwise, you don't have the right to a jury trial in civil cases in every state nor the right to indictment by grand jury (5th Amendment).

Of course, some states copied parts of the constitution into their own and had some form of protection, but it was by no means universal. Massachusetts even had a state church until 1833.

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#188

Post by xp84 »

randomNumber7 wrote: post #161
izacus wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same thing that prevents you form buying a knife and walking around stabbing people.

So you think this is comparable to sending around some data over TCP or UDP?

The people who are trying to install this kind of law basically do!

They want to change the public perception from "Private encrypted communication is good and desirable" to "Encrypted is unsafe. Encrypted could be scary. Encrypted enables Bad People."

In a vain attempt to inhibit access to non-broken cryptography, we will probably see operating systems that allow actual root access to the user -- or even just allowing non-manufacturer-signed executables to run! -- being painted as "unsafe platforms." Apple has already transitioned most of the way to being fully in the "trusted computing" camp, since it takes a great deal of gymnastics to even modify the OS because of the Mac's sealed system volume, and out of the box all executables must be blessed by Apple, meaning governments can put their thumb on Apple to force them to disallow any non-broken crypto tools from being used. I know this can be changed in Settings for now, but that'll probably go away eventually.

Microsoft will be next of course, and Linux will be portrayed as a "hacking tool" by contrast to the commercial OSs.

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#189

Post by nikkwong »

KPGv2 wrote: post #156
nikkwong wrote: post #151

Imagine a future where it becomes easier to commit terrorism because of some technological advancements—like smaller, less traceable bombs, or chemical weapons that are easily accessible and lead to higher casualties—like in the 1,000s or more. Imagine in that scenario, that the likelihood of you or someone you know becoming the victim of a terrorist attack is now non-trivial in your society. In a future where this b…

> it would be interesting to see if individuals are more willing to adopt a level of increased surveillance as it seems as the only reasonable protection against terror. One presumes it would make terrorism easier if you could hack in and find out where your target is at any given time. What they're doing. What their plans are for this evening. Also I think one could probably point to the current US president as proo…

Yeah, totally. Again not saying I'm advocating for it in that form or manner. I'm just saying, tradeoffs could occur, that reasonable people may start to weigh differently based on the level of threat they feel to their lives personally.

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#190

Post by spockz »

reliabilityguy wrote: post #111
raverbashing wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but unfortunately courts are mostly reactive, not proactive Sometimes there are some mechanisms to block unconstitutional (or other regulation) laws from passing but they're limited Not sure how that would apply at the EU level or even at the Danish level

> Yes but unfortunately courts are mostly reactive, not proactive I think it’s always the case, no? Unless the unconstitutional law is approved, there is nothing to dispute in court.

In the Netherlands we have the “Eerste kamer” (first chamber, also called Senate) that is responsible for verifying that the proposed laws are in accordance with our “constitution”. They are elected of band with the normal government which should ensure that no single party is able to steamroll laws through both chambers.
Post reply on HN