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

EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

statewatch.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 780 posts

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#251

Post by alkonaut »

dalu wrote: post #196
alkonaut wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GDPR complaints are sent to your national Data Protection Agency (DPA). Unsure what the relation is to this article though.

Third parties eyeing and storing your private communication maybe?

Are you suggesting they are doing it in violation of some law? This law isn't even a law yet, it's a proposal. Obviously eavesdropping and storing data with a court order is a valid use case under the GDPR. The GDPR might help ensure authorities properly delete old data though. I'm hoping that's already sorted since I hope authorities like law enforcement comply with the GDPR.

There is nothing inherent about eavesdropping that would violate the GDPR.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#252

Post by ben_w »

intricatedetail wrote: post #50
ben_w wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If by “we” you mean “the UK”, I’d like to point you in the direction of the UK’s Investigatory Powers Act, which is much worse than “we don’t like encrypted chat”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigatory_Powers_Act_201...

That is true, but you will be able to vote for a party in power to reverse it. Not possible in case of EU.

In the UK? Voting is a paper tiger for stuff like this. The bill was supported by both Tories and Labour, and I was living in a Tory safe seat. I mean, I could’ve moved to Scotland and supported the SNP bid for independence or Wales and Plaid Cymru (but not NI and Sinn Féin given their policy of not taking their seats), but realistically there was nothing I could do about it other than what I did do about it.

https://votes.parliament.uk/Votes/Commons/Division/80

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#253

Post by [deleted] »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #178
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> I mean wearing my programmer goggles it doesn't state privacy AND correspondence but OR, but still. But still what? The logic is perfectly correct; ~(a | b) = (~a & ~b)

[deleted]

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#254

Post by nullifidian »

PIKAL wrote: post #139

The brexit crowd is probably feeling vindicated.

It's not like Britain is any better than the EU in how it treats encryption. I remember them demanding private keys from Whatsapp. Though I agree it's much easier to lobby for change in a single country than to lobby change in a democratically deficient structure like the EU, where you first have to change local governments in EU countries, which in turn have to change eurocomissars, who will propose new legislation to the European parliament, where you too have to have the majority on your side.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#255

Post by m4rtink »

TheRealPomax wrote: post #74
eivarv wrote: post #30

I'm sick and tired of seeing tech-illiterate decision makers on both international levels attempt to thwart our right to privacy. Does anyone know what we or I can do (in this case specifically) to help fight this idiocy?

Yeah: run for office, win, and then effect policy change. But almost no one's willing to actually do that. They just want easy outs like "contacting your MP" or "donating to an org that says they'll try to fix it".

It can be done - an ex-coleague of mine got elected to the European Parliament last time - ot took two tries but wprled out & he is doing a good job there as far as I can tell. It's hardky an insurmountable barrier.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#256

Post by I_am_tiberius »

the_mitsuhiko wrote: post #195
nwellnhof wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While every EU member state has the right to veto important laws, there is no way to abolish a law unless all member states agree. So even if 90% of all Germans agree that a EU law should be abolished, they can't overrule tiny countries like Malta or Cyprus. This is a fundamental, undemocratic flaw that most politicians and supreme courts in Europe have yet to realize.

I think a lot of this depends on where your political position is, what is elected in your country and how the the EU is currently pointing. For instance for me as an Austrian citizen my country is significantly more leaning towards surveillance that I'm more worried about what we would be doing if we were not protected by the EU lawmaking process getting a lot more scrutiny and visibility.

I'm Austrian as well and I don't think lawmaking would go in the direction of surveillance without the EU. Austria's main ruling party has too many show politicians - I think they can do what they do now because they don't have to say in public what they do. In short: I don't think Sebastian Kurz would say in public that he wants all encryption (or chat app encryption) to be illegal.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#257

Post by ben_w »

notreallytrue wrote: post #247
ben_w wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

North Korea is rather a lot worse: https://insinuator.net/2015/07/redstar-os-watermarking/

Being better than North Korea is a pretty low bar I would expect from the greatest democracy and country in the World to be in the top three, not a little bit better than those at the bottom

My point is NK is a lot worse, not “a little bit”.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#258

Post by Daniel_sk »

Arathorn wrote: post #43

https://matrix.org/blog/2020/10/19/combating-abuse-in-matrix... is our attempt at Matrix to spell out what a catastrophic idea it is to backdoor end-to-end encryption (and to provide an alternative proposal in the form of using decentralised reputation to mitigate abuse. We're kicking decentralised reputation work off in earnest tomorrow, so watch this space to see how it goes). I guess we'll be weighing in on the EU…

Do you take donations?

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#259

Post by AnthonyMouse »

alkonaut wrote: post #227
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The struggle is to not lose the same ability (targeted eavesdropping after court orders) when people switch to e2e from phone calls. But they haven't. They can physically install a listening device at the location in the warrant and thereby record any conversations you make from there. That gives them the same capability they historically had with landlines.

Yes. So for a static location that's feasible. But the status quo is they can also tap old school mobile voice calls and text messages.

The status quo today is that various encrypted messaging apps exist without any apparent backdoors. This has been the case for several years already. The status quo from not long before that was that mobile phones and text messages didn't exist at all.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#260

Post by waskeifnikakew »

Perhaps some groups want to ban encryption to get more information, for example to force politiceans to resign. That is to know small bad things about people to make them resign. For example Madrid President (*), or Dominique Strauss, or Monica Levinski case. Many people rip off their clothes in outrage when their minds are conveniently manipulated. Getting information for pouring shit into your political adversary, who is going to ban that before banning encryption?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/25/madrid-preside...,

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/dec/10/dominique-stra...

Post reply on HN