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

261–270 of 780 posts

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#261

Post by SheinhardtWigCo »

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…

Thanks for Matrix.

This proposal seems to address general abuse, spam, propaganda, filter bubbles, and so on. While these are worthy issues to tackle, the authors of the 7-eyes statement are not really interested in them.

What they say they want is for terrorism and child pornography to be detectable or meaningfully reduced. Do you think a relative reputation system will solve that problem?

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#262

Post by modzu »

nix23 wrote: post #236
MayeulC wrote: post #165

This is madness. Oh, of course, it's much easier to put a wrench into some gears to show that you are actually working at "solving the terrorism problem" than shaving the yaks, but that machine is actually important for other things. 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 freed…

>We live in a dangerous world. No we don't, but that's what the Politicians try to implement in our brains.

exactly; the terror... stop being afraid and we avoid the collective need to sell our souls and those of our children for the protection of the state

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#263

Post by Arathorn »

Daniel_sk wrote: post #258
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?

Yup, the "Support Matrix" section at the bottom of https://matrix.org/ has the details. (thanks!)

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#264

Post by Zenst »

part1of2 wrote: post #212
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…

What about proposing encryption as an EU human right? Has that been attempted?

I'd of thought that Article 8 of human rights would encompass this.

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/human-rights-act/arti...

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#265

Post by hvis »

ars wrote: post #237
GhostVII wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can have wiretapping you don't have E2E encryption. So I think this would be a ban on E2E encryption, not on encryption in general of course but I think that should be self evident.

You could permit only weak encryption, this would allow E2E, but still be wiretapped (although with difficultly). This also gets rid of the need for master keys or key escrow. (Don't shoot the messenger, this is a technical theoretical idea, not a policy suggestion.)

So only use encryption that can be decrypted by anybody who really wants to?

That sounds useful.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#266

Post by throw0101a »

iandanforth wrote: post #238

I see this as follows: 1. Terrorism and trafficking of children will win the moral high ground. 2. App stores will be forced locale by locale to conform to these policies. 3. Most people will not notice or care. 4. This will be used by N-Eyes and totalitarian governments to quash dissent. 5. Meanwhile the tech crowd will create alternate app distribution mechanisms allowing those who care to communicate securely. 6.…

> 1. Terrorism and trafficking of children will win the moral high ground.

Requisite:

> The term was coined by Timothy C. May in 1988. May referred to "child pornographers, terrorists, drug dealers, etc."[2]. May used the phrase to express disdain for what he perceived as "Think of the children" argumentation by government officials and others seeking to justify limiting civilian use of cryptography tools. Connotations related to such argumentation continue to be attached to the phrase, and it is more commonly used by those who wish to deride various restrictions on Internet activity than by those who support such restrictions.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalyp...

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#267

Post by j0ba »

iandanforth wrote: post #238

I see this as follows: 1. Terrorism and trafficking of children will win the moral high ground. 2. App stores will be forced locale by locale to conform to these policies. 3. Most people will not notice or care. 4. This will be used by N-Eyes and totalitarian governments to quash dissent. 5. Meanwhile the tech crowd will create alternate app distribution mechanisms allowing those who care to communicate securely. 6.…

It's the infinite horse race. Black hats vs white hats. Neither holds the upper hand for long.

I hope that if we ever reach a steady state, it will be unbreakable privacy.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#268

Post by djbebs »

romanoderoma wrote: post #105
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU doesn't see free speech as a basic human right. They are of the opinion that some ideas are dangerous in and of themselves, even without a call to violence. It is doubtful that it will see something like encryption that allows speech and communication at a distance without government knowledge or control as a basic human right. After all, if some speech is so dangerous that it cannot be posted online, then we…

> The EU doesn't see free speech as a basic human right Of course it is, it's called freedom of opinion, simply some opinions are considered crimes by the EU law system. Removing a post that incites someone to commit suicide or to kill someone can save the poster from being prosecuted. That's it. Private communications are excempted though, unless they need to be used in a trial after a judge authorized it.

Try going to berlin waving a nazi flag and saying they should have killed more jews back then to see how that goes

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#269

Post by m4rtink »

intricatedetail wrote: post #137
raspyberr wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you please name a party who's against this? The Pirate Party UK recently disbanded. There is no one to vote for and practically starting a party won't achieve much. Seriously, give me a party to vote for to reduce the state of surveillance in the UK.

It does not exist because there is no public awareness. One of the parties could start looking into it and make noise. But if it won't catch up with the public it won't happen, however without EU at least we have a chance.

The Czech pirat party is dping rather well on both local and european level - it meeds a lot of work, but it can be done!

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#270

Post by prof-dr-ir »

I found this article from a month ago easier to read:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/10/orders-top-eus-timetab...

But maybe that is just because it contains fewer German words.

Edit: the top link has now changed to the actual proposal instead of a German source. The EFF's opinion may still interest people.

Post reply on HN