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

41–50 of 780 posts

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#41

Post by EliRivers »

intricatedetail wrote: post #22

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 note that here I am in the UK, and the current home secretary appears to be Priti Patel. Who is far more hardline on this than the EU, and not in the good direction.

If we left at the last minute, it's so that we can go faster. One of the things we are deliberately jettisoning is the protections afforded us by being in the EU.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#42

Post by scrollaway »

alkonaut wrote: post #21
scrollaway wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First step is finding a way to educate the mainstream (including politicians) on the dangers of master keys and backdoors. It is too easy for many politicians and security agencies to think that their master keys and backdoors won't ever fall into the wrong hands, that they're careful, etc. And if you point out the problem, they'll tell you they'll be even more careful. Think about it from a non-techie perspective. I…

E2E encryption is scary. I'm also in the "you can't ban math, why try" camp. But I can't see authorities/politicians give up the idea of getting access to decrypted communications after court orders, in a 100 years, even if everyone completely understood the topic. It's just not happening.

I mean, if you put it that way, assumption of innocence is also a scary concept; being the police and having to let someone you know is a murderer or terrorist go because you can't prove what they did is routinely touted as a genuinely terrifying prospect in plenty of TV shows.

Privacy is a human right in Europe. I don't think it's a pipe dream to give encryption some good PR, especially when it powers the internet, keeps your payments safe, protects you from bad guys, etc.

Pushing hard on the concept that Encryption == Privacy is very important. We should not call intentionally-backdoored crypto "Encryption", but something obviously bad such as "Open-Door Fake Encryption", or whatever actually speaks to people.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#43

Post by Arathorn »

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 proposal as well as the 7-eyes one.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#44

Post by Daniel_sk »

lprd wrote: post #35
dalu wrote: post #16

This shows that the attack was planned by the powers that be, if not planned at least not actively blocked. It was 1 guy with a weapon that the Austrian secret service was warned about. The media made it 6 people doing a huge thing, in the end it was just 1 guy with an AK47 apparently. Austrian intelligence was warned by the Slovaks about him and they let him do regardless. Just like the 9/11 stuff, they knew what wa…

Do you have any sources on this? I’m interested.

I am from Slovakia and yes - this idiot actually went to our capital city (near border) to a gun shop and tried to buy ammunition for his AK-47. Of course you can't buy anything if you are not a citizen and you don't have a gun permit. So he didn't buy anything, the seller contacted the police and they did a background check and found out that he was sentenced for radicalism, he tried to go to Syria to fight a war and so on. They sent an official warning in June to Austria. Austria didn't act. You will find lots of news on this. There is actually a scan of the official letter Slovakia sent with all the details floating on the internet, but it's in Slovak: https://i.imgur.com/vxCU6tN.png

They want to ban encryption, but they can't arrest and stop the attack based on DIRECT evidence? Please...

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#45

Post by tom_mellior »

cle wrote: post #27
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…

The problem is that you can’t leave any room for interpretation, because governments generally interpret things as liberally as they can in their favor, to the brink of absurdity. In other words, “encryption” needs to be listed there as a right, to remove any room for interpretation. Or explicitly listed as an example of a more general right, like the right to private speech (or whatever you want to call it).

The EU ministers do want us to have a right to encryption. They just want to be able to decrypt it.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#46

Post by zulban »

cle wrote: post #27
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…

The problem is that you can’t leave any room for interpretation, because governments generally interpret things as liberally as they can in their favor, to the brink of absurdity. In other words, “encryption” needs to be listed there as a right, to remove any room for interpretation. Or explicitly listed as an example of a more general right, like the right to private speech (or whatever you want to call it).

Not just governments. Anyone, really.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#49

Post by scrollaway »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #39
camgunz wrote: post #4

We need to establish the use of encryption as a basic human right. I'm so tired of this cropping up every couple years.

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…

There is no logical connection between your first sentence and encryption. (By the way, it's incorrect, we call it the right to freedom of expression over here; sometimes also referred to as the freedom of opinion)

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#50

Post by intricatedetail »

ben_w wrote: post #38
intricatedetail wrote: post #22

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.

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.
Post reply on HN