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

Mozilla publishes position paper on the EU Digital Identity Framework

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 161 posts

Re: Mozilla publishes position paper on the EU Digital Identity Framework

#41

Post by mikeiz404 »

deadbunny wrote: post #31
parasense wrote: post #28

I think the Browsers should swing the axe the other direction. Indicate the website is broken when EV certificates are present. Also, indicate all websites are broken if/or when the Root-CA-trust ever be forcefully extended to include EV CA authorities, in particular state backed authorities. I'm not sure about the EU, but forcing browsers green-light weak security is a violation of the USA's 1st amendment freedom of…

I'm not sure I follow. How are EV certificates weak? They use the same cyphers and just have extra validation on the owner/domain.

It appears to be more of a UI issue where the legal entity name is shown along side or sometimes in place of the URL which can be misleading.

To compound problems legal entity names are not required to be unique across states or countries so an EV certificate for a popular company name can be obtained in another geography and presented to the user on an attacker controlled domain.

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/extended-vali...

Re: Mozilla publishes position paper on the EU Digital Identity Framework

#43

Post by babypuncher »

phicoh wrote: post #36
dahfizz wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel similarly about the EU forcing companies to use usb-C as a charging port. I love usb-C, and it is basically a requirement for any electronic I buy. But forcing everyone to use it until the end of time is ridiculous. Imagine if they had done this a few years ago, and the micro-B connector was mandated. We would never have gotten usb-C.

I don't understand the 'never gotten usb-C' part. Modern phones have more than enough space for two connectors. So usb-C next to a micro-B charging port is no problem. After a while, almost all phone also have usb-C, most people like usb-C, so the industry can petition to replace micro-B with usb-C. Are there any examples where the EU mandates legacy stuff that is no longer useful, but still has to be kept anyway?

Ports actually do take up valuable real estate inside a phone. There are downsides to making phones have two USB ports. More ports on the bottom means less space for the second speaker and microphone, and makes waterproofing more difficult. I don't think any manufacturer would actually do it outside devices designed for special use cases.

Re: Mozilla publishes position paper on the EU Digital Identity Framework

#44

Post by ostenning »

theplumber wrote: post #5
MR4D wrote: post #3

Authoritarianism raises its head in all sorts of interesting ways. Interesting to see the EU choose the path of Kazakhstan.[0] [0] - https://www.internetsociety.org/news/statements/2019/interne...

A proper online identity framework is long due though. Maybe this is not the proper one but sending copies of my passport, electricity bills and lately selfie recordings as well to "prove my identity" doesn't seem right either.

I guess that depends what you expect from society and government.

Do you expect that everything runs like an extremely powerful well oiled machine, where 100% interoperability likely means complete surveillance? A seemingly technocratic dystopian reality where every impulse is quantified and catalogued? I think its naive to believe that governments don't want more money, power and control over its citizens and government likely will be extracting more with every optimization the system makes.

Or would you rather an extremely powerful machine that is disjointed, highly flawed and laden with inconvenience in-so-that society doesn't really know who you are? Where the individual has more freedom and liberty, but as a result there is more crime and less "safety". A world where powerful anti-social forces are at play, such as disinformation campaigns, polarization of discourse, fringe movements and revolution.

The commonality is they are both driven by technology. We have built an extremely powerful machine and that has introduced enormous complexity into our society. This complexity equates to entropy and either we pull it together with draconian government policy, or the system unravels.

Re: Mozilla publishes position paper on the EU Digital Identity Framework

#45

Post by NotEvil »

phicoh wrote: post #36
dahfizz wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel similarly about the EU forcing companies to use usb-C as a charging port. I love usb-C, and it is basically a requirement for any electronic I buy. But forcing everyone to use it until the end of time is ridiculous. Imagine if they had done this a few years ago, and the micro-B connector was mandated. We would never have gotten usb-C.

I don't understand the 'never gotten usb-C' part. Modern phones have more than enough space for two connectors. So usb-C next to a micro-B charging port is no problem. After a while, almost all phone also have usb-C, most people like usb-C, so the industry can petition to replace micro-B with usb-C. Are there any examples where the EU mandates legacy stuff that is no longer useful, but still has to be kept anyway?

You are missing that if micro-b was an "have to include" port. Usb-c whouldn't be created. There will be no incentive

Re: Mozilla publishes position paper on the EU Digital Identity Framework

#46

Post by zoobab »

Shadonototra wrote: post #23

Why is it ok for an american company to collude with foreign politics? Can't they focus on their broken system first?

EU laws are written by foreign actors, just look at the lobbying going on on DSA/DMA, those foreign corporations are writing laws against the interests of European companies and citizens.

Re: Mozilla publishes position paper on the EU Digital Identity Framework

#47

Post by alibarber »

phicoh wrote: post #36
dahfizz wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel similarly about the EU forcing companies to use usb-C as a charging port. I love usb-C, and it is basically a requirement for any electronic I buy. But forcing everyone to use it until the end of time is ridiculous. Imagine if they had done this a few years ago, and the micro-B connector was mandated. We would never have gotten usb-C.

I don't understand the 'never gotten usb-C' part. Modern phones have more than enough space for two connectors. So usb-C next to a micro-B charging port is no problem. After a while, almost all phone also have usb-C, most people like usb-C, so the industry can petition to replace micro-B with usb-C. Are there any examples where the EU mandates legacy stuff that is no longer useful, but still has to be kept anyway?

Is that really better though? Phones would have to be manufactured with an unused port - and if you want to use all the functionality you’d need to buy another cable (yet more e-waste)

Not that I have ‘the answer’ just that it’s a hard problem.

Re: Mozilla publishes position paper on the EU Digital Identity Framework

#48

Post by 66fm472tjy7 »

Is the draft of the revision available anywhere? I don't see a link anywhere in the position paper. Article 45 in the current regulation[0] says nothing about browsers. I am curious about the exact language that would force Firefox support the technology and include the TSPs in their root store.

[0] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...

Re: Mozilla publishes position paper on the EU Digital Identity Framework

#49

Post by sofixa »

parasense wrote: post #28

I think the Browsers should swing the axe the other direction. Indicate the website is broken when EV certificates are present. Also, indicate all websites are broken if/or when the Root-CA-trust ever be forcefully extended to include EV CA authorities, in particular state backed authorities. I'm not sure about the EU, but forcing browsers green-light weak security is a violation of the USA's 1st amendment freedom of…

> I'm not sure about the EU, but forcing browsers green-light weak security is a violation of the USA's 1st amendment freedom of speech. Regrettably I would not be surprised if EU took a more authoritarian stance.

Care to expand on this? I have a hard time making any sort of connection.

Re: Mozilla publishes position paper on the EU Digital Identity Framework

#50

Post by input_sh »

dahfizz wrote: post #18
xoa wrote: post #8

This did get posted a few weeks ago at the time it was written but didn't get much traction at that point, yet seems like a reasonably important issue. The EU has done worthy things for issues like privacy, but whatever pluses and minuses of regulating personal and business policy I'm a lot more dubious about government sticking its hand directly into how specific software (like browsers) functions. That seems like a…

I feel similarly about the EU forcing companies to use usb-C as a charging port. I love usb-C, and it is basically a requirement for any electronic I buy. But forcing everyone to use it until the end of time is ridiculous. Imagine if they had done this a few years ago, and the micro-B connector was mandated. We would never have gotten usb-C.

> Imagine if they had done this a few years ago, and the micro-B connector was mandated. We would never have gotten usb-C.

They did, you don't have to imagine it.

In 2009 they've signed a memorandum of understanding with 14 phone companies, which is why micro-B was the standard before type C. Apple was within those that signed it, and used a loophole in the text to ship a lightning-to-micro-B adapter instead.

Around 2016 they've realised micro-B was outdated and notified the signatories that they should switch to type C.

https://www.macrumors.com/guide/eu-charging-standard-proposa...

Post reply on HN