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

EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

tutanota.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 431 posts

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#401

Post by newsclues »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #206
newsclues wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Do you really believe that in Europe governments are in control of everything like it happens in Russia or in North Korea?" No, but I really believe European leaders are jealous of the authoritarian powers they lack, and are working to resolve that.

> No, but I really believe European leaders are jealous of the authoritarian powers they lack, and are working to resolve that. You can believe anything you want. That wouldn't make you right. national parliaments have to pass these legislation, EU is formed by 26 countries, all with very different ideas, traditions, political stances and objectives. So, Orban? Yeah he would love to be the sole leader of his country.…

I’m Canadian, they seized bank accounts and used emergency laws to crush protesters.

Democracy is already crumbling.

And American has the NSA!

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#402

Post by dragonwriter »

School-Cotton wrote: post #218
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your government who wants to control you How exactly? In Italy we had 67 different governments since 1946. What can they do with CSAM data? Government can't blackmail citizen, they can't use CSAM scans for other purposes, they can't even authorize a scan, because that's the justice system prerogative. Do you really believe that in Europe governments are in control of everything like it happens in Russia or in North…

> In Italy we had 67 different governments since 1946. Colloquially when Americans say “government” they are referring to the entire state, including not just elected officials but professional civil servants, police, courts, intelligence agencies, etc. You have definitely not had 67 different governments since 1946 in the sense that I think was meant.

> Colloquially when Americans say “government” they are referring to the entire state

Very consistently, when anyone (including Americans) talks about parliamentary systems, the number of governments or changes of government refer to the same thing as the number of administrations or change of administration when referring to the US system of government.

There are other contexts where there might be ambiguity, but this is one of them.

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#403

Post by a-dub »

flavius29663 wrote: post #104
a-dub wrote: post #48

seems like maybe a better approach might be to require software developers to give parents/guardians features that allow a comprehensive view into the online activities of their children. although unclear, that creates more visibility than has ever existed and could cause problems for kids who have different views from their parents. we're in uncharted territory, really.

This is not about parent control, it's about people doing horrible porn with toddlers and then distributing it to other adults.

yeah. maybe parental controls so parents know who their kids are talking to paired with good old fashioned undercover detective work might be a preferable approach to eastern bloc style listening posts.

if you want to get fancy, maybe build undercover chat bots or sophisticated honey pots.

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#404

Post by tut-urut-utut »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #217
pc86 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > 3. What makes you think #2 is true even today? > Because I live in EU and everywhere else I look the situation is far worse. "It's worse other places" doesn't answer the question. The EU's government isn't perfect and I don't see any safeguards in this proposal. It's ripe for abuse. > Funny that guns are abused daily in US Whataboutism nonsense, nobody is talking about guns except you. > If the filter has to be u…

> The EU's government isn't perfect Do you know someone or something that is? I don't. > I don't see any safeguards in this proposal. then write one and propose it! or look better. >It's ripe for abuse. BY WHOM EXACTLY? AND WHY? > Utterly fanciful. Once this exists and is in place, it can and will be expanded to other things. Are you from the future or simply doubling down on your opinions, trying to pose them as une…

You mean like German police using the data from COVID tracing apps, although legally they should not be used for anything except virus tracing?

Or it doesn't count since Germany is not a democracy?

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#405

Post by Avamander »

schroeding wrote: post #114

The worst thing is that, while the EU proposes dubious stuff like this, the police doesn't actually try to remove such content from the internet or are at least really ineffective at doing so. There was a documentary[1] from the german public tv station NDR in which reporters / journalists managed to delete the majority of content from one such CSAM forum, by sending deletion requests to the hosters. The police just.…

A lot of cybercrime is like that, the police are very incompetent at handling it. I've seen a criminal literally logged in with their personal account (with 2FA, home address etc.) and the case was dropped because they wouldn't/couldn't identify the person. I don't think they even attempted.

Botnets are annoying to dismantle even within the EU, it's not even illegal in some countries to not remove reported malware.

I view such legislation as an excuse to their general incompetence.

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#406

Post by encrux »

one-red-cent wrote: post #364

How do we stop this?

> How do we stop this?

I am not sure, honestly. I remember the Article 13/17 protests. To me it seemed like even though thousands of people went to protest, they simply did not care. And back then, it was about Copyright.

Now, a group of people would have to protest against a proposal that's supposed to "protect the children". I can already see what populists would do to any group.

In the end, it all boils down to education (raising awareness), protesting (and talking to those who want to understand) and electing officials who care about the people.

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#408

Post by encrux »

jstummbillig wrote: post #202
lm28469 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The HN attitude on anything touching privacy with a ten foot pole is awkward. Because the power it gives is basically limitless. Once these things are implemented there will be no going back. It only kind of works when the government acts in good faith, and even then not really. France passed laws against violent demonstrations, they ended up arresting people 200-300km away from Paris because they were suspected to…

When we say that privacy rights can absolutely not be touched, we are, among other things, also saying, whatever criminals get best at abusing those increasingly powerful rights (given the relatively growing space covered by encryption and stuff that happens through or over the internet) get to be more criminal and that's just the price we will have to pay for our collective freedom. This insanely childish and irresp…

> When we say that privacy rights can absolutely not be touched, we are, among other things, also saying, whatever criminals get best at abusing those increasingly powerful rights (given the relatively growing space covered by encryption and stuff that happens through or over the internet) get to be more criminal and that's just the price we will have to pay for our collective freedom.

Who is "we"?

As I see it, the criticism isn't directed at the goal. I think nobody is opposed to protecting children. Sure, HN crowd is obviously a very privacy-focused crowd, though I'm convinced that civil discussion is possible if the trade-offs for such a proposal would be a little more nuanced.

In this instance though, there is no nuance. There is no trade off. It's just security.

Also, implementing a law that kills privacy for pretty much anyone to protect children, while ignoring the elephant in the room [0] seems disingenuous at best.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_sexual_abuse...

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#409

Post by Ferrotin »

dodobirdlord wrote: post #342
kevincox wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not how it works at least in Canada and the US. Until they can read the password out of our minds (or at least prove that we have it) we don't need to give up the key.

I can't speak for Canada, but in the US if a court issues a search warrant for data stored on one of your devices you are obligated to take whatever steps are necessary to turn over the data, including decrypting the data if applicable. This power is provided to the government by the 4th Amendment. What you are likely referring to is the 5th Amendment right that protects a person from being compelled to testify again…

That is not true; there is conflicting precedent on the matter.

Re: EU Commission is planning automatic CSAM scanning of private communications

#410

Post by matheusmoreira »

GordonS wrote: post #129
marsRoverDev wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding of this technology was it was usually a hash or fingerprint of some form of the material, to be compared against a database of hashes of known-bad material. I doubt EU countries have the infrastructure or budget to run models across everything, no?

An article about this was posted yesterday, and the EU wants to take it further that detecting known CSAM content, using AI to detect new content too. Of course, it's all a pretence for getting access to read all of your data. It might be a language thing, but the wording of the report was such that they were almost stating this explicitly. Honestly, what.the.hell are these clowns thinking?!

The article says they already have technology that detects "grooming", whatever that means. That's seriously frightening, who knows what else they can detect? Maybe a few years from now we'll be reading articles about people getting arrested for expressing prohibited thoughts, subversive ideas, political opposition in what they thought was a private communications channel.
Post reply on HN