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

EU member states still cannot agree about end-to-end encryption

cyberlaw.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 154 posts

Re: EU member states still cannot agree about end-to-end encryption

#61

Post by mrtksn »

mannerheim wrote: post #58
mrtksn wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It freaks me out to the point that I rather have my country leave the EU. What makes you think that your country’s politicians don’t want that but some people in Brussels are forcing it? Those people in Brussels are just people from all the countries, including yours. You also vote them in. The desire of governments controlling the population is universal.

Because some of the governments in TFA have given positions opposing it?

And they can keep opposing it if they really don't want it.

However I agree that EU can also be used as a scapegoat when implementing unpopular policies, unfortunately. They can claim that they totally didn't want it but EU mede them accept it.

Re: EU member states still cannot agree about end-to-end encryption

#62

Post by maccard »

clarionbell wrote: post #20
hef19898 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it just means whatever data they have is less secure. Encryption does nothing about data collection.

Well encrypted data is practically useless to the collector. They could just as well be a random noise. Metadata may be worth something, but not nearly as much.

The solution there is political, not technical.

Re: EU member states still cannot agree about end-to-end encryption

#63

Post by shiroiuma »

gotbeans wrote: post #29
roenxi wrote: post #2

> “Ideally, in our view,” they say, “it would be desirable to legislatively prevent EU-based service providers from implementing end-to-end encryption.” - Spain It is hard to even comment on in idea that extreme. The rest of us are lucky the EU has failed so comprehensively at establishing a global tech presence.

Not surprising from Spain if you ask me. Spain's central gov's been found to actively spy trhough malware politically opposing parties[1], so hearing they are against e2e encryption just sounds about right. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CatalanGate

Well, it shouldn't be too surprising that a literal dictatorship would act this way. It may not be a dictatorship at the moment, but it was not too many years ago, and the only reason it's not a dictatorship today is only because the dictator died of old age. Spain does not have a very good track record with democracy, so of course such a culture isn't going to value freedom and liberal (in the classical sense) democratic values.

Re: EU member states still cannot agree about end-to-end encryption

#64

Post by mannerheim »

mrtksn wrote: post #61
mannerheim wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because some of the governments in TFA have given positions opposing it?

And they can keep opposing it if they really don't want it. However I agree that EU can also be used as a scapegoat when implementing unpopular policies, unfortunately. They can claim that they totally didn't want it but EU mede them accept it.

Can the EU sanction countries for not complying?

Re: EU member states still cannot agree about end-to-end encryption

#65

Post by rdm_blackhole »

mrtksn wrote: post #39
rollulus wrote: post #11

Initiatives like Chat Control makes me pessimistic. They keep on coming in all sort of variations and we defend. Given enough of such iterations, at some point though they’ll eventually be lucky and god knows how long it will take to revert things. And what I don’t get is that this sort of proposed legislation is more than Stasi could've ever wished. And yet it’s openly discussed as if it’s good idea. And note that “…

>It freaks me out to the point that I rather have my country leave the EU. What makes you think that your country’s politicians don’t want that but some people in Brussels are forcing it? Those people in Brussels are just people from all the countries, including yours. You also vote them in. The desire of governments controlling the population is universal.

The EC members who currently are sponsoring this bill (Chat Control 2.0) are not elected, they are appointed.

They do not answer to anyone and they collude with lobby organizations to push an agenda. This is the far from being a democratic process.

Re: EU member states still cannot agree about end-to-end encryption

#66

Post by lynx23 »

sebtron wrote: post #60
lynx23 wrote: post #30

The day the EU forbids E2E is the day I start to actively root for my country to exit.

Why not actively root for that one specific law to be reverted? Sounds like an easier change.

But not a long-term solution. The brits had the right intuition. The EU is pretty much a globalist failure. The more it goes in the direction of an US of E, the less I want to be a part of it. Its slow and hopelessly naiv. The whole refugee situation and the russia thing made this very obvious.

Re: EU member states still cannot agree about end-to-end encryption

#67

Post by pjmlp »

rdm_blackhole wrote: post #65
mrtksn wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It freaks me out to the point that I rather have my country leave the EU. What makes you think that your country’s politicians don’t want that but some people in Brussels are forcing it? Those people in Brussels are just people from all the countries, including yours. You also vote them in. The desire of governments controlling the population is universal.

The EC members who currently are sponsoring this bill (Chat Control 2.0) are not elected, they are appointed. They do not answer to anyone and they collude with lobby organizations to push an agenda. This is the far from being a democratic process.

Indeed, it doesn't change the fact that the countries themselves might implement such things.

Many dictators were democratly elected.

Re: EU member states still cannot agree about end-to-end encryption

#69

Post by kmlx »

hutzlibu wrote: post #26
rollulus wrote: post #11

Initiatives like Chat Control makes me pessimistic. They keep on coming in all sort of variations and we defend. Given enough of such iterations, at some point though they’ll eventually be lucky and god knows how long it will take to revert things. And what I don’t get is that this sort of proposed legislation is more than Stasi could've ever wished. And yet it’s openly discussed as if it’s good idea. And note that “…

Luckily governments are not a monolithic and coherent block. France for example was an early backer of matrix.. So if the worst happens and a mandatory chat control will gets implemented by the government, then it is a good thing that other parts of the government helped making sure, there are working alternatives avaiable, that are not so easy to regulate.

> France for example

https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/data-retention-france-illeg...

> In a decree made public today [18. October 2022], French Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne has extended the temporary retention of communications data of all citizens in France for another year. The blanket retention obligation concerns identity data (surname, first name, date and place of birth, postal address(es), e-mail address(es), telephone number(s)) as well as payment information, connection data (IP addresses, port numbers, identification numbers of users and their devices, date, time and duration of each communication, data on supplementary services and their providers)

Re: EU member states still cannot agree about end-to-end encryption

#70

Post by pjmlp »

Moldoteck wrote: post #51
mrtksn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU is a wide range of countries with very wide range of expectations on anything so all generalizations are wrong. EU’s function is to create a mechanism to find a common ground but that’s very hard so that’s why EU is has made a name for being slow and ineffective. Spain and Switzerland or Sweden and Italy would have very, very different understanding on what the state should be able to do and how much involvement t…

fiy, switzerland is not in eu

It isn't, however due to the bilateral agreements they might agree on specific changes, depending on how they see them.

Even if it goes to vote, sometimes referendum results might turn out differently than expected.

Post reply on HN