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

France rejects backdoor mandate

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 320 posts

Re: France rejects backdoor mandate

#61

Post by thomassmith65 »

If the general public is given a choice between super secret internet messaging, or the current status quo, they will go for the latter. This is because the former hampers law enforcement's ability to track down criminals and terrorists.

And the better informed non-techies are about the tech, the more they will support backdoors.

No large service will survive providing E2EE. In the near future, there is bound to be some widely publicized incident where E2EE plays a pivotal role in a big atrocity or financial calamity. Then the public will demand that government, for whom it is already a worry, do something about it.

It just seems like a pipedream to me that unfettered E2EE will last in big tech.

Re: France rejects backdoor mandate

#62

Post by mocamoca »

AceJohnny2 wrote: post #28

Tangentially, France has had the CNIL [1] since ~1978, following a scandal about creating a national citizen's database, and exists to prevent exactly that. (I believe the objection stemmed from memories of the Petainist fascist regime during WW2) The CNIL is why France (and now Europe) has "Right to Forget" laws. It is the direct ancestor of stuff like GDPR. Unfortunately, I feel like the CNIL is fairly neutered now…

This goes well beyond historical precedent. The legal system is complex, but even when Parliament approves a law, it can still be struck down if it violates fundamental principles.

For matters concerning IT and privacy, the CNIL (French Data Protection Authority) could spearhead such cancellation proceedings.

And companies doing business in France should watch out—CNIL sanctions are no joke!

Are there specific events making you feel it has been neutered?

Re: France rejects backdoor mandate

#63

Post by spapas82 »

> provision that would have forced messaging platforms like Signal and WhatsApp to allow hidden access to private conversations.

The fact that this could have been possible is the reason why the pgp/gpg way (you manage your certificate and you choose whose certificates to trust) is still the only way to have true encrypted communications.

Using centralised services to encrypt important data is a joke.

Re: France rejects backdoor mandate

#64

Post by vladms »

AceJohnny2 wrote: post #28

Tangentially, France has had the CNIL [1] since ~1978, following a scandal about creating a national citizen's database, and exists to prevent exactly that. (I believe the objection stemmed from memories of the Petainist fascist regime during WW2) The CNIL is why France (and now Europe) has "Right to Forget" laws. It is the direct ancestor of stuff like GDPR. Unfortunately, I feel like the CNIL is fairly neutered now…

I wonder if not having such state database is not causing today more issues than it defends from.

In the 80s I would get it, the state was the only one able to build such a database and people were afraid of what it would do secretly with it. Nowadays, "everybody" has a database with millions of people (ex: facebook, linkedin, x, tax offices, etc.) and discriminatory actions are done based on whims/stupidity rather than on actual good data.

People will do horrible stuff because they believe in it, not because they have good data.

Re: France rejects backdoor mandate

#65

Post by whatshisface »

tshaddox wrote: post #54
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the problem with backdoored encryption isn't making a cypher with multiple decryption keys. It's keeping secret that's worth billions of dollars and shared among 10s of thousands of people. The difference between backdoored encryption and no encryption is whether the backdoor is known to the public. There is a coherent set of values that lead to saying "no encryption", but not one for "only backdoored encryption".

> There is a coherent set of values that lead to saying "no encryption", but not one for "only backdoored encryption". While I oppose building backdoors, I don't really agree with this claim. There's nothing incoherent about developing a threat model.

I think some threat models, like one that doesn't include hackers, are not coherent relative to reality.

Re: France rejects backdoor mandate

#66

Post by [deleted] »

nickslaughter02 wrote: post #32

France has rejected this backdoor but keep in mind that France is still in favor of chat control (mandatory on device scanning of your communication). There's now a majority among EU countries and the proposal is expected to pass. The next meeting is April 8th.

[deleted]

Re: France rejects backdoor mandate

#67

Post by immibis »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #10
zimza wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because tech and society, like everything else, is inherently political. Backdoors, surveillance, control. These are things fascist and proto-fascist societies try to achieve. And they are thriving as of late.

Fascist behavior and actions aren't limited to the political right wing. Anyone can do it, you just choose to cherry pick the one you dislike under "fascism" and be OK with the fascist behavior that allies to your political views as being correct and justified. Do you see any conservatives firebombing people's private property right now, or is it only the "tolerant left" doing it? How much online free speech was cens…

fascist behaviour is right wing by definition.

Re: France rejects backdoor mandate

#68

Post by immibis »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #18
LPisGood wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vandalism by itself isn’t really a fascist action, so I’m not really sure what your point is. However, it is my experience that people using the phrase “tolerant left” aren’t frequently interested in discussions grounded in reality.

People labeling everyone who disagrees with them as "fascists" or "right wing", aren't capable of any kind of discussion or rational thought. It's my fault I got involved in the silly discussion in the first place since nobody starting a discussion with blaming "the right wing", is fully allright in the head. We closed down the asylums, and so they moved online.

Why do you think they label everything they disagree with fascist, not just some things? You only have one example of a thing which they disagree with, and labeled fascist. You are arguing against something someone didn't actually say (a.k.a. a straw man).

Re: France rejects backdoor mandate

#69

Post by Braxton1980 »

aucisson_masque wrote: post #23
whatshisface wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to know what the public opinion on these issues is before blaming politician's ignorance, considering that to them the relevant knowledge is knowledge of what voters will support or tolerate. The impossible promise of backdoors that France can enter but no other country, organized criminal syndicate or petty government-employed stalker can find is only one impossible promise among the many we can hear fr…

French want less criminals and immigrants in the street. Whatever it takes. I'm french, i have not heard any people, work, street, even television or internet speak about that. The sad truth is that it wouldn't even solve the issue, criminals will always be able to use encrypted communications. there are open source software that can't be tampered with, software that doesn't use a single server where backdoor can be…

> French want less criminals and immigrants in the street. Whatever it takes.

What about using the probability that a specific race or religion will commit crimes then target those people with aggressive tactics.

As for the public they could make those people feel unwelcomed through constant harassment in the hopes they leave the country.

Thus reducing the crime rate by any means.

----

I checked the murder rate and it's been on a downward trajectory for the last 30 years

https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/fra/fra...

I haven't check other stats but what if your views on crime are being manipulated by people who have agenda that normally wouldn't be possible if the true reason was revealed?

Re: France rejects backdoor mandate

#70

Post by Braxton1980 »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #34
buybackoff wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in France for the last 5 years. Been to many places in the world. France is OK overall.

Well I am French. "OK overall" is obviously good but at global scale this means better than the "third world", so context is important. The context of my previous reply is France's "direction of travel", which negative like most other European countries. This is a key metric on any meaningful timescale, which is what ultimately matters.

What key metric and what's your source
Post reply on HN