Misleading title, the council approves their mandate for negotiations with parliament. It’s still a long way to go before it turns into law and I think it’s rather unpopular in parliament.
EU Council approves Chat Control mandate for negotiation with Parliament
61–70 of 163 posts
Re: EU Council approves Chat Control mandate for negotiation with Parliament
#62They could have subpoenaed the unencrypted Gmail accounts of Maxwell, Epstein and Barak like two decades ago. They can still subpoena Barak's Gmail and other accounts, especially after Giuffre's allegations about "a well known prime minister". I have the feeling this will not happen.
Oh but those people would be exempt from scanning anyways.
"Don't worry, the scans won't invade your privacy or expose your information."
"Oh, so the politicians' communications are being scanned too, then?"
"Oh, heavens no. That might risk the privacy of our communications."
Re: EU Council approves Chat Control mandate for negotiation with Parliament
#63Taking the reasons at face value (for the sake of argument) I guess what I'm confused about is why this would be necessary. I would think there were already laws/regulations/liability reasons/etc requiring companies to make efforts to ensure they're not hosting CP and other such things? Am I wrong?
No, you're not wrong. But this framing allows them to paint the parties opposing these measures as being 'pro CP'.
Re: EU Council approves Chat Control mandate for negotiation with Parliament
#64Seems… fine? At least i dont see any invasion of privacy or encryption related obligations in this proposal. The EU ostensibly wants to improve innovation, i wonder how these new assessment regulations help with that, especially for SME and startups.
"High risk" providers will be obligated to "contribute" technologies "to mitigate." Seems like a doublespeak way of saying enforced decryption or enforced backdoors.
Sadly, another attempt will likely be made at some point. At least the regulation is quite explicit:
> This Regulation shall not prohibit, make impossible, weaken, circumvent or otherwise undermine cybersecurity measures, in particular encryption, including end-to-end encryption, implemented by the relevant information society services or by the users. This Regulation shall not create any obligation that would require a provider of hosting services or a provider of interpersonal communications services to decrypt data or create access to end-to-end encrypted data, or that would prevent providers from offering end-to-end encrypted services.
Re: EU Council approves Chat Control mandate for negotiation with Parliament
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume this is a delay to get a foot in the door. After some time, the scanning will be made no longer voluntary. One has to take rights away slowly, otherwise the frog jumps before you can boil it.
"voluntary" can also be pretty meaningless depending on the context. In the UK, if the police suspects you of shenanigans, they'll politely invite you for an "voluntary interview". Of course you can decide to not go, it's voluntary, right? Yes, you can. Your choice. And when you reject their kind offer they'll come and arrest you so you can attend the interview.
[deleted]
Re: EU Council approves Chat Control mandate for negotiation with Parliament
#66Is there still a loophole for politicians not to be tracked? Because if so, some people will make a lot of money by creating a political party and turning citizens into politicians for yearly fee and thus bypassing this whole law.
You can read the proposal and found out, if you're interested.
> In the light of the more limited risk of their use for the purpose of child sexual abuse and the need to preserve confidential information, including classified information, information covered by professional secrecy and trade secrets, electronic communications services that are not publicly available, such as those used for national security purposes, should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation. Accordingly, this Regulation should not apply to interpersonal communications services that are not available to the general public and the use of which is instead restricted to persons involved in the activities of a particular company, organisation, body or authority.
Re: EU Council approves Chat Control mandate for negotiation with Parliament
#67This is a major win! Basically: It's now (still) voluntary for services to implement scanning for CSAM material. Not mandatory. End-to-end encryption will continue to be legal.
Source: Swedish national public service radio (Sveriges Radio) interviewing Jon Karlung, CEO of Bahnhof AB - a major privacy-centric and politically outspoken ISP in Sweden. Think XS4ALL (RIP) but in Sweden. Here's the interview: https://www.sverigesradio.se/artikel/efter-flera-ar-eu-overe... (Swedish speech).
Here's their blog post (in Swedish, use browser translation tools):
Re: EU Council approves Chat Control mandate for negotiation with Parliament
#68>At the beginning of the month, the Danish Presidency decided to change its approach with a new compromise text that makes the chat scanning voluntary, instead. Hmm, so this will probably make the life for those who don't scan quite hard and if they experience a high profile scandal getting out of it will not be easy I assume. I'm not sure what to think of it, not being mandatory and requiring risk assessment sounds…
I feel like this will just incentivise the creation of privately run federated messaging systems. Powerful people will always be protected, any smart people will run fed messengers for their private stuff and normie tech for normie comms. This power will just turn into another form of control. As always, the only losers will be the average citizens.
Re: EU Council approves Chat Control mandate for negotiation with Parliament
#69Honest question. The EU was created as an economic and trade institution. How has it morphed into a wierd political institution, which NATO was already supposed to be? The root question: how did an organization that ushered in things like the Euro become a body that decides whether Europeans are allowed to have personal privacy?
> a weird political institution, which NATO was already supposed to be?
NATO is a military alliance, not a government.
Re: EU Council approves Chat Control mandate for negotiation with Parliament
#70Misleading title, the council approves their mandate for negotiations with parliament. It’s still a long way to go before it turns into law and I think it’s rather unpopular in parliament.
Ok, we've put that in the title above. Thanks!