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

ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

metalhearf.fr

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 656 posts

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#621

Post by pabs3 »

hsbauauvhabzb wrote: post #534
Juliate wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Won’t happen. There is way too much existing deployed systems depending on alternative open source systems, and a mn incentive to use them to keep using old hardware. And way too strong a strategic incentive not to depend on US tech alone.

What’s to stop attested open source systems, apart from pesky licence violations that I doubt would stop anyone powerful?

Attestation is simply incompatible with open source.

https://www.smokingonabike.com/2025/01/04/passkey-marketing-...

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#622

Post by abandonliberty »

haolez wrote: post #3

I think the challenge for society here is not to simply reject attempts like this, but how to prevent them from being pushed over and over until a specific context allows it to be approved.

It's incredibly difficult to stop a well-funded, 50-year plan to subvert a democracy. The attention spans of politicians, corporations, and the public are measured in days, months, or years, not decades.

After 9/11, the Bush administration was accused of abusing the crisis to expand executive power and the national security state. Those who raised the alarm about things like the Patriot Act were often dismissed as fringe alarmists.

Now, nearly 25 years later, we're seeing the downstream effects of that gradual degradation of democratic pillars.

On both sides, voters and politicians can be influenced by propaganda and campaign finance to accept small, incremental changes that don't seem dangerous in isolation, but can cumulate to crush an empire.

Every democracy carries these risks. Do we think our opponents haven't noticed?

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#623

Post by ycombigators »

ang_cire wrote: post #504
ycombigators wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anonymity is not privacy.

The mechanisms that attack one attack the other as well. The apparatuses which exist to de-anonymize communication also remove the ability to definitively keep the content of the communication private, and no government (UK or EU or US, etc) that has proposed a ChatControl-like scheme has ever used a method that did not allow them to do both. If a porn site checks my ID against a gov database, the gov now knows I wen…

Anonymity is eroding our democracies far faster than our privacy.

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#624

Post by danielscrubs »

tpm wrote: post #527
danielscrubs wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brexit was an awful thing, BUT it will increase democracy for both parties. EU needs to be made more democratic or we need to severely limit its power, as its original intent, because the current show is just a farce.

Brexit did not and will not 'increase democracy' in any way anywhere.

It will, in time. You basically cut the hierarchy in half. A citizen can now meet their politician in the supermarket.

The other parts necessary is transparency and democracy but those are on other orthogonal axis.

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#625

Post by 2000UltraDeluxe »

palata wrote: post #599
amarant wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But chat control will have "master keys"to all communication. That key will leak eventually, it's too juicy a target. You describe chat control as if it's just an AI csam scanner that runs locally on your phone, like what apple did recently-ish. Chat control is so much more than that, and so much worse

> But chat control will have "master keys"to all communication. That's not my understanding. My understanding is that ChatControl will run client-side scanning and report what is deemed illegal. This is not a master key to all communications.

Last time I checked, the preferred method was to simlify known CSAM material enough that you can hash the result, then repeat in the client end and hope nothing else has the same hash.

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#626

Post by Gander5739 »

demosito666 wrote: post #358
alkonaut wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But politicians are - in general - neither evil, nor do they have any real incentive to ”control citizens’ thoughts”. It doesn’t make sense. They can be gullible. Non-Technical. Owned by lobbyists. Under pressure to deliver on the apparent problem of the day (csam, terror, whatever). But I don’t think there is a general crusade against privacy. That’s why I think it’s so infuriating: I’m sure it’s not even deliberate…

> But politicians are - in general - neither evil, nor do they have any real incentive to ”control citizens’ thoughts”. As someone coming from authoritarian state, this is such an alien line of reasoning to me. By definition, those in power want more power. The more control over the people you have, the more power you get. Ergo, you always want more control. It's easy to overlook this if you've spent your entire life…

> By definition, those in power want more power.

This is not what 'by definition' means.

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#627

Post by palata »

2000UltraDeluxe wrote: post #625
palata wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But chat control will have "master keys"to all communication. That's not my understanding. My understanding is that ChatControl will run client-side scanning and report what is deemed illegal. This is not a master key to all communications.

Last time I checked, the preferred method was to simlify known CSAM material enough that you can hash the result, then repeat in the client end and hope nothing else has the same hash.

Which makes it even less of a problem than what people say. I see that as an argument in favour of ChatControl. If it really "just" compares hashes locally, then the claims that it breaks encryption is even more wrong.

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#628

Post by palata »

zenlot wrote: post #610
palata wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snowden was more than a decade ago. The NSA was recording everything .

A few decades ago implies 1990s or early 2000s. In 1990 he was 7 years old. In early 2000 - 17 years old.

a few

a small number of units or individuals

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#629

Post by palata »

tormeh wrote: post #434
palata wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is nonsense. Anyone who has the smallest clue would use Signal for anything sensitive. Of course people would use Signal to talk about illegal stuff. I am against ChatControl. But I am amazed by all the bullshit arguments that people find to criticise ChatControl. If you have more control, obviously it's easier to track criminals. That's not the question at all. The question is: what is the cost to society? A fe…

Most illegal things go on Telegram for some reason. I guess Signal doesn't have the required features.

It only proves that people doing illegal stuff mostly have no clue about security...

Re: ChatControl: EU wants to scan all private messages, even in encrypted apps

#630

Post by westmeal »

palata wrote: post #627
2000UltraDeluxe wrote: post #625

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last time I checked, the preferred method was to simlify known CSAM material enough that you can hash the result, then repeat in the client end and hope nothing else has the same hash.

Which makes it even less of a problem than what people say. I see that as an argument in favour of ChatControl. If it really "just" compares hashes locally, then the claims that it breaks encryption is even more wrong.

But how is this supposed to protect children if say an abuser takes pictures or videos of the victim?
Post reply on HN