5 ms·

Do you have a reference to this law in The Netherlands?

PhantomGremlin 9y ago
Posted to HN a few days ago. Didn't get a lot of discussion. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15595928 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15595928
rocqua 9y ago
There is an upcomming advisory (i.e. non-binding) referendum about this law coming up. Specifically, the referendum is about reversing the law. Notably, some parties in the newly minted government have declared their intention to ignore the referendum. They back this by two arguments "It is needed for security" and "We are going to remove the advisory referendum anyway, so we get to ignore this one". That second point is kind of interesting, because the referendum is possible due to a rather new law. We had one before that went rather poorly, so now we want to get rid of it. The actual law is here [1] this site [2] advocates for the referendum. I'm afraid I don't know of any english sources. Quoting from the law, and applying my own translation >> Article 45. Member 1 The services are authorized to: a. (Basically, do exploratory searches of networks) b. Use false signals, false keys, false identity or intervention by third parties to gain acces to automated systems. This can be done with the help of technical tooling. Article 45. Member 2 The authorization from member 1b above also authorizes: a. The defeating of any security measures b. Installing technical measures to reverse encryption on data stored or processed by automated systems. c. (references article 40) d. To copy data stored or processed by an automated system. Article 45 Member 2 (summarized, the government needs to give written permission for any of the above to happen) >> This seems to be the referenced passage based on a preliminary search. [1] https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/kst-34588-A.html https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/kst-34588-A.html [2]https://sleepwet.nl/ https://sleepwet.nl/
- rvanmil 9y ago
  Thanks, I did not realize the “sleepwet” also authorized defeating encryption.

Posted to HN a few days ago. Didn't get a lot of discussion. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15595928 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15595928

rocqua 9y ago

There is an upcomming advisory (i.e. non-binding) referendum about this law coming up. Specifically, the referendum is about reversing the law. Notably, some parties in the newly minted government have declared their intention to ignore the referendum. They back this by two arguments "It is needed for security" and "We are going to remove the advisory referendum anyway, so we get to ignore this one". That second point is kind of interesting, because the referendum is possible due to a rather new law. We had one before that went rather poorly, so now we want to get rid of it. The actual law is here [1] this site [2] advocates for the referendum. I'm afraid I don't know of any english sources. Quoting from the law, and applying my own translation >> Article 45. Member 1 The services are authorized to: a. (Basically, do exploratory searches of networks) b. Use false signals, false keys, false identity or intervention by third parties to gain acces to automated systems. This can be done with the help of technical tooling. Article 45. Member 2 The authorization from member 1b above also authorizes: a. The defeating of any security measures b. Installing technical measures to reverse encryption on data stored or processed by automated systems. c. (references article 40) d. To copy data stored or processed by an automated system. Article 45 Member 2 (summarized, the government needs to give written permission for any of the above to happen) >> This seems to be the referenced passage based on a preliminary search. [1] https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/kst-34588-A.html https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/kst-34588-A.html [2]https://sleepwet.nl/ https://sleepwet.nl/

rvanmil 9y ago
Thanks, I did not realize the “sleepwet” also authorized defeating encryption.