3 ms·

I don't think I've been paying enough attention but how does this work? The FBI, Police, and some congress members afaik have been talking about the going dark

by ffwd 6y ago

I don't think I've been paying enough attention but how does this work? The FBI, Police, and some congress members afaik have been talking about the going dark problem for years and now suddenly they pass a bill that explicitly protects companies from liability if they implement end to end encryption etc? Huh?! And why is EFF so wrong about this if that is correct? Maybe it has something to do with "Notwithstanding paragraph (6)"

ghastmaster 6y ago
Notwithstanding means in spite of paragraph 6. So 7(see above) preempts 6(see below). “(6) NO EFFECT ON CHILD SEXUAL EXPLOITATION LAW.—Nothing in this section (other than subsection (c)(2)(A)) shall be construed to impair or limit— “(A) any claim in a civil action brought against a provider of an interactive computer service under section 2255 of title 18, United States Code, if the conduct underlying the claim constitutes a violation of section 2252 or section 2252A of that title; “(B) any charge in a criminal prosecution brought against a provider of an interactive computer service under State law regarding the advertisement, promotion, presentation, distribution, or solicitation of child sexual abuse material, as defined in section 2256(8) of title 18, United States Code; or “(C) any claim in a civil action brought against a provider of an interactive computer service under State law regarding the advertisement, promotion, presentation, distribution, or solicitation of child sexual abuse material, as defined in section 2256(8) of title 18, United States Code.
- brushfoot 6y ago
  So what's the reason for the EFF's warning?
  - ghastmaster 6y ago
    Sadly, they did not point to any specific parts of the bill that would support their claims.
    - Nasrudith 6y ago
      The "best practices by a committee they control" requirement which is carte blanche. They could easily set it to considering "key escrow" or "master key" backdoors.
      - voxic11 6y ago
        Yeah I think that is the big question that will need to be answered. Would failing to implement such a key escrow scheme qualify for protection under the clause: > "(C) fails to take an action that would otherwise undermine the ability of the provider to offer full end-to-end encrypted messaging services, device encryption, or other encryption services.” My guess is no since even with a key escrow scheme the messages can still be encrypted end to end. Its just that there is another party which may be able to decrypt it later.
      - Spivak 6y ago
        But the worst thing that happens if you fail to implement the best practices is that you lose section 230 protections. If you're and E2E messaging app or the author of device encryption software you don't need section 230 protections to begin with.
        ghastmaster 6y ago
        Not according to the current text of the bill. The EFF post is outdated I think. The commission no longer has teeth. This bill will probably die.
  - ghastmaster 6y ago
    I believe the original EFF post is outdated. Much of the complaints about the bill have been deleted in the current text.

by ffwd 6y ago

ghastmaster 6y ago

Notwithstanding means in spite of paragraph 6. So 7(see above) preempts 6(see below). “(6) NO EFFECT ON CHILD SEXUAL EXPLOITATION LAW.—Nothing in this section (other than subsection (c)(2)(A)) shall be construed to impair or limit— “(A) any claim in a civil action brought against a provider of an interactive computer service under section 2255 of title 18, United States Code, if the conduct underlying the claim constitutes a violation of section 2252 or section 2252A of that title; “(B) any charge in a criminal prosecution brought against a provider of an interactive computer service under State law regarding the advertisement, promotion, presentation, distribution, or solicitation of child sexual abuse material, as defined in section 2256(8) of title 18, United States Code; or “(C) any claim in a civil action brought against a provider of an interactive computer service under State law regarding the advertisement, promotion, presentation, distribution, or solicitation of child sexual abuse material, as defined in section 2256(8) of title 18, United States Code.

brushfoot 6y ago
So what's the reason for the EFF's warning?
- ghastmaster 6y ago
  Sadly, they did not point to any specific parts of the bill that would support their claims.
  - Nasrudith 6y ago
    The "best practices by a committee they control" requirement which is carte blanche. They could easily set it to considering "key escrow" or "master key" backdoors.
    - voxic11 6y ago
      Yeah I think that is the big question that will need to be answered. Would failing to implement such a key escrow scheme qualify for protection under the clause: > "(C) fails to take an action that would otherwise undermine the ability of the provider to offer full end-to-end encrypted messaging services, device encryption, or other encryption services.” My guess is no since even with a key escrow scheme the messages can still be encrypted end to end. Its just that there is another party which may be able to decrypt it later.
    - Spivak 6y ago
      But the worst thing that happens if you fail to implement the best practices is that you lose section 230 protections. If you're and E2E messaging app or the author of device encryption software you don't need section 230 protections to begin with.
      - ghastmaster 6y ago
        Not according to the current text of the bill. The EFF post is outdated I think. The commission no longer has teeth. This bill will probably die.
- ghastmaster 6y ago
  I believe the original EFF post is outdated. Much of the complaints about the bill have been deleted in the current text.