A bit disappointed about the blind commenting here. I have just read the Commission Communication (pdf linked at the top of the article) and can't find anything

A bit disappointed about the blind commenting here. I have just read the Commission Communication (pdf linked at the top of the article) and can't find anything on prohibiting encryption. They write a few times about how increasing default encryption will make law enforcement more difficult but the only action proposed on encryption is: > One of the specific initiatives under the EU Internet Forum in 2020 is the creation of a technical expert process to map and assess possible solutions which could allow companies to detect and report child sexual abuse in end-to-end encrypted electronic communications, in full respect of fundamental rights and without creating new vulnerabilities criminals could exploit. Technical experts from academia, industry, public authorities and civil society organisations will examine possible solutions focused on the device, the server and the encryption protocol that could ensure the privacy and security of electronic communications and the protection of children from sexual abuse and sexual exploitation. So they want to see what can be done without breaking encryption, I guess this could be e.g. hash checks or things like that. The rest of the Communication is about prevention, victim support and rehabilitation, so really about pedophilia/child abuse, not encryption as a main issue. There is also a 3-layer-deep link[1] to a proposed new regulation (=eu-wide law) which puts an obligation on providers to detect and report or delete child abuse materials. No mention of encryption and its just four articles if you scroll down to the end, so look for yourself if that sounds problematic. The intro page [2] says it actually just provides a legal base for providers to scan data as another regulation that already allowed this is running out. I have no specific expertise on the matter but assuming that that does not seem problematic? The issue seems to be that police/ courts/NGOs/... basically have no chance to police as thesr networks are inaccessible and extremely complex to pursue anything. Seems obvious that the onus must be on the providers to do their duty - we all know what a cesspit the internet can be. If Telegram doesn't delete CP (or say beheading videos, calls for lynching, rape videos, ...) then who could possibly do it? So the legislation here is intended to give providers the legal right to check content. What's the alternative? Should the internet simply be lawless? 1. https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=69213 https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=69213 2. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/fighting-child-sexual-abuse-commission-proposes-interim-legislation-enable-communications https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/fighting-...