5 ms·

>Previously secure end-to-end encrypted messenger services such as Whatsapp or Signal would be forced to install a backdoor. [0] So as an American, are there a

>Previously secure end-to-end encrypted messenger services such as Whatsapp or Signal would be forced to install a backdoor. [0] So as an American, are there any Euros that can enlighten me on whether or not there remain any procedural hurdles left for this to clear? Or is this being implemented in Signal as we speak? https://european-pirateparty.eu/parliament-approves-chatcontrol/ https://european-pirateparty.eu/parliament-approves-chatcont...

nisegami 5y ago
I would like to think Signal would simply not operate in the EU in any official capacity if this were passed as written. WhatsApp would definitely cave though.
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago
  I mean, it's not that difficult for them to do this for the EU. The EU can be like "You guys know those back-doors you put in for the CCP so they let you operate in China? Yeah, those, just gives us a fork of exactly that and we're cool. Maybe we'll also stop fining you every year for privacy violations and such if you play ball. :wink-wink:"
- hellojesus 5y ago
  Two questions: 1. If Signal does implement something like this, are they under gag orders so wouldn't be able to inform users? 2. What if they simply don't comply? So long as they don't have an office in the EU, is there anything that could be done? Users could just side-load.
  - lixtra 5y ago
    > 2. What if they simply don't comply? So long as they don't have an office in the EU, is there anything that could be done? Signal would be banned from European appstores/IPs. > Users could just side-load. Yes. But that can be illegal. And is an option for only a small part of the population.
    - hellojesus 5y ago
      This is really interesting to me. How could side-loading be illegal? It's just software. How would the state prevent vpns or tor users from connecting to Signal servers? More importantly, what if users just use pgp in emails, etc.?
      - feanaro 5y ago
        Furthermore, are we now banning decentralized chat networks, where everyone can host their own node, like Matrix?
      - megous 5y ago
        It can't. It's as simple as that. This is all just to catch people who don't know how the technology works.
      - lixtra 5y ago
        > How could side-loading be illegal? It's just software. Lawmakers have no problem making software illegal [1]. > How would the state prevent vpns or tor users from connecting to Signal servers? They don’t have to prevent a 100%. They may just decide to police and punish. > More importantly, what if users just use pgp in emails, etc.? The same stupid arguments about lawful access (=back doors) [2] come up again and again. But that does not ensure it won’t become law some day. If users continue to use secure tools above policing and punishing applies. [1] https://edri.org/our-work/edrigramnumber5-11germany-bans-hacking-tools/ https://edri.org/our-work/edrigramnumber5-11germany-bans-hac... [2] https://www.justice.gov/olp/lawful-access https://www.justice.gov/olp/lawful-access
        hellojesus 5y ago
        Point taken. But it is beyond me why anyone would let this type of law prevent them from encrypting their hard drives and messages. I would gladly take on the state to fight for the right to encrypt, but I'm American so I do understand my culture significantly impacts that perspective.
  - thomasahle 5y ago
    > 1. If Signal does implement something like this, are they under gag orders so wouldn't be able to inform users? I would guess not. At least if you mean gag-orders as used in the US by NSA etc. That's because this would be a law, and not a "friendly favor" asked for by the police. A law is at least under public scrutiny in contrast to fisa orders etc. Another question is whether EU police already is issuing gag based surveillance orders today. I'd like to know the answer to that too.
bojan 5y ago
There are still quite some hurdles. The European Comission is set to propose to make it mandatory, but the proposal will only come in December (and has been already postponed a couple of times due to the resistance). Then the European Parliament needs to pass it. The fight is not over, and resisting legislation like this in the past has provided results. I am hopeful.
- blibble 5y ago
  the commission wouldn't have proposed it if they didn't think they would be able to push through the vast majority of it and if they don't get it through this parliament they'll wait until the next one, and so on and once it's passed: the parliament has no ability to alter or undo it
  - AnssiH 5y ago
    But the commission has not actually proposed it, has it?
- laurent92 5y ago
  The People shouldn’t have to oppose what their leaders want. Not in a democracy. The people should vote.
  - thomasahle 5y ago
    The leaders listen to what the people say too. If the only people to speak up are the "we must do everything we can to protect the children" people, and the "we must give the police any tools they ask for", it's easy for the leaders to forget about the rest.
    - laurent92 5y ago
      Or the leaders listen to who pays them. The vocabulary of listening or voting has faded away for the vocabulary of “explaining” or “spreading awareness”, in both of which people are told what they should think. But they also listen, to ensure their explanations are “understood”.
AnssiH 5y ago
There is no actual concrete proposal at all yet, so this is very far from passing in my opinion. (I think this is the initiative: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12726-Fighting-child-sexual-abuse-detection-removal-and-reporting-of-illegal-content-online_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-sa...) The article in your link ("Parliament approves chatcontrol") is also misleading. What was actually passed in July 2021 was a temporary 3-year restoration of pre-Dec-2020 rules that allow service providers to voluntarily scan for child abuse (news release: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20210701IPR07503/parliament-adopts-temporary-rules-to-detect-child-sexual-abuse-online https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20210701IP... , actual legal text: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32021R1232 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A...). Dec 2020 privacy law changes would have otherwise prohibited voluntary scanning.

nisegami 5y ago

I would like to think Signal would simply not operate in the EU in any official capacity if this were passed as written. WhatsApp would definitely cave though.

ChuckNorris89 5y ago
I mean, it's not that difficult for them to do this for the EU. The EU can be like "You guys know those back-doors you put in for the CCP so they let you operate in China? Yeah, those, just gives us a fork of exactly that and we're cool. Maybe we'll also stop fining you every year for privacy violations and such if you play ball. :wink-wink:"
hellojesus 5y ago
Two questions: 1. If Signal does implement something like this, are they under gag orders so wouldn't be able to inform users? 2. What if they simply don't comply? So long as they don't have an office in the EU, is there anything that could be done? Users could just side-load.
- lixtra 5y ago
  > 2. What if they simply don't comply? So long as they don't have an office in the EU, is there anything that could be done? Signal would be banned from European appstores/IPs. > Users could just side-load. Yes. But that can be illegal. And is an option for only a small part of the population.
  - hellojesus 5y ago
    This is really interesting to me. How could side-loading be illegal? It's just software. How would the state prevent vpns or tor users from connecting to Signal servers? More importantly, what if users just use pgp in emails, etc.?
    - feanaro 5y ago
      Furthermore, are we now banning decentralized chat networks, where everyone can host their own node, like Matrix?
    - megous 5y ago
      It can't. It's as simple as that. This is all just to catch people who don't know how the technology works.
    - lixtra 5y ago
      > How could side-loading be illegal? It's just software. Lawmakers have no problem making software illegal [1]. > How would the state prevent vpns or tor users from connecting to Signal servers? They don’t have to prevent a 100%. They may just decide to police and punish. > More importantly, what if users just use pgp in emails, etc.? The same stupid arguments about lawful access (=back doors) [2] come up again and again. But that does not ensure it won’t become law some day. If users continue to use secure tools above policing and punishing applies. [1] https://edri.org/our-work/edrigramnumber5-11germany-bans-hacking-tools/ https://edri.org/our-work/edrigramnumber5-11germany-bans-hac... [2] https://www.justice.gov/olp/lawful-access https://www.justice.gov/olp/lawful-access
      - hellojesus 5y ago
        Point taken. But it is beyond me why anyone would let this type of law prevent them from encrypting their hard drives and messages. I would gladly take on the state to fight for the right to encrypt, but I'm American so I do understand my culture significantly impacts that perspective.
- thomasahle 5y ago
  > 1. If Signal does implement something like this, are they under gag orders so wouldn't be able to inform users? I would guess not. At least if you mean gag-orders as used in the US by NSA etc. That's because this would be a law, and not a "friendly favor" asked for by the police. A law is at least under public scrutiny in contrast to fisa orders etc. Another question is whether EU police already is issuing gag based surveillance orders today. I'd like to know the answer to that too.

bojan 5y ago

There are still quite some hurdles. The European Comission is set to propose to make it mandatory, but the proposal will only come in December (and has been already postponed a couple of times due to the resistance). Then the European Parliament needs to pass it. The fight is not over, and resisting legislation like this in the past has provided results. I am hopeful.

blibble 5y ago
the commission wouldn't have proposed it if they didn't think they would be able to push through the vast majority of it and if they don't get it through this parliament they'll wait until the next one, and so on and once it's passed: the parliament has no ability to alter or undo it
- AnssiH 5y ago
  But the commission has not actually proposed it, has it?
laurent92 5y ago
The People shouldn’t have to oppose what their leaders want. Not in a democracy. The people should vote.
- thomasahle 5y ago
  The leaders listen to what the people say too. If the only people to speak up are the "we must do everything we can to protect the children" people, and the "we must give the police any tools they ask for", it's easy for the leaders to forget about the rest.
  - laurent92 5y ago
    Or the leaders listen to who pays them. The vocabulary of listening or voting has faded away for the vocabulary of “explaining” or “spreading awareness”, in both of which people are told what they should think. But they also listen, to ensure their explanations are “understood”.

AnssiH 5y ago

There is no actual concrete proposal at all yet, so this is very far from passing in my opinion. (I think this is the initiative: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12726-Fighting-child-sexual-abuse-detection-removal-and-reporting-of-illegal-content-online_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-sa...) The article in your link ("Parliament approves chatcontrol") is also misleading. What was actually passed in July 2021 was a temporary 3-year restoration of pre-Dec-2020 rules that allow service providers to voluntarily scan for child abuse (news release: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20210701IPR07503/parliament-adopts-temporary-rules-to-detect-child-sexual-abuse-online https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20210701IP... , actual legal text: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32021R1232 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A...). Dec 2020 privacy law changes would have otherwise prohibited voluntary scanning.