4 ms·

This looks like a scare-story. Firstly, the EU produces directives and regulations; it doesn't produce "laws". Secondly, the phrase "child pornography" is in

This looks like a scare-story. Firstly, the EU produces directives and regulations; it doesn't produce "laws". Secondly, the phrase "child pornography" is in quotes, as if there's no such thing. There is such a thing. Thirdly, the imputed "law" requires service providers to scan encrypted messages. That's impossible, unless the proposal is to ban properly-encrypted messages. If that were the proposal, then surely that's what should be in the headline? Like, I already assume anything that isn't properly encrypted is going to be scanned by someone.

JacobiX 5y ago
The EU has many types of legal acts and the European Commission is responsible for planning and proposing law. Also EU regulations are legal acts that apply automatically to all EU countries without needing to be transposed into national law. For scanning encrypted messages, they can be scanned on device before encryption, like Apple’s approach to CSAM.
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  My "device" is a laptop. You say "like Apple", but I believe Apple's CSAM is unique - nothing else tries to scan your messages between keyboard and encryption.
  - JacobiX 5y ago
    I think the term « device » is a bit misleading. I should have used client side instead. It doesn’t need to scan your messages between keyboard and encryption, the application handles your messages in plaintext and it can scan them without needing any decryption. The encryption is done just before sending the messages.
    - denton-scratch 5y ago
      Well, I did say "properly encrypted". An encryption scheme that, by design, shares information from my plaintext with a third party, isn't "proper" in my book. That's phony encryption. [Edit] I evidently don't understand your remark. If some "encryption app" processes the plaintext before it is encrypted, isn't it processing plaintext between the keyboard and the encryption?
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  It's true that "regulations" are effectively laws. They are also quite rare, compared to directives. Directives have to be implemented in national legislation; it is customary for nations to ignore deadlines on implementing directives they don't like, and to finally implement them in a way that serves the interests of the party in power. So the national legislation is often full of loopholes, or provides zero mechanisms and funding for enforcement. The EU does nothing to ensure that the implementing legislation actually implements its directives. I welcome the GDPR (which is a regulation); I can't think of another occasion on which a piece of EU legislation I thought was good, has been handed down as a regulation.
DocTomoe 5y ago
> This looks like a scare-story. Let's hope you are right. The EU has a funny history of beating through brain-dead policies. The current EU commission chief, Ursula von der Leyen, is known as "Zensursula" (a portemanteau of "censorship" and her given name) in Germany because she attempted to install essentially the Chinese Firewall for Germany (complete with Stop signs) when she was still doing politics here. > Firstly, the EU produces directives and regulations; it doesn't produce "laws". A regulation is technically a law, as it is immediately binding in all EU countries. Directives are quasilaws, as local governments are forced to make them into local laws. > Secondly, the phrase "child pornography" is in quotes, as if there's no such thing. There is such a thing. Of course there is. But we have seen again and again that this phrase is being used by wannabe dictators to justify massive limitations of human rights for everyone. > If that were the proposal, then surely that's what should be in the headline? Just you wait, right now, very few people know what is in that draft. I'm willing to put money to the fact that it essentially outlaws E2E encryption (and, if we are unlucky, not "only" for messengers - which may be deliberate or by ignorance).
- tmalsburg2 5y ago
  Agree about Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission. She’s completely serious about online surveillance and has been for many years. Now she has the power to push this really far.
mdp2021 5y ago
> is in quotes, as if You cannot read what people write the way /you/ would read it if you wrote it. So, you have to place lots of partial confidence values. Others for that quote place more bets in, "he could have placed the opening quotes of figurative speech two words earlier" (i.e. "under a pretense of a fight against Evil...").
unethical_ban 5y ago
"child pornography" is in quotes because it is listed as a good faith, legitimate motivation to spy on populations preemptively, when it isn't.
raxxorraxor 5y ago
> Firstly, the EU produces directives and regulations; it doesn't produce "laws". Even in legalese these are one and the same. And we have proposals like this regularly, so when is the time to get involved? Not that I would recommend that to anyone if I look at the state of the EU.

JacobiX 5y ago

The EU has many types of legal acts and the European Commission is responsible for planning and proposing law. Also EU regulations are legal acts that apply automatically to all EU countries without needing to be transposed into national law. For scanning encrypted messages, they can be scanned on device before encryption, like Apple’s approach to CSAM.

denton-scratch 5y ago
My "device" is a laptop. You say "like Apple", but I believe Apple's CSAM is unique - nothing else tries to scan your messages between keyboard and encryption.
- JacobiX 5y ago
  I think the term « device » is a bit misleading. I should have used client side instead. It doesn’t need to scan your messages between keyboard and encryption, the application handles your messages in plaintext and it can scan them without needing any decryption. The encryption is done just before sending the messages.
  - denton-scratch 5y ago
    Well, I did say "properly encrypted". An encryption scheme that, by design, shares information from my plaintext with a third party, isn't "proper" in my book. That's phony encryption. [Edit] I evidently don't understand your remark. If some "encryption app" processes the plaintext before it is encrypted, isn't it processing plaintext between the keyboard and the encryption?
denton-scratch 5y ago
It's true that "regulations" are effectively laws. They are also quite rare, compared to directives. Directives have to be implemented in national legislation; it is customary for nations to ignore deadlines on implementing directives they don't like, and to finally implement them in a way that serves the interests of the party in power. So the national legislation is often full of loopholes, or provides zero mechanisms and funding for enforcement. The EU does nothing to ensure that the implementing legislation actually implements its directives. I welcome the GDPR (which is a regulation); I can't think of another occasion on which a piece of EU legislation I thought was good, has been handed down as a regulation.

DocTomoe 5y ago

> This looks like a scare-story. Let's hope you are right. The EU has a funny history of beating through brain-dead policies. The current EU commission chief, Ursula von der Leyen, is known as "Zensursula" (a portemanteau of "censorship" and her given name) in Germany because she attempted to install essentially the Chinese Firewall for Germany (complete with Stop signs) when she was still doing politics here. > Firstly, the EU produces directives and regulations; it doesn't produce "laws". A regulation is technically a law, as it is immediately binding in all EU countries. Directives are quasilaws, as local governments are forced to make them into local laws. > Secondly, the phrase "child pornography" is in quotes, as if there's no such thing. There is such a thing. Of course there is. But we have seen again and again that this phrase is being used by wannabe dictators to justify massive limitations of human rights for everyone. > If that were the proposal, then surely that's what should be in the headline? Just you wait, right now, very few people know what is in that draft. I'm willing to put money to the fact that it essentially outlaws E2E encryption (and, if we are unlucky, not "only" for messengers - which may be deliberate or by ignorance).

tmalsburg2 5y ago
Agree about Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission. She’s completely serious about online surveillance and has been for many years. Now she has the power to push this really far.

mdp2021 5y ago

> is in quotes, as if You cannot read what people write the way /you/ would read it if you wrote it. So, you have to place lots of partial confidence values. Others for that quote place more bets in, "he could have placed the opening quotes of figurative speech two words earlier" (i.e. "under a pretense of a fight against Evil...").

unethical_ban 5y ago

"child pornography" is in quotes because it is listed as a good faith, legitimate motivation to spy on populations preemptively, when it isn't.

raxxorraxor 5y ago

> Firstly, the EU produces directives and regulations; it doesn't produce "laws". Even in legalese these are one and the same. And we have proposals like this regularly, so when is the time to get involved? Not that I would recommend that to anyone if I look at the state of the EU.