15 ms·

WhatsApp threatened to leave the Netherlands due to controversial backdoor law

104 points by _han 4y ago

_han 4y ago
Translation of the original Dutch article: https://www-nrc-nl.translate.goog/nieuws/2022/06/03/whatsapp-dreigde-te-vertrekken-om-aftapplicht-a4132175?_x_tr_sl=nl&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://www-nrc-nl.translate.goog/nieuws/2022/06/03/whatsapp...
- tempodox 4y ago
  ‘Justice [Department] keeps looking for the holy grail: a “secure” backdoor to WhatsApp’ I wonder, at what point will they stop caring that there's no such thing as a “secure” backdoor?
  - orlp 4y ago
    Define secure. Because if you were trying to bring up a technological argument, please stop. It weakens our position. Cryptographically you absolutely can have asymmetric systems with a privileged master key that are secure to anyone not knowing the master key. You might argue that the key could leak, and they'll come right back with ephemerally rotating master keys signed by the backdoor agency. Legally enforced secure backdooring is not a technology issue, it is a social one. Simply put, we don't want mass surveillance. We don't want authorities snooping in our private communications, period. That is more than sufficient, and does not require building on technological arguments that will only wear down.
    - rowanG077 4y ago
      That's not a backdoor. That's just a front door.
      - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
        A front door is simply a back door hiding in plain sight.
    - bruce343434 4y ago
      key rotation still gives windows of oppertunity
thepangolino 4y ago
This is why decentralised apps and protocols like Tox and Jami have to be pushed forward. They can’t “leave” a country.
- throwaway0x7E6 4y ago
  that's why they will be eventually outlawed, either outright by the government or by its corporate proxies who own and control the whole stack of communication technology and don't have to respect our outdated constitutional rights the future of the internet in the West is even more grim than its present in China, Russia, Iran and all the other countries we had criticized for it up until a few years ago. now we're setting up our own Great Firewalls to protect our dumb gray masses from disinformation and telescreens to protect our ever-threatened democracies freedom of speech is explicitly on the list of "a range of human rights" that need to be "recalibrated", and our young global leaders feel comfortable enough to say that bluntly. when it goes, anything goes
  - forum_ghost 4y ago
    >outdated constitutional rights ? surely you are joking?
    - tempodox 4y ago
      That's obviously not their own opinion, but a view they're arguing against.
    - throwaway0x7E6 4y ago
      sadly, I'm not. these are very common arguments against the both 1A and 2A - 1A was written at the time of pen and printing press. now there's the Internet - 2A was written at the time of sword and musket. now there are fully semi-automatic assault rifles
      - forum_ghost 4y ago
        - 1A was written to make sure citizens beliefs, ideas and thoughts cannot be suppressed and controlled by the state. - 2A was written to allow citizens possess the same tools as any other powerful imperial force of the day. How is any of these concepts outdated? You really think people who drafted those wrote them specifically about the tech of the day, and were smart enough to form a great nation, but too dumb to anticipate advances in technology, and were illiterate w.r.t history of civilizations and how technology advanced through the ages? >fully semi-automatic OK. You likely never held a gun in your hands. Makes sense. Reminder: The nation with oldest gun culture in the world, Czech Republic, issued guns like candy to everyone that asked after Soviets pulled out in 1991. There were only two periods in Czechia that had prohibitions on gun ownership: 1. Occupation by Soviets. 2. Occupation by Germans. For the other 500 years Czechs owned and carried weapons, and still remain the only shall issue country in Europe, with rights secured by the constitution to carry and to use of deadly force in self defence. (FYI: Gun homicides rates in Czechia are on par with much vaunted entirely gunless Asia.) Afghans fought off the US with nothing but goats and AKs, while hiding in caves. Seems these things are still quite relevant in 1991 and 2021.
DavideNL 4y ago
[opinion] I will eat my shoe in a tvshow if there's any evidence to confirm Whatsapp/Meta did this for privacy/moral reasons. They simply fear this would lead people to leaving Whatsapp and turn to alternative ways of private communication which would mean less users and thus revenue. [/opinion]
- init-as 4y ago
  I think you overestimate the amount that the average person cares about their privacy.
  - nonrandomstring 4y ago
    > I think you overestimate the amount that the average person cares about their privacy. We should reword this nearly-true claim to avoid spreading a pernicious myth. Let's try: "I think you overestimate the amount that the average person understands about their privacy." People care. They don't understand. Indeed, they are actively misled. That is not a fair foundation for assertions like "people don't care about X".
    - Moto7451 4y ago
      Very much this. The same people that feed large amounts of data to an ad network in exchange for videos of puppies can also be upset when they discover something about that same company that leads them to believe they’ve been harmed.
      - zelphirkalt 4y ago
        But lets also add, that so many of them will gladly believe everything an ad financed company tells them, just to have a bit of convenience and just so that they do not have to go against any network effect. All that, while people tell them, that they are being spied on. All that, while there is one personal data scandal after the other. Many people are severly uninformed or have closed themselves off to information, that could disturb their comfort with FB and the likes (ha, pun not intended, but it works!). Many people are computer illiterates, addicted to their "drug of choice" and kept in place via network effect of "all their friends and family being on FB/WA/whatever" and they too are part of the problem, increasing the network effect. I've had discussion with people, where I told them, that FB had the biggest personal data scandal in history (financially, in terms of what they had to pay), and that there is a new thing happening every month or so. Still these people do not want their way of being addicted shaken and continue regardlessly, dragging others down with them. I am sometimes at a loss what I can tell them, how I can explain to them what is happening. Telling them, that FB is running on ads, which are tailored to them, by spying on their behavior and mining that data. Nope, message not understood.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
throwaway0x7E6 4y ago
>Grapperhaus wanted to prevent the distribution of photos of the sexual abuse of children and if someone gets arrested for a thoughtcrime or hatespeak offense, the evidence obtained from their chat logs will be inadmissible in court, right? :)
- j3th9n 4y ago
  Meanwhile Grapperhaus didn't want to appoint an independent team of researchers to investigate child sex abuse in connection with members of his own justice department.
  - encrux 4y ago
    Sounds like a swell dude
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  of course, unless the wire tapping was authorized by a court. The system has been.in place for decades and the same procedures must be followed for every private conversation Besides: do you know someone that was arrested for a thoughtcrime in the Netherlands?
  - mardifoufs 4y ago
    Yes, they still have lese-majeste laws. And it's not like they never used them, people still go to jail over insulting the king. They reformed the laws in 2018 but it's still punishable by up to one year of jail >A court in the Netherlands has sentenced a man to 30 days in jail for insulting the king on Facebook. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36799639 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36799639? Plus, The Netherlands has quite a few restrictions on free speech in general. But I guess it depends on how you define "thought crimes"
    - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
      > to 30 days in jail for insulting the king on Facebook. That's not tough crime. You can't insult the President of Republic here in Italy too, because it represent Italy, you're insulting the institution, it's against the law. A though crime, as per Orwell - who invented the term - definition. is someone who goes against the status quo and get punished for expressing an unorthodox idea or doubting the system. You don't get a sentence usually, you simply disappear. Or get hunged in public as an example. What you just reported is a plain straight law infringement. Just like a robbery. A though crime would be being arrested for protesting against the US Supreme court and their vote to cancel abortion rights.
getcrunk 4y ago
Wow this is amazing. How did whatsapp react to that Australian law about backdoors?
- forum_ghost 4y ago
  afaik they only have key disclosure. which you can reveal yourself on clientside? afaik they dont have a backdoor law? can you point to a link? tia
  - jeroenhd 4y ago
    There's this recent news: https://fee.org/articles/australia-s-unprecedented-encryption-law-is-a-threat-to-global-privacy/ https://fee.org/articles/australia-s-unprecedented-encryptio... The existing law is already quite extensive: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/09/australian-government-ignores-experts-advancing-its-anti-encryption-bill https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/09/australian-government-... Theoretically, any Australian could be compelled by the government to sneak backdoors into their bos's software, though I haven't seen any indication that such extreme measures were taken. Australia is quite extreme in their anti encryption laws. Their government's stance has made me distrust Australian software dealing in security, and even Australian developers working on encryption technology. Not because I don't trust Australians per se, but because their government can force good people to do bad things. Were this law to strike in the Netherlands, I'd expect other countries to shun Dutch security software immediately as well.
rapnie 4y ago
Wonder what they will do with https://chatcontrol.eu https://chatcontrol.eu then.
- dan-robertson 4y ago
  Well they’re already scanning the images that you send so obviously they have a more nuanced position on the topic.
  - kevincox 4y ago
    Do you have a source/writeup about this?
- DavideNL 4y ago
  Not going to happen anyway... (in German): https://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/chatkontrolle-messenger-ueberwachung-duerfte-an-deutschland-scheitern-a-61338f80-839f-4798-b8d9-180e7a5bb711 https://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/chatkontrolle-me... "Federal Minister of the Interior Faeser has changed her mind about the EU Commission's plan: "I don't think it's compatible with our civil liberties to check every private message without any reason."
  - rapnie 4y ago
    Maybe. Germany and Netherlands were the only countries with some real opposition in the parliamentary vote last year. https://mepwatch.eu/9/vote.html?v=134463# https://mepwatch.eu/9/vote.html?v=134463#
bitcharmer 4y ago
> Grapperhaus wanted to prevent the distribution of photos of the sexual abuse of children Ah yes, the "think about the children" narrative again. This argument is as valid as banning knives because some percentage of knife owners commit crimes with them. I'm really getting tired of this and hope larger groups of population start seeing through this bullshit.
- IYasha 4y ago
  I heard a joke "Let's ban all men, because they have dicks which make them potential rapists" ) The only thing that makes original narrative not so absurdly ridiculous is the fact that "they" have the resources to execute a few example cases (of abuse, abduction, shootings, etc. etc.) to justify any restrictions. (
- blenderdt 4y ago
  This is no bullshit, it's about feeling powerless. Grapperhouse saw how hard it is to track down child abusers. He was touched by it and he wanted to fix this. The best solution to track down child abusers fast is to track down their communications. But I agree with you this might not be the best solution for the rest of the world.
  - rglullis 4y ago
    > The best solution to track down child abusers fast is to track down their communications. Right. Then as bad actors find out that WhatsApp is backdoored, they move on to some other network, the police agents go on to think "oh, cool, no more abusers on WhatsApp, good job!", leaving the backdoor only for the good people and a bunch of police agents thinking "Now that CP is no longer a threat, what else are we going to use as a reason to keep these powers we have"?
    - forum_ghost 4y ago
      I'd be very surprised any serious criminals use anything from webstores in the first place. maybe some low level foot soldiers at most.
saos 4y ago
Can they leave UK aswell?
- agilob 4y ago
  Right after encryption is banned in the UK.
DeathArrow 4y ago
Can a government demand the same from Telegram and Signal? And if that is the case, how easy would be to circumvent an IP block without users having to use VPNs or tunelling?
- jeroenhd 4y ago
  Would the law have been passed, all chat clients would have to implement backdoors or leave the country. Circumventing the block would be trivial, so the next step would be to go after VPNs, TOR, decentralised messengers, and any other technology that would keep your private days out of the hands of the government.
typooner 4y ago
A law enforcement backdoor into encrypted messaging is a good thing for society overall, and it's not unreasonable for Dutch lawmakers such as Grapperhaus to push for this as a long-term solution. Fortunately, there are plenty of alternative approaches to this right now that effectively give law enforcement the equivalent of backdoor access, often not just to encrypted messaging applications like WhatsApp but the entire device too. Reading between the lines, this is likely why plans to legislate for encrypted messaging backdoors were quietly shelved, for now. But it's coming eventually.
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  > A law enforcement backdoor into encrypted messaging is a good thing for society overall Why?
- raverbashing 4y ago
  > A law enforcement backdoor into encrypted messaging is a good thing for society overall, Is that why you created a throwaway? Privacy for thee but not for other people? I definitely would want a backdoor on the communications of every politician pushing for those kind of backdoors, that would be a net benefit to society
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- SirHound 4y ago
  It’s not a good thing. A back door to encryption is oxymoronic.
- meibo 4y ago
  Considering the technical and moral illiteracy of police and the judicial branch in many western European countries, this would be extremely prone to abuse, which is why it is not a good idea to enable it by law. Not only that, it's also just useless. Criminals and child predators don't use commercial services to share their offerings and material, they use private forums. Placing all citizens under suspicion and privatizing criminal justice is not the right way.
raverbashing 4y ago
Good They were right to do this It is a bit naive of some companies to think all they need is to "pay or comply" with some regulations and not push back when it is merited. It might come back later to bite them
quadcore 4y ago
I realised recently China has a population of 1 billion and 400 million. That's more than a billion more people than the U.S. And they dont have democracy. They cant french revolution on their CCP thing. Im no expert but this is mostly due to surveillance right? Dont say culture please, nobody prefer autocracy to democracy but the autocrate. This convinced me surveillance is bad. Edit: some of you disagree. Id like the opportunity to convince you. I get it that many chinese are just happy with the regime. And actually, I dont judge that. Its certainly a cool regime in some ways. But democracy grows like weed, there is no stopping it. But with surveillance. Remove surveillance, there is democracy in China tomorrow.
- axlee 4y ago
  > And they dont have democracy. They cant french revolution on their CCP thing. Im no expert but this is mostly due to surveillance right? Dont say culture please, nobody prefer autocracy to democracy but the autocrate. Of course culture has a part in it. Believe it or not, most people have never experienced democracy, and a sizeable amount do not believe that it is a superior society model. Some cultures will never be democratic in their current form, starting with the ones where religion is deeply intertwined with politics. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/02/27/democratic-rights-popular-globally-but-commitment-to-them-not-always-strong/ https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/02/27/democratic-rig...
  - ChrisMarshallNY 4y ago
    I believe the Greeks had democracy in a number of their city states, but some also had war, slavery, and a fairly pervasive misogyny. There's an old saying I remember: "The best form of government is an absolute monarchy. The worst form of government is an absolute monarchy." It all depends who's on top of the heap. Democracy tends to dilute the damage done by bad actors, but also hobbles really good ones. No system is perfect.
    - throw0101a 4y ago
      > There's an old saying I remember: "The best form of government is an absolute monarchy. The worst form of government is an absolute monarchy." Constitutional monarchy seems to rank highly: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index#By_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index#By_country
codeptualize 4y ago
What's most disturbing to me is that these people without any technical knowledge are pushing for these things while largely ignoring expert opinions. Imo it's fine to explore such options as you should consider everything, but just give up, accept reality, and go look for alternative options when literally everyone with knowledge about the topic says it's a bad idea and impossible to do in a secure way. They should spend that time on finding solutions that actually work.
- throw457 4y ago
  The experts could come forward and propose solutions that actually work. Like the CCC did with their talking points at the last major election. I always hear the arguments against but not even once is someone bringing alternatives up. Just like you did in your comment.
  - stingraycharles 4y ago
    What if the desire of the government (“listen in on all communication without weakening security”) has no solution? Just because someone has a ridiculous idea, doesn’t always mean “experts should just propose a better alternative”. It may as well mean that the whole goal is flawed.
  - workingon 4y ago
    This isn’t a good faith comment. You assume that there is actually a problem with the authorities not having perfect access to criminal communications. We’ve gone the entirety of human history with ridiculously simple methods of analysis for crime etc., and the world is doing just fine. There will always be some crime, stomping out .1% more crime at great expense to the public isn’t even something that everyone would agree is necessary.
    - throw457 4y ago
      People like you always pretend like you are not voting for your government or you are not part of the society you live in. There is a problem with rampart criminal activity on the net and there is atm no solution to it. Pretending that the world doesn't change has never done any good or why you are not writing this on your C64...
edhelas 4y ago
Do it
can16358p 4y ago
Is the server hugged to death? The moment I tap it says can't connect to the server, immediately. Any archive links?
- _han 4y ago
  For me it still works, but here’s an archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20220604110604/https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2022/06/03/whatsapp-dreigde-te-vertrekken-om-aftapplicht-a4132175 https://web.archive.org/web/20220604110604/https://www.nrc.n...
notRobot 4y ago
English translation: https://www-nrc-nl.translate.goog/nieuws/2022/06/03/whatsapp-dreigde-te-vertrekken-om-aftapplicht-a4132175?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://www-nrc-nl.translate.goog/nieuws/2022/06/03/whatsapp...
stereoradonc 4y ago
This is a PR plant that Meta (and its acolytes) routinely stress the importance of "E2EE" - while skimming off the generated metadata which reveals even more. E2EE is closed source implementation and it is hard to determine what happens in the background. I am not denouncing E2EE- just WhatsApp.

104 points by _han 4y ago

_han 4y ago

Translation of the original Dutch article: https://www-nrc-nl.translate.goog/nieuws/2022/06/03/whatsapp-dreigde-te-vertrekken-om-aftapplicht-a4132175?_x_tr_sl=nl&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://www-nrc-nl.translate.goog/nieuws/2022/06/03/whatsapp...

tempodox 4y ago
‘Justice [Department] keeps looking for the holy grail: a “secure” backdoor to WhatsApp’ I wonder, at what point will they stop caring that there's no such thing as a “secure” backdoor?
- orlp 4y ago
  Define secure. Because if you were trying to bring up a technological argument, please stop. It weakens our position. Cryptographically you absolutely can have asymmetric systems with a privileged master key that are secure to anyone not knowing the master key. You might argue that the key could leak, and they'll come right back with ephemerally rotating master keys signed by the backdoor agency. Legally enforced secure backdooring is not a technology issue, it is a social one. Simply put, we don't want mass surveillance. We don't want authorities snooping in our private communications, period. That is more than sufficient, and does not require building on technological arguments that will only wear down.
  - rowanG077 4y ago
    That's not a backdoor. That's just a front door.
    - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
      A front door is simply a back door hiding in plain sight.
  - bruce343434 4y ago
    key rotation still gives windows of oppertunity

thepangolino 4y ago

This is why decentralised apps and protocols like Tox and Jami have to be pushed forward. They can’t “leave” a country.

throwaway0x7E6 4y ago
that's why they will be eventually outlawed, either outright by the government or by its corporate proxies who own and control the whole stack of communication technology and don't have to respect our outdated constitutional rights the future of the internet in the West is even more grim than its present in China, Russia, Iran and all the other countries we had criticized for it up until a few years ago. now we're setting up our own Great Firewalls to protect our dumb gray masses from disinformation and telescreens to protect our ever-threatened democracies freedom of speech is explicitly on the list of "a range of human rights" that need to be "recalibrated", and our young global leaders feel comfortable enough to say that bluntly. when it goes, anything goes
- forum_ghost 4y ago
  >outdated constitutional rights ? surely you are joking?
  - tempodox 4y ago
    That's obviously not their own opinion, but a view they're arguing against.
  - throwaway0x7E6 4y ago
    sadly, I'm not. these are very common arguments against the both 1A and 2A - 1A was written at the time of pen and printing press. now there's the Internet - 2A was written at the time of sword and musket. now there are fully semi-automatic assault rifles
    - forum_ghost 4y ago
      - 1A was written to make sure citizens beliefs, ideas and thoughts cannot be suppressed and controlled by the state. - 2A was written to allow citizens possess the same tools as any other powerful imperial force of the day. How is any of these concepts outdated? You really think people who drafted those wrote them specifically about the tech of the day, and were smart enough to form a great nation, but too dumb to anticipate advances in technology, and were illiterate w.r.t history of civilizations and how technology advanced through the ages? >fully semi-automatic OK. You likely never held a gun in your hands. Makes sense. Reminder: The nation with oldest gun culture in the world, Czech Republic, issued guns like candy to everyone that asked after Soviets pulled out in 1991. There were only two periods in Czechia that had prohibitions on gun ownership: 1. Occupation by Soviets. 2. Occupation by Germans. For the other 500 years Czechs owned and carried weapons, and still remain the only shall issue country in Europe, with rights secured by the constitution to carry and to use of deadly force in self defence. (FYI: Gun homicides rates in Czechia are on par with much vaunted entirely gunless Asia.) Afghans fought off the US with nothing but goats and AKs, while hiding in caves. Seems these things are still quite relevant in 1991 and 2021.

DavideNL 4y ago

[opinion] I will eat my shoe in a tvshow if there's any evidence to confirm Whatsapp/Meta did this for privacy/moral reasons. They simply fear this would lead people to leaving Whatsapp and turn to alternative ways of private communication which would mean less users and thus revenue. [/opinion]

init-as 4y ago
I think you overestimate the amount that the average person cares about their privacy.
- nonrandomstring 4y ago
  > I think you overestimate the amount that the average person cares about their privacy. We should reword this nearly-true claim to avoid spreading a pernicious myth. Let's try: "I think you overestimate the amount that the average person understands about their privacy." People care. They don't understand. Indeed, they are actively misled. That is not a fair foundation for assertions like "people don't care about X".
  - Moto7451 4y ago
    Very much this. The same people that feed large amounts of data to an ad network in exchange for videos of puppies can also be upset when they discover something about that same company that leads them to believe they’ve been harmed.
    - zelphirkalt 4y ago
      But lets also add, that so many of them will gladly believe everything an ad financed company tells them, just to have a bit of convenience and just so that they do not have to go against any network effect. All that, while people tell them, that they are being spied on. All that, while there is one personal data scandal after the other. Many people are severly uninformed or have closed themselves off to information, that could disturb their comfort with FB and the likes (ha, pun not intended, but it works!). Many people are computer illiterates, addicted to their "drug of choice" and kept in place via network effect of "all their friends and family being on FB/WA/whatever" and they too are part of the problem, increasing the network effect. I've had discussion with people, where I told them, that FB had the biggest personal data scandal in history (financially, in terms of what they had to pay), and that there is a new thing happening every month or so. Still these people do not want their way of being addicted shaken and continue regardlessly, dragging others down with them. I am sometimes at a loss what I can tell them, how I can explain to them what is happening. Telling them, that FB is running on ads, which are tailored to them, by spying on their behavior and mining that data. Nope, message not understood.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

throwaway0x7E6 4y ago

>Grapperhaus wanted to prevent the distribution of photos of the sexual abuse of children and if someone gets arrested for a thoughtcrime or hatespeak offense, the evidence obtained from their chat logs will be inadmissible in court, right? :)

j3th9n 4y ago
Meanwhile Grapperhaus didn't want to appoint an independent team of researchers to investigate child sex abuse in connection with members of his own justice department.
- encrux 4y ago
  Sounds like a swell dude
peoplefromibiza 4y ago
of course, unless the wire tapping was authorized by a court. The system has been.in place for decades and the same procedures must be followed for every private conversation Besides: do you know someone that was arrested for a thoughtcrime in the Netherlands?
- mardifoufs 4y ago
  Yes, they still have lese-majeste laws. And it's not like they never used them, people still go to jail over insulting the king. They reformed the laws in 2018 but it's still punishable by up to one year of jail >A court in the Netherlands has sentenced a man to 30 days in jail for insulting the king on Facebook. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36799639 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36799639? Plus, The Netherlands has quite a few restrictions on free speech in general. But I guess it depends on how you define "thought crimes"
  - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    > to 30 days in jail for insulting the king on Facebook. That's not tough crime. You can't insult the President of Republic here in Italy too, because it represent Italy, you're insulting the institution, it's against the law. A though crime, as per Orwell - who invented the term - definition. is someone who goes against the status quo and get punished for expressing an unorthodox idea or doubting the system. You don't get a sentence usually, you simply disappear. Or get hunged in public as an example. What you just reported is a plain straight law infringement. Just like a robbery. A though crime would be being arrested for protesting against the US Supreme court and their vote to cancel abortion rights.

getcrunk 4y ago

Wow this is amazing. How did whatsapp react to that Australian law about backdoors?

forum_ghost 4y ago
afaik they only have key disclosure. which you can reveal yourself on clientside? afaik they dont have a backdoor law? can you point to a link? tia
- jeroenhd 4y ago
  There's this recent news: https://fee.org/articles/australia-s-unprecedented-encryption-law-is-a-threat-to-global-privacy/ https://fee.org/articles/australia-s-unprecedented-encryptio... The existing law is already quite extensive: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/09/australian-government-ignores-experts-advancing-its-anti-encryption-bill https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/09/australian-government-... Theoretically, any Australian could be compelled by the government to sneak backdoors into their bos's software, though I haven't seen any indication that such extreme measures were taken. Australia is quite extreme in their anti encryption laws. Their government's stance has made me distrust Australian software dealing in security, and even Australian developers working on encryption technology. Not because I don't trust Australians per se, but because their government can force good people to do bad things. Were this law to strike in the Netherlands, I'd expect other countries to shun Dutch security software immediately as well.

rapnie 4y ago

Wonder what they will do with https://chatcontrol.eu https://chatcontrol.eu then.

dan-robertson 4y ago
Well they’re already scanning the images that you send so obviously they have a more nuanced position on the topic.
- kevincox 4y ago
  Do you have a source/writeup about this?
DavideNL 4y ago
Not going to happen anyway... (in German): https://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/chatkontrolle-messenger-ueberwachung-duerfte-an-deutschland-scheitern-a-61338f80-839f-4798-b8d9-180e7a5bb711 https://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/chatkontrolle-me... "Federal Minister of the Interior Faeser has changed her mind about the EU Commission's plan: "I don't think it's compatible with our civil liberties to check every private message without any reason."
- rapnie 4y ago
  Maybe. Germany and Netherlands were the only countries with some real opposition in the parliamentary vote last year. https://mepwatch.eu/9/vote.html?v=134463# https://mepwatch.eu/9/vote.html?v=134463#

bitcharmer 4y ago

> Grapperhaus wanted to prevent the distribution of photos of the sexual abuse of children Ah yes, the "think about the children" narrative again. This argument is as valid as banning knives because some percentage of knife owners commit crimes with them. I'm really getting tired of this and hope larger groups of population start seeing through this bullshit.

IYasha 4y ago
I heard a joke "Let's ban all men, because they have dicks which make them potential rapists" ) The only thing that makes original narrative not so absurdly ridiculous is the fact that "they" have the resources to execute a few example cases (of abuse, abduction, shootings, etc. etc.) to justify any restrictions. (
blenderdt 4y ago
This is no bullshit, it's about feeling powerless. Grapperhouse saw how hard it is to track down child abusers. He was touched by it and he wanted to fix this. The best solution to track down child abusers fast is to track down their communications. But I agree with you this might not be the best solution for the rest of the world.
- rglullis 4y ago
  > The best solution to track down child abusers fast is to track down their communications. Right. Then as bad actors find out that WhatsApp is backdoored, they move on to some other network, the police agents go on to think "oh, cool, no more abusers on WhatsApp, good job!", leaving the backdoor only for the good people and a bunch of police agents thinking "Now that CP is no longer a threat, what else are we going to use as a reason to keep these powers we have"?
  - forum_ghost 4y ago
    I'd be very surprised any serious criminals use anything from webstores in the first place. maybe some low level foot soldiers at most.

saos 4y ago

Can they leave UK aswell?

agilob 4y ago
Right after encryption is banned in the UK.

DeathArrow 4y ago

Can a government demand the same from Telegram and Signal? And if that is the case, how easy would be to circumvent an IP block without users having to use VPNs or tunelling?

jeroenhd 4y ago
Would the law have been passed, all chat clients would have to implement backdoors or leave the country. Circumventing the block would be trivial, so the next step would be to go after VPNs, TOR, decentralised messengers, and any other technology that would keep your private days out of the hands of the government.

typooner 4y ago

A law enforcement backdoor into encrypted messaging is a good thing for society overall, and it's not unreasonable for Dutch lawmakers such as Grapperhaus to push for this as a long-term solution. Fortunately, there are plenty of alternative approaches to this right now that effectively give law enforcement the equivalent of backdoor access, often not just to encrypted messaging applications like WhatsApp but the entire device too. Reading between the lines, this is likely why plans to legislate for encrypted messaging backdoors were quietly shelved, for now. But it's coming eventually.

Nextgrid 4y ago
> A law enforcement backdoor into encrypted messaging is a good thing for society overall Why?
raverbashing 4y ago
> A law enforcement backdoor into encrypted messaging is a good thing for society overall, Is that why you created a throwaway? Privacy for thee but not for other people? I definitely would want a backdoor on the communications of every politician pushing for those kind of backdoors, that would be a net benefit to society
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
SirHound 4y ago
It’s not a good thing. A back door to encryption is oxymoronic.
meibo 4y ago
Considering the technical and moral illiteracy of police and the judicial branch in many western European countries, this would be extremely prone to abuse, which is why it is not a good idea to enable it by law. Not only that, it's also just useless. Criminals and child predators don't use commercial services to share their offerings and material, they use private forums. Placing all citizens under suspicion and privatizing criminal justice is not the right way.

raverbashing 4y ago

Good They were right to do this It is a bit naive of some companies to think all they need is to "pay or comply" with some regulations and not push back when it is merited. It might come back later to bite them

quadcore 4y ago

I realised recently China has a population of 1 billion and 400 million. That's more than a billion more people than the U.S. And they dont have democracy. They cant french revolution on their CCP thing. Im no expert but this is mostly due to surveillance right? Dont say culture please, nobody prefer autocracy to democracy but the autocrate. This convinced me surveillance is bad. Edit: some of you disagree. Id like the opportunity to convince you. I get it that many chinese are just happy with the regime. And actually, I dont judge that. Its certainly a cool regime in some ways. But democracy grows like weed, there is no stopping it. But with surveillance. Remove surveillance, there is democracy in China tomorrow.

axlee 4y ago
> And they dont have democracy. They cant french revolution on their CCP thing. Im no expert but this is mostly due to surveillance right? Dont say culture please, nobody prefer autocracy to democracy but the autocrate. Of course culture has a part in it. Believe it or not, most people have never experienced democracy, and a sizeable amount do not believe that it is a superior society model. Some cultures will never be democratic in their current form, starting with the ones where religion is deeply intertwined with politics. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/02/27/democratic-rights-popular-globally-but-commitment-to-them-not-always-strong/ https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/02/27/democratic-rig...
- ChrisMarshallNY 4y ago
  I believe the Greeks had democracy in a number of their city states, but some also had war, slavery, and a fairly pervasive misogyny. There's an old saying I remember: "The best form of government is an absolute monarchy. The worst form of government is an absolute monarchy." It all depends who's on top of the heap. Democracy tends to dilute the damage done by bad actors, but also hobbles really good ones. No system is perfect.
  - throw0101a 4y ago
    > There's an old saying I remember: "The best form of government is an absolute monarchy. The worst form of government is an absolute monarchy." Constitutional monarchy seems to rank highly: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index#By_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index#By_country

codeptualize 4y ago

What's most disturbing to me is that these people without any technical knowledge are pushing for these things while largely ignoring expert opinions. Imo it's fine to explore such options as you should consider everything, but just give up, accept reality, and go look for alternative options when literally everyone with knowledge about the topic says it's a bad idea and impossible to do in a secure way. They should spend that time on finding solutions that actually work.

throw457 4y ago
The experts could come forward and propose solutions that actually work. Like the CCC did with their talking points at the last major election. I always hear the arguments against but not even once is someone bringing alternatives up. Just like you did in your comment.
- stingraycharles 4y ago
  What if the desire of the government (“listen in on all communication without weakening security”) has no solution? Just because someone has a ridiculous idea, doesn’t always mean “experts should just propose a better alternative”. It may as well mean that the whole goal is flawed.
- workingon 4y ago
  This isn’t a good faith comment. You assume that there is actually a problem with the authorities not having perfect access to criminal communications. We’ve gone the entirety of human history with ridiculously simple methods of analysis for crime etc., and the world is doing just fine. There will always be some crime, stomping out .1% more crime at great expense to the public isn’t even something that everyone would agree is necessary.
  - throw457 4y ago
    People like you always pretend like you are not voting for your government or you are not part of the society you live in. There is a problem with rampart criminal activity on the net and there is atm no solution to it. Pretending that the world doesn't change has never done any good or why you are not writing this on your C64...

edhelas 4y ago

Do it

can16358p 4y ago

Is the server hugged to death? The moment I tap it says can't connect to the server, immediately. Any archive links?

_han 4y ago
For me it still works, but here’s an archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20220604110604/https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2022/06/03/whatsapp-dreigde-te-vertrekken-om-aftapplicht-a4132175 https://web.archive.org/web/20220604110604/https://www.nrc.n...

notRobot 4y ago

English translation: https://www-nrc-nl.translate.goog/nieuws/2022/06/03/whatsapp-dreigde-te-vertrekken-om-aftapplicht-a4132175?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://www-nrc-nl.translate.goog/nieuws/2022/06/03/whatsapp...

stereoradonc 4y ago

This is a PR plant that Meta (and its acolytes) routinely stress the importance of "E2EE" - while skimming off the generated metadata which reveals even more. E2EE is closed source implementation and it is hard to determine what happens in the background. I am not denouncing E2EE- just WhatsApp.