7 ms·

Majority of EU countries support scanning of audio communications

62 points by mdp2021 3y ago

mikece 3y ago
Do any of the EU countries have a legal history of having the right to privacy enshrined in law and custom?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- marginalia_nu 3y ago
  Not that I'm aware of, although East Germany still has Stasi in living memory, which gives mass surveillance a tangibley sour aftertaste.
- eisstrom 3y ago
  You might be interested in Aritcle 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_8_of_the_European_Convention_on_Human_Rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_8_of_the_European_Conv...). It was recently used to declare the UK's mass surveillance unlawful (https://dpglaw.co.uk/european-court-of-human-rights-declares-uks-mass-surveillance-regime-unlawful/ https://dpglaw.co.uk/european-court-of-human-rights-declares...)
  - andai 3y ago
    Very interesting. Does this apply to the Dutch "dragnet" surveillance law too? https://aboutintel.eu/update-dutch-dragnet-act/ https://aboutintel.eu/update-dutch-dragnet-act/
    - jruohonen 3y ago
      In principle, yes. In practice, no. National security is a matter of the member states. Note that the right to privacy is also in the Dutch constitution. From the little I know, the oversight mechanism in the Netherlands seems to be working to some extent but there are still plenty of caveats: https://aboutintel.eu/ctivd-bulk-datasets-held-by-intel-need-to-be-deleted/ https://aboutintel.eu/ctivd-bulk-datasets-held-by-intel-need...
  - cccbbbaaa 3y ago
    See also Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf https://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf). (side note, the ECHR is why European countries have strong privacy laws since the '70s.) The EDPS recently said that under the Charter, the infamous “Chat Control” would always be illegal in the EU: https://www.euractiv.com/section/law-enforcement/news/eu-watchdog-online-child-abuse-draft-law-creates-illusion-of-legality/ https://www.euractiv.com/section/law-enforcement/news/eu-wat....
- miohtama 3y ago
  Yes. Also in not so delightful way. https://www.investigate-europe.eu/en/2023/luxembourg-businessman-offshore-transparency-shutdown/ https://www.investigate-europe.eu/en/2023/luxembourg-busines... This is the case that shut down the public access to Companies House registry, as oligarch’s handyman was complaining access to companies ownership data violates the privacy of his businesses. Might be a net loss for the society in this case.
- johngladtj 3y ago
  Like all "rights" in Europe, they are only rights when it's politically convenient.
ilyt 3y ago
It's sad that "think of the children" is still argument that works on some dumbasses.
- mikece 3y ago
  I tend to ignore "think of the children" pleas from people who outsource the education and supervision of their children to the state or other "non-parent providers."
  - anigbrowl 3y ago
    Right it's not like children are ever abused by family members.
  - andai 3y ago
    Alas, we are outnumbered by servants of the machine ;)
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  It's equally sad that privacy advocates (of whom I am one) mostly refuse to acknowledge that CSAM is a real and measurable problem, which specifically exploits children's naïveté and lack of agency. 'Think of the children' should absolutely not be the only decision-making criterion, but it should absolutely be among such criteria.
  - nforgerit 3y ago
    You know what would help for real? Social workers, parents empowering on things digital, educative initiatives for all stakeholders and proper case-by-case prosecution by prosecution authorities that are not under-financed and overwhelmed. But hey, this way is easier and gives total government control into hands of possibly bad government actors in the future.
    - BLKNSLVR 3y ago
      You're absolutely right, and I've said as much in the past. Social work and educational solutions actually have a chance of making things better, actually giving children the tools and knowledge to protect themselves. Law enforcement is only a tool for punishment of offenders, it in no way "protects children" because the offense has already occurred. Anecdotal example, but this is seems to be the opposite of wanting to "protect children": https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-06/high-risk-paedophile-prison-release/102312516 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-06/high-risk-paedophile-...
dadjoker 3y ago
What could possibly go wrong?
- mdp2021 3y ago
  > What could possibly go wrong? This could have normally be considered an idle comment. Unfortunately, in today's world it has become part of a rule: "when any trend emerges, ask yourself: what could possibly go wrong".
ClumsyPilot 3y ago
This is a terrible headline. It gives impression that the majority of electorate supports this. Or maybe majority of their respective parliaments does. But it's just the executive branch of the EU itself- "A majority of the EU Council of Ministers". More or less, each government selects a minister to represent them in this council. The article should really be reporting on how this bill is progressing. I am no legal expert, but I believe the EU parliament, which is actually elected, could reject it. I am not sure what happens if it is found unconstitutional in some of the countries concerned.
- someweirdperson 3y ago
  > I am not sure what happens if it is found unconstitutional in some of the countries concerned. I am sure that we are not going to bring those to justice that create law that is found unconstitutional.
- denton-scratch 3y ago
  > More or less, each government selects a minister to represent them in this council. That's right; but note that the minister they select depends on what's being discussed. There isn't really a "Council of Ministers" you could list the names of; it changes for each meeting. That is, the C of M is really a council of member governments. And what government wouldn't like to have the EU mandate maximum surveillance, so when their citizens complain, they can just blame the EU?
  - FinnKuhn 3y ago
    You can see this all the time in German politics. Someone says that they don't want to do a thing in Germany and than just do it in the EU. The best example would probably be chat control.
- jltsiren 3y ago
  > I am not sure what happens if it is found unconstitutional in some of the countries concerned. The general principle is that EU law takes precedence over national laws, including national constitutions. If a member state finds a law unconstitutional, they have a few options. They could try to convince everyone else to change the law. They could change their constitution. They could leave the EU. Or they could just ignore the law and face the political and financial consequences. In some sense, the EU is no different from any other legally binding international treaty. It's a package deal, so you can't avoid the aspects you don't like. But because treaties are between sovereign states, it's always possible to leave them.
nforgerit 3y ago
I used to be a convinced pro-European but for me it's getting harder and harder to _not_ believe in some kind of plot for assuming total control over their citizens. Each and every EU regulation concerning "things digital" is pointing to a direction where "freedom" is just an empty buzzword used for virtue signalling against states like China. I am getting seriously concerned about things (not that i haven't been before).
- bjoli 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - antiloper 3y ago
    It is not "exclusively the right". The social democrats strongly voted in favour of chatcontrol. If there's anything all EU bureaucrats are agreeing on, it's that they need more power. https://mepwatch.eu/9/vote.html?v=134463 https://mepwatch.eu/9/vote.html?v=134463
    - bjoli 3y ago
      European social democracy hasn't been left in some time apart for maybe in words. Regarding EU votes it is fun to always see the same division: people from countries where there is still a left phalanx of the social democratic party always seem to have people (who are always the same) voting with GUE/NGL.
- Yujf 3y ago
  It is a difficult thing. Because of it's size, the EU often feels unnaccountable to me. Also the news does not focus on who votes for what or what their ideas in the EU are but only focusses on national level. And then the EU makes decisions that I dissagree with and it leaves a bad taste. On the other hand, I believe the EU has so much potential and is a huge benefit overall
  - soco 3y ago
    I would say it is accountable buuuttt ssoooooo sssllooowwwwww that in the end it almost feels unaccountable, and that's a pity. I don't know though how to bring together so many directions and so many (levels of) legislators in a quicker manner... and let's face it, the EU voters aren't smarter or better informed than in other places.
squarefoot 3y ago
In a few years, every pedophile will be able to create CSAM material indistinguishable from reality on their computer thanks to AI, therefore they won't need anymore to download it from the Internet. When this will occur, the powers that be could hardly use the protect-the-children argument to spy on citizens, since all material will be virtually created offline. I guess they're struggling to have draconian laws passed ASAP also for this reason.
- kwhitefoot 3y ago
  Such material is already criminalised in the UK.
- waboremo 3y ago
  I don't think this is a good argument as is, because it effectively justifies the draconian laws. Basically if they got all of them to stop taking actions in real life, and exclusively generate content on people who don't exist... then the laws have done their job. They've saved people from harm.
nico 3y ago
> majority of the EU Council of Ministers seem to favour expanding the scanning of private messages to audio communications to detect child sexual abuse material Please think of the children Oh well
Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
Obligatory reminder: the goal of mass-surveillance is never to prevent terrorist acts or protect the children from predators. It is to have a dossier on everyone.
x-complexity 3y ago
This just proves that all communications need to be made E2EE in order to preserve privacy & security, with no carveouts for law enforcement: Any avenue that is carved out for the State will be used by malicious actors, both within the State (that don't want to leave any paper trails) and outside of the State.

62 points by mdp2021 3y ago

mikece 3y ago

Do any of the EU countries have a legal history of having the right to privacy enshrined in law and custom?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
marginalia_nu 3y ago
Not that I'm aware of, although East Germany still has Stasi in living memory, which gives mass surveillance a tangibley sour aftertaste.
eisstrom 3y ago
You might be interested in Aritcle 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_8_of_the_European_Convention_on_Human_Rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_8_of_the_European_Conv...). It was recently used to declare the UK's mass surveillance unlawful (https://dpglaw.co.uk/european-court-of-human-rights-declares-uks-mass-surveillance-regime-unlawful/ https://dpglaw.co.uk/european-court-of-human-rights-declares...)
- andai 3y ago
  Very interesting. Does this apply to the Dutch "dragnet" surveillance law too? https://aboutintel.eu/update-dutch-dragnet-act/ https://aboutintel.eu/update-dutch-dragnet-act/
  - jruohonen 3y ago
    In principle, yes. In practice, no. National security is a matter of the member states. Note that the right to privacy is also in the Dutch constitution. From the little I know, the oversight mechanism in the Netherlands seems to be working to some extent but there are still plenty of caveats: https://aboutintel.eu/ctivd-bulk-datasets-held-by-intel-need-to-be-deleted/ https://aboutintel.eu/ctivd-bulk-datasets-held-by-intel-need...
- cccbbbaaa 3y ago
  See also Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf https://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf). (side note, the ECHR is why European countries have strong privacy laws since the '70s.) The EDPS recently said that under the Charter, the infamous “Chat Control” would always be illegal in the EU: https://www.euractiv.com/section/law-enforcement/news/eu-watchdog-online-child-abuse-draft-law-creates-illusion-of-legality/ https://www.euractiv.com/section/law-enforcement/news/eu-wat....
miohtama 3y ago
Yes. Also in not so delightful way. https://www.investigate-europe.eu/en/2023/luxembourg-businessman-offshore-transparency-shutdown/ https://www.investigate-europe.eu/en/2023/luxembourg-busines... This is the case that shut down the public access to Companies House registry, as oligarch’s handyman was complaining access to companies ownership data violates the privacy of his businesses. Might be a net loss for the society in this case.
johngladtj 3y ago
Like all "rights" in Europe, they are only rights when it's politically convenient.

ilyt 3y ago

It's sad that "think of the children" is still argument that works on some dumbasses.

mikece 3y ago
I tend to ignore "think of the children" pleas from people who outsource the education and supervision of their children to the state or other "non-parent providers."
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  Right it's not like children are ever abused by family members.
- andai 3y ago
  Alas, we are outnumbered by servants of the machine ;)
anigbrowl 3y ago
It's equally sad that privacy advocates (of whom I am one) mostly refuse to acknowledge that CSAM is a real and measurable problem, which specifically exploits children's naïveté and lack of agency. 'Think of the children' should absolutely not be the only decision-making criterion, but it should absolutely be among such criteria.
- nforgerit 3y ago
  You know what would help for real? Social workers, parents empowering on things digital, educative initiatives for all stakeholders and proper case-by-case prosecution by prosecution authorities that are not under-financed and overwhelmed. But hey, this way is easier and gives total government control into hands of possibly bad government actors in the future.
  - BLKNSLVR 3y ago
    You're absolutely right, and I've said as much in the past. Social work and educational solutions actually have a chance of making things better, actually giving children the tools and knowledge to protect themselves. Law enforcement is only a tool for punishment of offenders, it in no way "protects children" because the offense has already occurred. Anecdotal example, but this is seems to be the opposite of wanting to "protect children": https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-06/high-risk-paedophile-prison-release/102312516 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-06/high-risk-paedophile-...

dadjoker 3y ago

What could possibly go wrong?

mdp2021 3y ago
> What could possibly go wrong? This could have normally be considered an idle comment. Unfortunately, in today's world it has become part of a rule: "when any trend emerges, ask yourself: what could possibly go wrong".

ClumsyPilot 3y ago

This is a terrible headline. It gives impression that the majority of electorate supports this. Or maybe majority of their respective parliaments does. But it's just the executive branch of the EU itself- "A majority of the EU Council of Ministers". More or less, each government selects a minister to represent them in this council. The article should really be reporting on how this bill is progressing. I am no legal expert, but I believe the EU parliament, which is actually elected, could reject it. I am not sure what happens if it is found unconstitutional in some of the countries concerned.

someweirdperson 3y ago
> I am not sure what happens if it is found unconstitutional in some of the countries concerned. I am sure that we are not going to bring those to justice that create law that is found unconstitutional.
denton-scratch 3y ago
> More or less, each government selects a minister to represent them in this council. That's right; but note that the minister they select depends on what's being discussed. There isn't really a "Council of Ministers" you could list the names of; it changes for each meeting. That is, the C of M is really a council of member governments. And what government wouldn't like to have the EU mandate maximum surveillance, so when their citizens complain, they can just blame the EU?
- FinnKuhn 3y ago
  You can see this all the time in German politics. Someone says that they don't want to do a thing in Germany and than just do it in the EU. The best example would probably be chat control.
jltsiren 3y ago
> I am not sure what happens if it is found unconstitutional in some of the countries concerned. The general principle is that EU law takes precedence over national laws, including national constitutions. If a member state finds a law unconstitutional, they have a few options. They could try to convince everyone else to change the law. They could change their constitution. They could leave the EU. Or they could just ignore the law and face the political and financial consequences. In some sense, the EU is no different from any other legally binding international treaty. It's a package deal, so you can't avoid the aspects you don't like. But because treaties are between sovereign states, it's always possible to leave them.

nforgerit 3y ago

I used to be a convinced pro-European but for me it's getting harder and harder to _not_ believe in some kind of plot for assuming total control over their citizens. Each and every EU regulation concerning "things digital" is pointing to a direction where "freedom" is just an empty buzzword used for virtue signalling against states like China. I am getting seriously concerned about things (not that i haven't been before).

bjoli 3y ago
[flagged]
- antiloper 3y ago
  It is not "exclusively the right". The social democrats strongly voted in favour of chatcontrol. If there's anything all EU bureaucrats are agreeing on, it's that they need more power. https://mepwatch.eu/9/vote.html?v=134463 https://mepwatch.eu/9/vote.html?v=134463
  - bjoli 3y ago
    European social democracy hasn't been left in some time apart for maybe in words. Regarding EU votes it is fun to always see the same division: people from countries where there is still a left phalanx of the social democratic party always seem to have people (who are always the same) voting with GUE/NGL.
Yujf 3y ago
It is a difficult thing. Because of it's size, the EU often feels unnaccountable to me. Also the news does not focus on who votes for what or what their ideas in the EU are but only focusses on national level. And then the EU makes decisions that I dissagree with and it leaves a bad taste. On the other hand, I believe the EU has so much potential and is a huge benefit overall
- soco 3y ago
  I would say it is accountable buuuttt ssoooooo sssllooowwwwww that in the end it almost feels unaccountable, and that's a pity. I don't know though how to bring together so many directions and so many (levels of) legislators in a quicker manner... and let's face it, the EU voters aren't smarter or better informed than in other places.

squarefoot 3y ago

In a few years, every pedophile will be able to create CSAM material indistinguishable from reality on their computer thanks to AI, therefore they won't need anymore to download it from the Internet. When this will occur, the powers that be could hardly use the protect-the-children argument to spy on citizens, since all material will be virtually created offline. I guess they're struggling to have draconian laws passed ASAP also for this reason.

kwhitefoot 3y ago
Such material is already criminalised in the UK.
waboremo 3y ago
I don't think this is a good argument as is, because it effectively justifies the draconian laws. Basically if they got all of them to stop taking actions in real life, and exclusively generate content on people who don't exist... then the laws have done their job. They've saved people from harm.

nico 3y ago

> majority of the EU Council of Ministers seem to favour expanding the scanning of private messages to audio communications to detect child sexual abuse material Please think of the children Oh well

Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago

Obligatory reminder: the goal of mass-surveillance is never to prevent terrorist acts or protect the children from predators. It is to have a dossier on everyone.

x-complexity 3y ago

This just proves that all communications need to be made E2EE in order to preserve privacy & security, with no carveouts for law enforcement: Any avenue that is carved out for the State will be used by malicious actors, both within the State (that don't want to leave any paper trails) and outside of the State.