5 ms·

Nym, Threema and Proton said they would leave Switzerland over this. The question is where to go. Certainly not to any EU country (ProtectEU, Chat Control). ht

Nym, Threema and Proton said they would leave Switzerland over this. The question is where to go. Certainly not to any EU country (ProtectEU, Chat Control). https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/we-would-be-less-confidential-than-google-proton-threatens-to-quit-switzerland-over-new-surveillance-law https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/we-would-...

FirmwareBurner 1y ago
There's nowhere to go, since it's a constant game of whack-a-mole. Small island countries in the Caribbean can brag about super lax laws that aid privacy and evasion but none of them will ruin relationships with US or the EU just to protect a small 10 person privacy focused tech company when a warrants comes from abroad. For reference, Switzerland had to change their banking secrecy laws decades ago due to pressure from the US, Germany and France, so you can guess how well other weaker countries will fare against such pressure. And let's not forget the famous Crypto AG scandal in Switzerland, so I'm not buying the famous "Swiss privacy" marketing fluff at all anymore as much as I like the country. Just like Crypto AG, every tech company is, or will be, infiltrated by alphabet agencies by cooperation or by force. If you want real privacy you have to self host, that's the only way. Plus, I feel like we're focusing at the wrong issue here. Do we really want lawless places on this planet to exist where companies and individuals can escape the courts and law enforcement of their own nations? Something that will be exploited mostly for nefarious purposes than protecting privacy of law abiding people. The real solution is holding powerful governments accountable against invasions of privacy by their voters, not creating lawless zones where companies and powerful individuals can go and hide to avoid laws they dislike. If laws are bad, just change the laws, don't normalize law avoidance. If you normalize law avoidance about one thing, why not about other things as well like theft, taxation, human trafficking etc? The whole point of developed western nations is democratic representation, the strong rule of law and fairness of the court system. Write to your representative.
- rubit_xxx20 1y ago
  How about Sealand? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand
  - volemo 1y ago
    What about Sealand? They can be all for privacy and freedom, but it’d all amount to nothing if they don’t have Internet connection, and connection is a two way consent, so Sealand is even worse for this purpose than island micro nations.
  - viridian 1y ago
    Sealand is a fake country, a state without a nation. Even a nation without a military like Costa Rica can muster a defense via its people. Sealand on the other hand exists solely because no one cares to even acknowledge its existence. If Russia cut a deal to garrison troops there, that wikipedia page would see every "is" replaced with "was" before the day's end.
    - AStonesThrow 1y ago
      > Sealand on the other hand exists solely because no one cares to even acknowledge its existence. In the Infocom-produced Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, the player must enter his/her own brain and navigate a maze, in search of the Common Sense Particle, finding where it is lodged in this brain, and get rid of the blasted thing. Then the player may return to the Heart of Gold and, without hindrance of Common Sense, hold “No Tea” and “Tea” simultaneously in inventory. But that is just a computer game!!!
- modzu 1y ago
  if democracy ever threatened to change anything, it would be banned
- zarzavat 1y ago
  > Do we really want lawless places on this planet to exist where companies and individuals can escape the courts and law enforcement of their own nations? Yes. If the alternative is a worldwide police state.
  - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
    >Yes. If the alternative is a worldwide police state. Being held accountable for crimes is your definition of a "police state"? Interesting. What you're trying to hint at is political persecution, and there is the possibility of asylum for that. But let's differentiate between persecution and running away from crimes, and not muddy the waters. Not all crimes are the result of persecution. Otherwise what's stopping anyone form breaking into your house, murdering your family to rob you and then fleeing abroad on asylum to avoid legal repercussions? If that was the status quo, you probably wouldn't exist anymore right now. The "police state" is the one ensuring your family's safety. In our modern societies, we have outsourced the monopoly on violence to the police state, so that we can focus on work and hobbies, and that comes at the expense of trusting the state and holding it accountable through democracy.
    - K0balt 1y ago
      I don’t think op meant that at all. Your response reads a lot like “if you don’t have anything to hide…” arguments against privacy and encryption. Liberty always comes with a cost. It is de-facto a lack of control by the state. It is precisely this lack of control that creates value in liberty. The state will always go through cycles of opinion, witch hunts, political interference, and other malfeasances of power. It will probably be corrected, only to temporarily careen off the rails again. This is -the best case scenario- for a healthy democracy. The only way to limit the effect of this meandering pathfinding on individuals is to place some things intentionally out of reach of the state. To abuse their power, then they must break the law. This triggers the correction that brings democracy back towards the just path. Without limits to break, the state will careen so far off the path that it may have a hard time righting itself. We must force the state to use open coercion when it wants to stretch the limits of its reach. This is a critical element for democracy to function… its reach must have well defined limits that stop well short of any legal activity, even if it means criminals and deviants will face less obstacles. This is the cost of freedom.
api 1y ago
Iceland? It’s tough. The world is, overall, going through a shift toward authoritarianism of various flavors, and people are voting for it because of incredibly successful propaganda and fear of change.
- nickslaughter02 1y ago
  going through a shift toward authoritarianism of various flavors It is the current establishment that is pushing for these laws. Switzerland and EU have proven you don't need authoritarianism to constantly attack privacy and security of people.
  - api 1y ago
    I see two big brands of authoritarianism on the rise right now. One is populist strongman rule, usually but not always of a right wing bent. We have this rising in the US. The other is technocratic corporatism, the model of China and it seems a faction of the EU. Both endlessly malign democracy and liberalism as decadent, chaotic, and responsible for an endless parade of bogie men they will protect you against.
    - StefanBatory 1y ago
      Depends, in Poland our conservatives are way more aligned with Republicans.
  - conradfr 1y ago
    And a lot of decision in the EU are made by unelected people, great democracy.
    - nickslaughter02 1y ago
      Unelected and anonymous. "EU Commission refuses to disclose authors behind its mass surveillance proposal" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44168134 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44168134
  - 1y ago
ThatMedicIsASpy 1y ago
Mullvad (VPN) currently is in Sweden.
- nickslaughter02 1y ago
  For now. ProtectEU would require service providers to log metadata and beyond or face criminal charges. > For the first time, an EU expert group has explicitly mentioned VPN services as "key challenges" to the investigative work of law enforcement agencies, alongside encrypted devices, apps, and new communications operators. "VPN services may soon become a new target of EU lawmakers after being deemed a "key challenge"" https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/vpn-services-may-soon-become-a-new-target-of-eu-lawmakers-after-being-deemed-a-key-challenge https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/vpn-servi...
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
pclmulqdq 1y ago
Unfortunately, it appears the state that is the most cryptography-friendly and remains outside of the reach of US courts may be the UAE.
- nickslaughter02 1y ago
  > In March 2015, the Dubai Police declared the usage of VPN (virtual private network) illegal, saying that "tampering with the internet is a crime". Although action may not be taken against an individual for simply using a VPN, the usage of VPN combined with other illegal acts would lead to additional charges. > Popular instant messaging applications that remained blocked despite the removal of the ban on VoIP services included WhatsApp, FaceTime, and Skype. The selective relaxation of the ban narrowed down the user’s choice to premium (paid) services, owned by state-run telecommunication firms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_in_the_United_Arab_Emirates#Internet_censorship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_in_the_Unit...
Beijinger 1y ago
Russia would be pretty good right now (for non-Russians). If it is just a VPN, a "cybercompany" does not need to be incorporated somewhere. If is is just virtual, it does not have to follow any laws in a jurisdictions. Servers can come and go...
- bugtodiffer 1y ago
  Not if you want to be paid in normal countries

FirmwareBurner 1y ago

There's nowhere to go, since it's a constant game of whack-a-mole. Small island countries in the Caribbean can brag about super lax laws that aid privacy and evasion but none of them will ruin relationships with US or the EU just to protect a small 10 person privacy focused tech company when a warrants comes from abroad. For reference, Switzerland had to change their banking secrecy laws decades ago due to pressure from the US, Germany and France, so you can guess how well other weaker countries will fare against such pressure. And let's not forget the famous Crypto AG scandal in Switzerland, so I'm not buying the famous "Swiss privacy" marketing fluff at all anymore as much as I like the country. Just like Crypto AG, every tech company is, or will be, infiltrated by alphabet agencies by cooperation or by force. If you want real privacy you have to self host, that's the only way. Plus, I feel like we're focusing at the wrong issue here. Do we really want lawless places on this planet to exist where companies and individuals can escape the courts and law enforcement of their own nations? Something that will be exploited mostly for nefarious purposes than protecting privacy of law abiding people. The real solution is holding powerful governments accountable against invasions of privacy by their voters, not creating lawless zones where companies and powerful individuals can go and hide to avoid laws they dislike. If laws are bad, just change the laws, don't normalize law avoidance. If you normalize law avoidance about one thing, why not about other things as well like theft, taxation, human trafficking etc? The whole point of developed western nations is democratic representation, the strong rule of law and fairness of the court system. Write to your representative.

rubit_xxx20 1y ago
How about Sealand? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand
- volemo 1y ago
  What about Sealand? They can be all for privacy and freedom, but it’d all amount to nothing if they don’t have Internet connection, and connection is a two way consent, so Sealand is even worse for this purpose than island micro nations.
- viridian 1y ago
  Sealand is a fake country, a state without a nation. Even a nation without a military like Costa Rica can muster a defense via its people. Sealand on the other hand exists solely because no one cares to even acknowledge its existence. If Russia cut a deal to garrison troops there, that wikipedia page would see every "is" replaced with "was" before the day's end.
  - AStonesThrow 1y ago
    > Sealand on the other hand exists solely because no one cares to even acknowledge its existence. In the Infocom-produced Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, the player must enter his/her own brain and navigate a maze, in search of the Common Sense Particle, finding where it is lodged in this brain, and get rid of the blasted thing. Then the player may return to the Heart of Gold and, without hindrance of Common Sense, hold “No Tea” and “Tea” simultaneously in inventory. But that is just a computer game!!!
modzu 1y ago
if democracy ever threatened to change anything, it would be banned
zarzavat 1y ago
> Do we really want lawless places on this planet to exist where companies and individuals can escape the courts and law enforcement of their own nations? Yes. If the alternative is a worldwide police state.
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago
  >Yes. If the alternative is a worldwide police state. Being held accountable for crimes is your definition of a "police state"? Interesting. What you're trying to hint at is political persecution, and there is the possibility of asylum for that. But let's differentiate between persecution and running away from crimes, and not muddy the waters. Not all crimes are the result of persecution. Otherwise what's stopping anyone form breaking into your house, murdering your family to rob you and then fleeing abroad on asylum to avoid legal repercussions? If that was the status quo, you probably wouldn't exist anymore right now. The "police state" is the one ensuring your family's safety. In our modern societies, we have outsourced the monopoly on violence to the police state, so that we can focus on work and hobbies, and that comes at the expense of trusting the state and holding it accountable through democracy.
  - K0balt 1y ago
    I don’t think op meant that at all. Your response reads a lot like “if you don’t have anything to hide…” arguments against privacy and encryption. Liberty always comes with a cost. It is de-facto a lack of control by the state. It is precisely this lack of control that creates value in liberty. The state will always go through cycles of opinion, witch hunts, political interference, and other malfeasances of power. It will probably be corrected, only to temporarily careen off the rails again. This is -the best case scenario- for a healthy democracy. The only way to limit the effect of this meandering pathfinding on individuals is to place some things intentionally out of reach of the state. To abuse their power, then they must break the law. This triggers the correction that brings democracy back towards the just path. Without limits to break, the state will careen so far off the path that it may have a hard time righting itself. We must force the state to use open coercion when it wants to stretch the limits of its reach. This is a critical element for democracy to function… its reach must have well defined limits that stop well short of any legal activity, even if it means criminals and deviants will face less obstacles. This is the cost of freedom.

api 1y ago

Iceland? It’s tough. The world is, overall, going through a shift toward authoritarianism of various flavors, and people are voting for it because of incredibly successful propaganda and fear of change.

nickslaughter02 1y ago
going through a shift toward authoritarianism of various flavors It is the current establishment that is pushing for these laws. Switzerland and EU have proven you don't need authoritarianism to constantly attack privacy and security of people.
- api 1y ago
  I see two big brands of authoritarianism on the rise right now. One is populist strongman rule, usually but not always of a right wing bent. We have this rising in the US. The other is technocratic corporatism, the model of China and it seems a faction of the EU. Both endlessly malign democracy and liberalism as decadent, chaotic, and responsible for an endless parade of bogie men they will protect you against.
  - StefanBatory 1y ago
    Depends, in Poland our conservatives are way more aligned with Republicans.
- conradfr 1y ago
  And a lot of decision in the EU are made by unelected people, great democracy.
  - nickslaughter02 1y ago
    Unelected and anonymous. "EU Commission refuses to disclose authors behind its mass surveillance proposal" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44168134 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44168134
- 1y ago

ThatMedicIsASpy 1y ago

Mullvad (VPN) currently is in Sweden.

nickslaughter02 1y ago
For now. ProtectEU would require service providers to log metadata and beyond or face criminal charges. > For the first time, an EU expert group has explicitly mentioned VPN services as "key challenges" to the investigative work of law enforcement agencies, alongside encrypted devices, apps, and new communications operators. "VPN services may soon become a new target of EU lawmakers after being deemed a "key challenge"" https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/vpn-services-may-soon-become-a-new-target-of-eu-lawmakers-after-being-deemed-a-key-challenge https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/vpn-servi...

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

pclmulqdq 1y ago

Unfortunately, it appears the state that is the most cryptography-friendly and remains outside of the reach of US courts may be the UAE.

nickslaughter02 1y ago
> In March 2015, the Dubai Police declared the usage of VPN (virtual private network) illegal, saying that "tampering with the internet is a crime". Although action may not be taken against an individual for simply using a VPN, the usage of VPN combined with other illegal acts would lead to additional charges. > Popular instant messaging applications that remained blocked despite the removal of the ban on VoIP services included WhatsApp, FaceTime, and Skype. The selective relaxation of the ban narrowed down the user’s choice to premium (paid) services, owned by state-run telecommunication firms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_in_the_United_Arab_Emirates#Internet_censorship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_in_the_Unit...

Beijinger 1y ago

Russia would be pretty good right now (for non-Russians). If it is just a VPN, a "cybercompany" does not need to be incorporated somewhere. If is is just virtual, it does not have to follow any laws in a jurisdictions. Servers can come and go...

bugtodiffer 1y ago
Not if you want to be paid in normal countries