European Union | European Parliament
results.elections.europa.eu
Official results of the European elections held between 6 and 9 June 2024.

The results are showing up… Now we have to hope for the law to be declined… Already discussed about the chat control law of the EU, here : https://lemmy.ml/post/16469106

  • ItsComplicated@sh.itjust.works
    281·
    5 months ago

    Doesn’t scanning before upload imply the encryption is broken somewhere? Is that the point, to remove encryption? Forgive my naivete.

    • foremanguy@lemmy.mlOP
      221·
      5 months ago

      For sure! The EU will tell to the apps to backdoored their encryption to accept this law. For example Google, Meta and Microsoft are okay with it if it is implemented. And Signal would leave the EU market.

  • makeasnek@lemmy.mlEnglish
    23·
    5 months ago

    We need more censorship-resistant, private, decentralized communication protocols. We need them to be widespread enough that lawmakers see censoring/controlling them as technically impossible and politically unwise. That means they need to be easy to use for the average person so we can get sufficient adoption. Donate to your software of choice, that’s how it happens.

    This is kinda how Bitcoin is. Even if a nation-sate wants to “ban” it or attack the network, the network is gonna keep working and doing its thing (technically impossible) and they will piss off a bunch of voters and/or other keys to political power and potentially lose out on businesses and jobs building in this sector (politically unwise). The CCP tried to ban Bitcoin some years ago, did not work at all, and the network wasn’t nearly as strong or large as it is today.

    • Korkki@lemmy.world
      242·
      5 months ago

      political elites in Europe are afraid and fear upheavals are coming in the coming years and months because of the cost of living crisis and the war. They try to clamp down beforehand to preserve their own power. This always happens when things go bad. The leash is kept looser when people behave and it’s tightened again when the opposite happens. There is no real freedoms that is given to the people by the elites, because what concessions they give willingly they can just as easily take away when they no longer feel like it. Provided that they think they can get away with it.

      • archchan@lemmy.ml
        131·
        5 months ago

        It’s not just European elites who are afraid of upheaval. It’s all of them. It’s one of the reasons why they all have bunkers, why Zuckerberg is building another one in Hawaii recently. They know that we can actually do something about them because we outnumber them by a lot, so they build these systems of control. Governments, corps, elites have all become noticeably more brazen in the past several years.

      • GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml
        9·
        5 months ago

        This is why we shouldn’t let such people to the government in the first place. Anyone who believes in “patriotism” and “national interest” (that appears to be 99% of people in the democratic world) will disagree though. It’s a matter of double standards, lack of understanding and care at this point

    • Daaric@lemmy.world
      7·
      5 months ago

      Never, they’ll try again and again with different names, covered by different purposes and stuck to another law.

  • emberpunk@lemmy.mlEnglish
    4·
    5 months ago

    It is cute that they think they can regulate the use of math and how the internet can be used.

    lol

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipEnglish
    41·
    5 months ago

    If this ever makes it to the US I am going to put up a hell of a fight. On my left will be California and on my right Texas.

  • Elise@beehaw.org
    21·
    5 months ago

    Lol Facebook was too dumb to even share my father’s posts when he joined. Just kept spamming me with rage bait and posts from someone obnoxious I met at a party years before and never really had a real contact with. How is this company supposed to detect anything? To me it’s just a cesspool that provides a few people with power.

    Let’s imagine the error rate would be 0%, anonimity is a right and none of the privacy tools are broken, would you be on board with it? Or are there concerns I am missing here.

    • foremanguy@lemmy.mlOP
      3·
      5 months ago

      That’s why the EU wants to control the chats. They would ask to software producers to backdoor their apps, and Meta Google and Microsoft would be OK with it.

      • Elise@beehaw.org
        1·
        5 months ago

        You mean like a secret power motive? I’ve never sought that in the EU. Would appreciate any references.

        • foremanguy@lemmy.mlOP
          4·
          5 months ago

          Read this how it affects you text : https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/posts/chat-control/#how-does-this-affect-you

          All of your chat conversations and emails will be automatically searched for suspicious content. Nothing remains confidential or secret. There is no requirement of a court order or an initial suspicion for searching your messages. It occurs always and automatically.

          Intelligence services and hackers may be able to spy on your private chats and emails. The door will be open for anyone with the technical means to read your messages if secure encryption is removed in order to be able to screen messages.

          • Elise@beehaw.org
            2·
            5 months ago

            Hmm I’m not under that impression, at least not from the parliament. I’m unfamiliar with the dynamic between the commission and the parliament but it might be that the commission tends to state what’s possible and the parliament then picks what they want.

            It’s not a backdoor as far as I understand it and it doesn’t compromise e2ee, but a scan on a system you trust. Local or on a server you trust.

            The only issue I personally have is with the error rate. It seems to be at 80%. Personally I would find any level of error a problem. I don’t see any reasonable solution with our current tech.

            • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
              4·
              5 months ago

              By acting as a man-in-the-middle with the ability to read unencrypted message data (absolutely required in order to try to match against known CSAM), this is absolutely providing a backdoor as well as undermining privacy and security. By needing to trust another party, there is now a greater threat surface which is outside of end user control. One compromised account with access to that third-party is all it would take to extract private details from any messages, undetected, whether for sale on there blackmarket or for suppressing political dissidents, that’s exactly where this would go and we know this because state actors have been caught doing it and getting their toolkits leaked to criminals.

              This kind of law doesn’t make children or regular people any safer.

              • Elise@beehaw.org
                2·
                5 months ago

                I think we have different information. What I’ve read showed that the commission had a very broad and extreme proposal just as you just mentioned. I’d definitely not be on board with that.

                However the parliament’s proposal was way more restrictive. If I understood it right it’s the commission that makes proposals but the parliament can react to it and this goes back and forth. The parliament is the one in the end that turns it into law.

                I’m still a newbie in this area because I wasn’t able to vote due to my circumstances until last week.

                As I mentioned before this might just be a standard day at the office for them. The commission makes wide and extreme proposals. Perhaps they even survey that stuff and look at the public opinion and allow time for debate. Eventually they create a reasonable law.

  • Zerush@lemmy.ml
    21·
    5 months ago

    The only is avoid centralized chats, using decentralized encrypted ones. For all those which use Watsfuck and others like these Google-Zuckerbot derivates it makes anyway no difference if the EU scan or not their chats, especially using stock iPhone or Android.

      • Zerush@lemmy.ml
        2·
        5 months ago

        Yeah, wait for it. Even in China they are not cappable to control all the privacy tricks and measures for messages by the users. Where there is a law, there is also a trick to go around it, I doubt very much that they manage to control more than the usual chat apps, the effort would be economically unaffordable to do it also in decentralized or even on self-hosted private networks.

        • smiletolerantly@awful.systems
          5·
          5 months ago

          They don’t actually have to enforce that though. Rather, it’s a neat trick: if you do use encrypted chats, well, you’re purposefully doing something illegal! To hide information, no less! That surely means you have more to hide, and since you’ve already broken a law, let’s investigate further!

          To be clear: I’m not saying this is the intended effect. But it is a frighteningly possible one. Anyone who has reason to hide their communication (regime critical activists, opposition politicians, investigative journalists,…) either have to

          • accept that their communication will be scanned, making it trivial to spy on them and use that information (legally, no less!) to hinder/stop them, or
          • do something illegal, giving pretext for hindering/stopping them since they’ve now committed a crime
          • Zerush@lemmy.ml
            3·
            5 months ago

            the argument ?I’ve nothing to hide? isn’t valid. Ask the people if then it’s also OK if the Postman or anyone else read their private correspondence, or is looking over their shoulder while you are chatting with someone, above you are investigated by the authorities when you try to avoid it, it’s exactly the same

          • foremanguy@lemmy.mlOP
            2·
            5 months ago

            They don’t want to forbid the encryption only to backdoor to have a control on it. But that’s almost impossible to backdoor all of them…

        • foremanguy@lemmy.mlOP
          1·
          5 months ago

          I know that the law is almost impossible to apply but first we have to stop it, if they gain the power of reading trough WhatsApp and else, they could ask for more after

    • menas@lemmy.wtf
      1·
      5 months ago

      I read the text, and didn’t find anything on centralize or decentralize messenger. Are you talking about the technical solution they want to use ? The text is very confusing about it.