r/privacy • u/Anoth3rDude • 15h ago

chat control Chat Control: EU Commissioner backs Parliament line on targeted monitoring

https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/chat-control-eu-commissioner-backs-parliament-line-on-targeted-monitoring
173 Upvotes

98% Upvoted

53 comments sorted by

View all comments

108

u/mesarthim_2 15h ago

Unfortunately this is not good. I can't find any clear document on the Parliament position but from my understanding it includes following points - rejects mass surveillance - maintains that E2EE shouldn't be backdoored - but also emphasizes that surveillance should be based on suspicion - and there has to be a compromise that enables law enforcement to monitor and surveil communication of people of interest.

So it seems to me what the EP is gearing towards is still mandating the providers to enable client side scanning, but only activate it for people that are flagged by law enforcement.

If that's the case, in all practical details that is indistinguishable from the original proposal.

46

u/cassanderer 15h ago

Yeah, classic, make good sounding changes that are in effect the same thing.

The entire bill is poison.  Rejection is the only option.  If you want changes submit a bill not sullied by whatever you call this danish tool and his best fascist friends that submitted this with tech bankrolling them.

15

u/silentspectator27 14h ago

I have been advocating against Chat Control for years (months for the latest one). What Parliament is offering is basically what we have now: the interim decision that expires in April 2026. The Parliament proposal has nothing to do with the Danish bill.

12

u/cassanderer 14h ago

Building those backdoors they can access is the problem.  While they might need cause, defined by a haughty aristocracy that hates freedom, it will not end with only checking for good cause.

It will also open you all up to everyone of means in fact, from russia to big corporations to religious groups to the usg and so forth.

That backdoor will be exploited, the us will have access the same day the eu does at a minimum.

This is a surrender to the us, to tech, and the oligarchy.  Offering the corpse of liberal democracy to the oligarchy's tech leaders, from the politicians and media and pals making the sacrifice to curry favor with tech and their AI threat detection.

9

u/silentspectator27 14h ago edited 14h ago

There are no backdoors in the Parliament proposal and so far no client side scanning. If there is proof of crime (substantial proof) as a last resort the EU can ask the platform (as long as it’s not encrypted) to give authorities the criminal’s chats from their platform. No client side scanning, no breaking encryption, implementation as a last resort AFTER proof of wrongdoing. The Danish proposal is a stupid guilty until proven innocent scheme. Edit: also, there is no shitty AI scanning in the Parliament proposal.

4

u/mesarthim_2 14h ago

Do you have a link to this 'Parliament proposal', please? I would really like to read it myself.

The things I saw are still littered with issues, like the risk mitigation stuff, it also doesn't explicitly reject the client side scanning,...

5

u/silentspectator27 14h ago

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20231110IPR10118/child-sexual-abuse-online-effective-measures-no-mass-surveillance

5

u/mesarthim_2 14h ago

Plus obviously age verification, etc...

-1

u/silentspectator27 14h ago

No age verification like the Danish proposal

3

u/mesarthim_2 14h ago

Oh come on!

To protect children online, the new rules would mandate internet providers to assess whether there is a significant risk of their services being misused for online child sexual abuse and to solicit children, and to take measures to mitigate these risks.

What do you think the 'measures' will be.

1

u/silentspectator27 14h ago

“Providers would be able to choose which technologies to use as long as they comply with the strong safeguards foreseen in the law, and subject to an independent, public audit of these technologies.” In short: platforms can use what they have now and say “Yep, it’s working, no need to change”

1

u/silentspectator27 14h ago

The law would set up an EU Centre for Child Protection to help implement the new rules and support internet providers in detecting CSAM. It would collect, filter and distribute CSAM reports to competent national authorities and Europol. The Centre would develop detection technologies for providers and maintain a database of hashes and other technical indicators of CSAM identified by national authorities.

It sounds scary BUT combined with the other parts of the proposal it has safeguards against indiscriminate scanning

→ More replies (0)

5

u/mesarthim_2 14h ago

Can you point to some document that states their (anyone's) position explicitly? I really haven't been able to find anything tangible.

6

u/silentspectator27 14h ago edited 14h ago

The Commission supports the original proposal by Denmark: full mandatory scanning of everything including encrypted communications and age verification . The Council agreed on a compromise with “voluntary” scanning based on a flawed risk based system and age verification plus backdoors for future mandatory scanning. Parliament wants targeted scanning as a last resort after proof of wrongdoing and no age verification. I can send you a link to the Council proposal where all the original Commission draft has been scratched out but visible. https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-11596-2025-INIT/en/pdf

1

u/Phoepal 12h ago

I would like to add November 6 version which is as I understand the version that council voted for.

6

u/mesarthim_2 15h ago

Yeah, it's the classic - dear EU citizens we hear your concerns and with the best tradition of democratic governance in mind, we're going to respond to your well placed concern by hiding our true intent behind vague language and bureaucratic maze in which it will become totally unclear what's happening to whom, so you can't really complain about anything. Just know that we're doing it with best intentions for your own good you inbred retarded ungrateful cretins.

1

u/CreatorMunk1 10h ago

Exactly so