[TRANSLATED ARTICLE]
EU chat control comes – through the back door of voluntariness
The EU states have agreed on a common position on chat control. Data protection advocates warn against massive surveillance. What is in store for us?
After lengthy negotiations, the EU states have agreed on a common position on so-called chat control. Like from one Minutes of negotiations of the Council working group As can be seen, Internet services will in future be allowed to voluntarily search their users' communications for information about crimes, but will not be obliged to do so.
The Danish Council Presidency wants to get the draft law through the Council "as quickly as possible", "so that the trilogue negotiations can begin promptly", the minutes say. Feedback from states should be limited to "absolute red lines".
Consensus achieved
The majority of States supported the compromise proposal. At least 15 spoke in favor, including Germany and France. Germany "welcomed both the deletion of the mandatory measures and the permanent anchoring of voluntary measures", said the protocol.
However, other countries were disappointed. Spain in particular "continued to see mandatory measures as necessary, unfortunately a comprehensive agreement on this was not possible". Hungary also "seen voluntariness as the sole concept as too little".
Spain, Hungary and Bulgaria proposed "an obligation for providers to detect, at least in open areas". The Danish Presidency "described the proposal as ambitious, but did not take it up to avoid further discussion.
The organization Netzpolitik.org, which has been reporting critically on chat control for years, sees the plans as a fundamental threat to democracy. "From the beginning, a lobby network intertwined with the security apparatus pushed chat control", writes the organization. “It was never really about the children, otherwise it would get to the root of abuse and violence instead of monitoring people without any initial suspicion.”
Netzpolitik.org argues that "encrypted communication is a thorn in the side of the security apparatus". Authorities have been trying to combat private and encrypted communication in various ways for years.
A number of scholars criticize the compromise proposal, calling voluntary chat control inappropriate. "Their benefits have not been proven, while the potential for harm and abuse is enormous", one said open letter.
According to critics, the planned technology, so-called client-side scanning, would create a backdoor on all users' devices. Netzpolitik.org warns that this represents a "frontal attack on end-to-end encryption, which is vital in the digital world".
The problem with such backdoors is that "not only the supposedly 'good guys' can use them, but also resourceful criminals or unwell-disposed other states", argues the organization.
Signal considers withdrawing from the EU
Journalists' associations are also alarmed by the plans. The DJV rejects chat control as a form of mass surveillance without cause and sees source protection threatened, for which encrypted communication is essential. The infrastructure created in this way can be used for political control "in just a few simple steps", said the DJV in a statement Opinion.
The Messenger service Signal Already announced that it would withdraw from the EU if necessary. Signal President Meredith Whittaker told the dpa: “Unfortunately, if we were given the choice of either undermining the integrity of our encryption or leaving Europe, we would make the decision to leave the market.”
Next steps in the legislative process
The Permanent Representatives of the EU states are due to meet next week on the subject, followed in December by the Ministers of Justice and Home Affairs, these two bodies are due to approve the bill as the Council's official position.
The trilogue then begins, in which the Commission, Parliament and Council must reach a compromise from their three draft laws. Parliament had described the original plans as mass surveillance and called for only unencrypted suspect content to be scanned.
The EU Commission had originally proposed requiring Internet services to search their users' content for information about crimes without cause and to send it to authorities if suspected.
fuck's sake Germany
Sorry, best we can do is deport some brown people.
It's been very interesting since I've moved to Germany.
I'm white, and not once during train checks have I ever been spoken too or asked for my info.
However, every single person that's slightly tanned is asked for their identification. Also the German officers often speak English to these people they suspect of being here illegally. I can't tell you how many times I've seen the person they're questioning respond in Germany and pull out a German passport or one from an EU nation. But if I had to guess I'd say 9/10 times that's the case. In the remaining 1/10 times the questioned almost always pull out a visa or a valid passport.
It's a huge waste of time and I've only seen 1 person ever taken off the train.
Frankly border checks like this are pointless. They select very few people to ask for their documents. Frankly if I was in a position to be entering the country illegally from one of the bordering nations I'd just walk across and take a bus to the next town over before taking a train. It's not like there are border guards at most crossings, they only ever check the trains, and don't check outside of border crossing. All of this to say it's security theater that isn't accomplishing much, is a waste of resources, and is usually racist in application.
@arrow74
ICE was useless, most of the times. Until it got abused. It was designed for abuse. What Bundespolizei now does, is just the same ICE did. And it's designed for abuse.
@einkorn
Having come from the US this is infinitely better than ICE. The officers are at least polite about it and once they recieve paperwork quietly move on. While the racial bias is clear the checks are non-invasive and quick for those selected.
Nobody is being dragged into unmarked vans that I've seen. Nobody is being randomly detained and searched on the train. Trust me it can get a whole lot worse.
Even before the Trump administration ICE was way more aggressive and abusive when they began questioning someone. German border control seems to either be better trained or have more limits on their power.
By acknowledging what they are doing wrong now and how frankly ineffective it is hopefully you can avoid becoming like ICE. But if things continue on the current path it wouldn't be good
In continental Europe you must have governemnt ID and in some countries you have to have it at all times with you and show it to authorities if requested. If I understand USA correctly there is no such system in place over there and thus enforcment is kinda difficult.
Yes the 4th amendment makes it to where police cannot simply check your ID, and as you said it's not required to carry either.
Our police should be trained to respect our citizens and their rights. Too bad that makes it difficult for them. Instead they are trained to be belligerent to get what they want.
I agree that police should be nice. Just wanted to point out that its vastly different system.
I can't speak for the other continental nations but that is not correct for Germany. You just have to have an ID. You don't have to have it with you at all times.
@arrow74 @einkorn the boss of the boss of the boss of the bundespolizei is most likely a racist, that´s why......