The EU wants to decrypt your private data by 2030(techradar.com)
techradar.com
The EU wants to decrypt your private data by 2030
https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/the-eu-wants-to-decrypt-your-private-data-by-2030
51 comments
One of the main politicians behind this is Swedish Social Democrat Ylva Johansson[1]; coming from a party with a long history of political surveillance[2]. Unlike East Germany, Sweden has never “dealt” with this past. She thinks this is how it should be.
1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ylva_Johansson?wprov=sfti1#Sur...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IB_affair?wprov=sfti1
1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ylva_Johansson?wprov=sfti1#Sur...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IB_affair?wprov=sfti1
Read the USAs "Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act" of 1994, it may change your mind. An FBI document from 2021 foiad by the property of the people org shows the FBI abilities to get information from encrypted messengers, which, simplified, shows that end2end encrypted services run by american corporations have backdoors for the american government. Which surprises no one, except patriots who never heard of the patriot act of 2001.
So is Meta committing fraud when claiming in it's policies that it has no access to user e2e data?
I can drive several large trucks through that sentence while answering no, so: no. There are so many ways to create a no there is an important point.
Related: you are in an audit. The auditor asks you if you know what the time is. Correct answer: yes.
Related: you are in an audit. The auditor asks you if you know what the time is. Correct answer: yes.
[deleted]
You're sending out masked gangs to grab people into vans to be trafficked overseas without due process or oversight. But sure, it's the EU with the overreach issues.
The whataboutism is completely, stupidly useless for dealing with this being a shitty, control-grabbing bit of cotton-gloved authoritarianism from the grey apparatchiks of the Union government.
Because the current administration of the U.S is creating its own legal monstrosities, people should just clam up about a complete grab on communications privacy from another major government?
Because the current administration of the U.S is creating its own legal monstrosities, people should just clam up about a complete grab on communications privacy from another major government?
What whataboutism? I was responding to the assertion that while things are bad in the US at least it's not as bad as Europe.
In no way did I suggest that European citizens should become complacent. I just wanted to question if the government commissioning a report which suggests they take a further look at some actions which could possibly infringe on privacy and which explicitly talks about doing it with respect to national privacy laws is really do much worse than people being disappeared by a government who is openly hostile to the rulings of the courts as well as to the media who dare to question it.
If there was any whatabout then it was in the GP comment, so maybe direct your ire towards them.
In no way did I suggest that European citizens should become complacent. I just wanted to question if the government commissioning a report which suggests they take a further look at some actions which could possibly infringe on privacy and which explicitly talks about doing it with respect to national privacy laws is really do much worse than people being disappeared by a government who is openly hostile to the rulings of the courts as well as to the media who dare to question it.
If there was any whatabout then it was in the GP comment, so maybe direct your ire towards them.
The last 50 times this was proposed it was rejected and I don't know why you think this time will be different. If it was proposed in the USA, it'd already be law by now (in fact it is already law in the USA), and to be struck down 6 months later by a sane supreme court (so not this one).
Also recently,
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44168134 ("EU Commission refuses to disclose authors behind its mass surveillance proposal", 292 comments)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44168134 ("EU Commission refuses to disclose authors behind its mass surveillance proposal", 292 comments)
I don't understand why they keep trying this over and over. It can't possibly be a moral crusade as it keeps happening with different players, but I don't understand the purpose.
We now live in a world where the opposite routinely happens: a crime happens, you give the police access to Apple or Google's Find Device / Find My data, they throw it in the trash. Law enforcement has more data to find and procecute criminals than they have time. People get scammed out of money by the thousands every day, over the phone, an insanely easy system to tap and trace. No one gets arrested.
Who is actually repeatedly pushing for things like these within the EU? For what purpose? What crimes went unprocecuted because of the unability to perform mass surveillance like this? It seems that all the time, when law enforcement actually cares about, it's trivial for them to get evidence? So why does this keep popping up every year?
We now live in a world where the opposite routinely happens: a crime happens, you give the police access to Apple or Google's Find Device / Find My data, they throw it in the trash. Law enforcement has more data to find and procecute criminals than they have time. People get scammed out of money by the thousands every day, over the phone, an insanely easy system to tap and trace. No one gets arrested.
Who is actually repeatedly pushing for things like these within the EU? For what purpose? What crimes went unprocecuted because of the unability to perform mass surveillance like this? It seems that all the time, when law enforcement actually cares about, it's trivial for them to get evidence? So why does this keep popping up every year?
You know the answer, you’re just not comfortable saying it out loud.
I really don't, what is the answer? I assume higher ups at law enforcement, who are detached from the day-to-day operations, make up excuses about "end to end encryption being a challenge" because it's a meme, much like execs in our fields parrot "challenges" to boards and VC investors that are often fully removed from actual execution issues.
And then because it comes up in slides so much at that higher level, politicians actually start thinking that's why we haven't solved all crime, our guys are competent and clearly they're not understaffed, it's that pesky "not being able to break end to end encryption" that is preventing law enforcement from doing their work!
And then because it comes up in slides so much at that higher level, politicians actually start thinking that's why we haven't solved all crime, our guys are competent and clearly they're not understaffed, it's that pesky "not being able to break end to end encryption" that is preventing law enforcement from doing their work!
>It can't possibly be a moral crusade as it keeps happening with different players, but I don't understand the purpose.
it's not a moral crusade. they don't give a shit about children. they don't give a shit about crime. to the people in power, crime - even the most heinous kind - is just background noise. the laughably short sentences given to the perpetrators of the most heinous crimes in the EU/UK reflect that.
mass surveillance is a means to identify and suppress dissent.
the people in power care only about maintaining it. it's that simple. and once you acknowledge that, it will finally make sense why the US/EU/UK are implementing the same measures that China and Russia do.
it's not a moral crusade. they don't give a shit about children. they don't give a shit about crime. to the people in power, crime - even the most heinous kind - is just background noise. the laughably short sentences given to the perpetrators of the most heinous crimes in the EU/UK reflect that.
mass surveillance is a means to identify and suppress dissent.
the people in power care only about maintaining it. it's that simple. and once you acknowledge that, it will finally make sense why the US/EU/UK are implementing the same measures that China and Russia do.
That's pretty much exactly why. The EU is structured in a way where various groups keep proposing things and the elected representatives keep voting against them. There's no law saying they can't keep proposing the same things that keep getting rejected, so, they do.
We have this exact same post multiple times a year, where an EU body proposes a bad encryption law and everyone gets angry about how authoritarian the EU is. And then everyone forgets about it before the elected representatives get to vote on it and they vote to reject it, but that doesn't get to the front page so it doesn't give everyone the opposite emotions.
Also, end-to-end encryption is a challenge to law enforcement - idk why you think that's a meme. If they could just spy on all citizens 24/7, they could solve crime so much more easily! (Now that's a meme)
We have this exact same post multiple times a year, where an EU body proposes a bad encryption law and everyone gets angry about how authoritarian the EU is. And then everyone forgets about it before the elected representatives get to vote on it and they vote to reject it, but that doesn't get to the front page so it doesn't give everyone the opposite emotions.
Also, end-to-end encryption is a challenge to law enforcement - idk why you think that's a meme. If they could just spy on all citizens 24/7, they could solve crime so much more easily! (Now that's a meme)
This.
From the article:
> Next year, the EU Commission is set to present a Technology Roadmap on encryption to identify and evaluate decrypting solutions. These technologies are expected to equip Europol officers from 2030.
> Now, lawmakers promise to be committed to finding the right balance between "allowing for efficient and future-proof solutions to facilitate law enforcement’s lawful access to digital information, while respecting the right to privacy and maintaining high levels of cybersecurity," said EU Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration, Magnus Brunner.
Basically the status now is "we've heard that most people think it is a really shitty idea, but we really, really think we can make it work and are going to come up with how! Just give us some time!"
It is misguided, wasted money and effort, and deserves to be called out as such; The chances of it actually being implemented are very, very small, however.
From the article:
> Next year, the EU Commission is set to present a Technology Roadmap on encryption to identify and evaluate decrypting solutions. These technologies are expected to equip Europol officers from 2030.
> Now, lawmakers promise to be committed to finding the right balance between "allowing for efficient and future-proof solutions to facilitate law enforcement’s lawful access to digital information, while respecting the right to privacy and maintaining high levels of cybersecurity," said EU Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration, Magnus Brunner.
Basically the status now is "we've heard that most people think it is a really shitty idea, but we really, really think we can make it work and are going to come up with how! Just give us some time!"
It is misguided, wasted money and effort, and deserves to be called out as such; The chances of it actually being implemented are very, very small, however.
I’d imagine there’s a lot of money chasing around the lobby and some of it just slushes into things like these. Easy passive income when you think about it.
It's sad to see Europe's influence fading, and instead of investing in innovation, politicians are focused on stripping even more freedoms from their citizens.
That's pretty much all the major governments these days. Globally we're sliding back to authoritarianism, likely as a prelude to WWIII
When privacy is criminalised, only criminals have privacy.
Also a state where a police makes the laws is called a police state.
For example, East Germany was a police state, so Europe has a rich history on the topic.
Also a state where a police makes the laws is called a police state.
For example, East Germany was a police state, so Europe has a rich history on the topic.
a rich and fascinating history. If i may recommend a wikipedia article: "Cabinet Noir", which includes: "by the 1700s, cryptanalysis was becoming industrialized"
The EU just doesn’t have the tech muscle to make this happen now or ever. They’re pros at cranking out regulations, but when it comes to the actual tech know-how, they’re kind of out of their depth.
I was thinking the same. Plus who cares, I or probably most people here can encrypt their own data. If I were ever to send things to the "cloud", it would be encrypted on my local system first by me before uploading it.
If this is enabled, all they will get to see is LOL cats, data they would really want to see will still be invisible to them.
If this is enabled, all they will get to see is LOL cats, data they would really want to see will still be invisible to them.
The EU always sounds schizophrenic when you call each of its individual parts "the EU". These proposals are proposed every year and never accepted.
The EU clearly moves in that authoritarian direction, not away from it.
Each and every state does nowadays
Any legislative body keeps making legislature, yes, that's what it does.
Most legislative bodies make a lot of legislature that keeps things away from people, like GDPR. That's "authoritarian" if by "authoritarian" you mean "more legislation". If by "authoritarian" you mean "more interference with people's lives" then it's actually anti-authoritarian.
Most legislative bodies make a lot of legislature that keeps things away from people, like GDPR. That's "authoritarian" if by "authoritarian" you mean "more legislation". If by "authoritarian" you mean "more interference with people's lives" then it's actually anti-authoritarian.
Like introducing the GDPR, one of the most far reaching privacy protecting laws ever?
The only authoritarian moves are the ones by radical right national parties in the member states of the EU.
The only authoritarian moves are the ones by radical right national parties in the member states of the EU.
Wild that Marshall McCluhan prophesied all of this before the technology to achieve it was around.
He got the message out there, we just didn't listen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan#Legacy
He got the message out there, we just didn't listen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan#Legacy
So how will this work, if this becomes law? Ok, I understand whatsapp and signal and whatnot will have to change their code inorder to be able to provide cleartext messages for the goverment.
But there are other, maybe less known apps. Will all github repos that try to achieve e2ee be shut down? Won’t such apps just move to Tor?
But there are other, maybe less known apps. Will all github repos that try to achieve e2ee be shut down? Won’t such apps just move to Tor?
We can compare it to anything that's already illegal, like distributing child porn for example. What do you think happens to github repos that distribute child porn? Won't they just move to Tor? Enforcement of one illegal bitstream is the same as enforcement of another illegal bitstream.
It is bad enough that AI is a threat to millions of existing jobs today, and this will just worsen for the unprepared in 2030.
Now we have this introduced from the complete lunacy of the EU.
Could 2030 get any more worse?
Now we have this introduced from the complete lunacy of the EU.
Could 2030 get any more worse?
Could someone with strong background in this area perhaps shine a light on this?
Is this essentially the EU empowering its constituent nation states to deeply compromise security practices? Or is this just basic capability building for mass communication surveillance?
There is little a private man can do against state actors. Of course, I could operate my encrypted backups with my antique Raspberry Pi in a Faraday cage. But … really?
Also, how does this not backfire when taking account third accounts?
Is this essentially the EU empowering its constituent nation states to deeply compromise security practices? Or is this just basic capability building for mass communication surveillance?
There is little a private man can do against state actors. Of course, I could operate my encrypted backups with my antique Raspberry Pi in a Faraday cage. But … really?
Also, how does this not backfire when taking account third accounts?
So you’re telling me that all of the grandstanding the EU and Europeans do about how much more they care about their citizens and protecting them from the evil American privacy invading capitalists was all BS?
this proposal will get rejected just like the last 50 of these proposals. If it was in the USA, it'd already be law.
I mean they can try.
And when they fail and you don’t give them your keys they will throw you in jail.
No, when they fail no such law will be passed.
When they fail they will pretend that the CEO of a messaging company is actually a criminal mastermind, and will throw him in jail for almost a week as soon as he steps into a european country, then he will not be allowed to leave the country for over a year, but I'm obviously exaggerating this would never happen, right?
[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/telegram-pavel-durov-travel-...
[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/telegram-pavel-durov-travel-...
You mean the same guy that actively tried to use his platform to spread Russian propaganda and destabilize European elections? https://meduza.io/en/feature/2025/05/20/completely-unfounded...
They do that already.
Remember GDPR?
Yeah, what of it? It helps protect my privacy rights online, though enforcement is severely lacking.
Hacker News intentionally doesn't comply with it, by the way - as a pure USA website which doesn't take payments, they didn't really have to, but they chose to make an ideology out of it anyway.
Hacker News intentionally doesn't comply with it, by the way - as a pure USA website which doesn't take payments, they didn't really have to, but they chose to make an ideology out of it anyway.
My comment, which, upon reflection was poorly written, was supposed to imply "remember how the European Union pretended to care about privacy, and created GDPR? That same european union wants to do this"
GDPR is great for privacy. All these sites that track you have to tell you all the ways they track you and trick you into clicking "consent".
And it made the web experience way worse. Would have been much better to just take back the cookie popups in the browsers, and require each site to publish ToS in a standard format to the browser. I want to approve each data sink once, and each type of clause in ToSes once. They took the technically easy way out. Not very well thought out, but great for adding web dev jobs, of course.
Yes, the GDPR should have gone much further and just banned tracking. But we live in free-market capitalism (an oxymoron in the long run btw) so it was deemed unacceptable to take away people's ability to choose to give up their own rights.
Yes because the 11 chapter 99 article law that was passed really needs to be more complicated…
[deleted]
In the USA our founding fathers wrote the constitution to limit government, not citizens. For sure, we have strayed away from this ideal, but things here are not as bad as apparently they are in the EU.