from the first-one-way-then-the-other dept.
The Independent quotes France's interior minister, Bernard Cazeneuve, as saying
Exchanges carried out via applications like Telegram must be identified and used in the course of judicial proceedings.
[...] We propose that the EU Commission studies the possibility of a legislative act introducing rights and obligations for operators to force them to remove illicit content or decrypt messages as part of investigations, whether or not they are based in Europe.
Similar intentions have been announced by the UK government in the past. Those are still up for debate but were walked back at least slightly in the face of an angry reaction from campaigners and activists.
The same article says that Germany will make the same request.
Previously:
European Privacy Body Slams Shut Backdoors Everywhere
Related Stories
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Europe's privacy body has reiterated its pro-privacy, anti-backdoor stance.
The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) Giovanni Buttarelli has long expressed the view that “privacy versus security” is a false dichotomy. In 2015, he told a conference in Brussels that “the objective of cyber-security may be misused to justify measures which weaken protection of [data protection] rights”.
He's now issued a much longer dissertation on the topic, the Preliminary EDPS Opinion on the review of the ePrivacy Directive, here (PDF).
The ePrivacy framework needs to be extended, the opinion states, it needs to be clarified, and it needs better enforcement.
The document also says the emergence of new services since the directive was first issued means it needs a thorough update. For example, Buttarelli's document states that there's a danger that new services erode privacy protections even though they're “functionally equivalent” to existing services.
For example, he writes, VoIP services should afford users the same privacy protection as traditional phone services, as should mobile messaging apps.
Likewise, he highlights the risk that the Internet of Things erodes privacy because the directive doesn't pay enough attention to machine-to-machine communications.
On encryption, Buttarelli is unequivocal:
The prohibition on backdoors would be universal, the EDPS writes: encryption providers, communication service providers, and “all other organisations (at all levels of the supply chain)” should be prohibited from “allowing or facilitating” backdoors.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Nerdfest on Wednesday August 24 2016, @08:24PM
Good encryption does not recognize borders, nor does stupidity apparently.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 24 2016, @08:34PM
I don't know how I feel about it. On one hand, they've a more desperate and even, yes, legitimate, need for such drastic measures than, say, the US does or ever has, though I see that changing for the US within the next, oh... five years or so.
On the other hand, it's a need that was created in the first place by the same people who are doing the asking. If you need to create new problems to solve the problems you've already created, maybe you're the ACTUAL problem.
And on the other, other hand, it's borderline silly and outright unrealistic from a technical point of view.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 24 2016, @08:39PM
Go to war with the techies. See what happens.
(Score: 5, Informative) by stormreaver on Wednesday August 24 2016, @08:58PM
On one hand, they've a more desperate and even, yes, legitimate, need for such drastic measures...
No, they don't have a legitimate need for it. Remember, none of the terrorist attacks were facilitated by encryption. They were all carried out in plain sight.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anal Pumpernickel on Wednesday August 24 2016, @09:04PM
There wouldn't be a legitimate need for it even if there were terrorist attacks that were facilitated by encryption. Sacrificing everyone's privacy to stop a few terrorists is unjust beyond belief, and therefore such a false need could never be described as legitimate.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 24 2016, @09:33PM
This (crazy) idea is from the same (crazy) people that think groping everybody's crotch in airports stops terrorism. Crazy!
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 24 2016, @10:23PM
Be fair, we don't check everyone's crotch, just the good-looking ones.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by sjames on Wednesday August 24 2016, @09:53PM
As Stormreaver pointed out, thus far, encryption hasn't been a factor at all in their problems, so they have no legitimate reason.
Next up, they've apparently been living under a rock. The NSA losing it's tools demonstrates that the gold key will likely leak sooner or later (I'm guessing sooner) and will fall into the hands of exactly the wrong people. They will have made sitting ducks of their citizens.
(Score: 2) by stormreaver on Friday August 26 2016, @02:19PM
The NSA losing it's tools demonstrates that the gold key will likely leak sooner or later (I'm guessing sooner) and will fall into the hands of exactly the wrong people. They will have made sitting ducks of their citizens.
Which is exactly why I hold the view that the lawmakers pushing for these backdoors are actively aiding and abetting terrorists, pedophiles, and all forms of criminals. They are providing aid and comfort to the enemy. If that phrase doesn't ring a significant bell, click on this link:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Aid+and+Comfort [thefreedictionary.com]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Francis on Wednesday August 24 2016, @11:26PM
At present there's no evidence to suggest that a lack of backdoors is actually holding investigations back with any frequency.
Cases where there's evidence locked in an encrypted volume are rare. The criminals they catch tend to be stupid enough that they hand the police the relevant data without need of breaking into it. Or they hack into the computer and use a keylogger to get the necessary password to decrypt the drive.
The main reason why they want it, is because they're looking for more power, not because there's this large volume of drives that they absolutely need to decrypt otherwise the terrorist will blow up puppies.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 25 2016, @02:34PM
maybe you're the ACTUAL problem.
Yes, we are the problem, but you need more of us to solve the problem. Monies pleeez...
(Score: 2) by tibman on Wednesday August 24 2016, @08:44PM
Yeah, not sure what they are thinking. But the next step would be to make it illegal (for citizens) to use unbreakable* encryption. Yikes! But to be fair, everyone knows (or should know) Skype is not secure [wikipedia.org] but plenty of people still use it. Not only is it unsecure but it actively undermines your privacy and security. So this law (or one like it) will probably pass. Leading to the next step..
*Unbreakable also meaning unbackdoored
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Wednesday August 24 2016, @09:22PM
Any Microsoft product should be considered unsafe due to backdoors.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Wednesday August 24 2016, @11:28PM
Backdoors? I'd be more concerned with bugs. MS doesn't exactly hire the best and brightest or bother to retain them long enough to properly secure the OS. Right now the average length of employment is less than 18 months at a go.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 25 2016, @03:05PM
Right now the average length of employment is less than 18 months at a go.
You got numbers to back that claim up, boy?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 24 2016, @09:08PM
Both politicians are not particularly popular (Germany's de Maiziere probably even less so than his French counterpart) and are appealing to right-wing protest voters (Front National in France, AfD in Germany) in view of upcoming elections...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 25 2016, @12:11AM
Why would the right wing want to ban encryption?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 25 2016, @06:22AM
At least in Germany these voters are mostly computer-illiterate people in the 60+ age group. They just want "control" over some unseen evil in a world that is increasingly "too young" for them to understand.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by ewk on Thursday August 25 2016, @11:15AM
What you cannot see, you cannot control.
Since right wingers want to control everything/everyone, you need to be able to see everything/everyone.
Hence the 'need' for backdoored encryption (or 'need' for the prohibition of wearing hoodies/masks on certain venues).
I don't always react, but when I do, I do it on SoylentNews
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 24 2016, @08:31PM
Your data is no longer encrypted you fuckin stupids!
(Score: 3, Informative) by bob_super on Wednesday August 24 2016, @09:13PM
They can't know that. It's not like anyone has ever very recently leaked a Golden Key ...
On the other hand, I'm happy that they feel they need a law. That means they don't have an easy way to break known encryptions.
They'll get he law passed in Brussels, so they can as usual point to Evil EU when they are "forced" to implement the privacy-busting directive and people protest. (then they'll wonder about Brexit having children)
And the real bad people will just download an open-source non-backdoored version (or a potentially-backdoored one from any random country they have no reason to fear).
(Score: 3, Interesting) by tangomargarine on Wednesday August 24 2016, @09:41PM
On the other hand, I'm happy that they feel they need a law. That means they don't have an easy way to break known encryptions.
Also it implies they aren't like the authorities in the U.S., in that they can do whatever the hell they want then come up with justifications for it later. And sometimes even the justifications are blatantly illegal.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 24 2016, @10:38PM
France's interior minister, Bernard Cazeneuve after being informed that government key escrow was imminent, has expressed his gratification with the move [youtube.com].
(Score: 2) by Kunasou on Wednesday August 24 2016, @08:42PM
As always only Germany and his dog, France do something in the EU. Going beyond their borders.
Backdoors ain't a new thing either.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by quietus on Wednesday August 24 2016, @09:28PM
Actually, the reverse -- this is not how the EU works.
When the big countries make such a public announcement, it is always for internal political consumption. For France, it breaks the rhythm of Sarkozy's announcement last weekend he's going to run again for president; Merkel in Germany is busy destroying the AfD, and getting some CSU voters, with initiatives like faster deportation and better follow-up of asylum seekers, moves to introduce a general ban on the burkini, and just today telling Turks in Germany they should show which country they really belong to. Both countries move somewhat in tandem with regards to these announcements over the last month and a half or so, indicating both the Hollande and Merkel administration get along quite well.
If it were for real, you wouldn't have heard from it so publicly before it got into Parliament, would have come out of a bunch of smaller nations, with the initial support of a bigger country (Germany, France, Italy, Spain), then stepwise agreed upon by the other members.
Finally, chances are smaller nations are likely to be more outward-looking than former Empires, as they don't have to carry too much historical baggage, and never were bounded by the illusion of self-sufficiency anyway.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 24 2016, @09:37PM
Can somebody with more knowledge of the German zeitgeist comment on this?
I somewhat understand why France would support this, especially in recent past and the ongoing "state of emergency." However, Germany (for better or worse) seems to have a lot of cultural awareness and shame of the Holocaust. My understanding is that, as such, they tend to be among the strongest supporters of privacy rights in the world.
Am I mistaken? Did something change in the past five years?
(Score: 1) by quietus on Wednesday August 24 2016, @10:20PM
Political consumption. Merkel is mowing away the grass before the feet of right-wing populists (and the CSU). It's not only this encryption thing; she also in recent weeks made moves against [ibtimes.co.uk] the burqa/burkini, talked about [yahoo.com] deals with African countries to quickly take back asylum seekers, and just today called upon German Turks to prove their loyalty [reuters.com] to Germany. All moves to the right side of the political spectrum; there are 2 important state-level elections [wsj.com] coming up next; and a bit of a rumor that her sell-by date is close to passing, especially if she can't handle the migration "crisis".
I'm not German though -- maybe someone with more intimate knowledge of the German news cycle can elaborate a bit further.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 24 2016, @11:34PM
It is not the place of government to dictate attire.
Nobody from Africa has any right to be seeking asylum in the EU.
The woman is delusional.
Not really.
There is no migration "crisis", Merkels position was dictated by the worlds favourite psychopathic jewish nazi. [jpost.com]
The EU support immigration because they want to destroy national identities and supplant the nation state, their wealthy supporters because they will plunder national wealth in the resultant chaos. [rt.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 25 2016, @03:56PM
So basically Merkel has been drifting towards the Nationalistic in recent past, especially in regard to upcoming elections, and everything shifts as a result?
Thanks for the summary.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 24 2016, @10:03PM
Good luck with that. Your stupid laws dont apply here.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 24 2016, @10:35PM
Wars don't pop-up over night.
normally they are kept secret and a lot of planning needs to be done before hand.
as some have pointed out, many a terrorist spends a successful day being a terrorist without using much encryption.
thus, i am lead to belief, that something more is going on, considering the above and that the the new 'murican beach-head into europe has been established (brexit).
looking at recent past history, we can see that europe wasn't much in the business of making war.
however "other countries" have been rather busy in this department (far from home but not so far from paris, berlin and london?)
further, i have to assume, that europe being not completely stupid, has to "gear up" in the "decryption department" if everyone else (being mostly one country) is doing so.
keep europe busy so they cannot make friends with russia seems to be the motto for the next 10 years or so.
wedge between the two and then next step is to make local population doubt their government (which actually means something in europe unlike in a certain overseas covert-stealthy police state) and you got a good situation to "help fix the problem" ...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 24 2016, @10:39PM
you mean the head-lines:
"europe allows uncrackable encryption, NSA moves headquarters to brussel!"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 25 2016, @02:47AM
Apparently France and Germany want the other countries to have their way with their infrastructure. As that is exactly what will happen. Do they honestly think China, Russia, and NK will not try for it? Heck even the US and GB would get in there.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday August 25 2016, @04:04AM
This sounds like a bunch of suits and bureaucrats essentially saying "I don't know anything about this, but it's scary, so ban it." Idiots. May as well try to ban literacy while you're at it; after all, terrorists communicated by way of written language.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by ewk on Thursday August 25 2016, @11:23AM
No no... it;s more like outlawing some parts of maths...
Like you're allowed to add and subtract, but no multiplication and division (because that's too close to wizardry for them to understand :-) )
I don't always react, but when I do, I do it on SoylentNews
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday August 25 2016, @06:30PM
Wait till you tell them that multiplication is just a lot of addition really fast :D
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 25 2016, @01:30PM
Outlawing mustard gas is not the same thing as outlawing chemistry.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 25 2016, @06:40PM
Bad analogy. If people have knowledge about mathematics, backdoor-free encryption will not vanish. In fact, with all the FOSS encryption projects that exist, they don't even need knowledge of math. Any takes about encryption back doors are a complete waste of time, and more importantly, the idea is totally unethical.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 25 2016, @03:37PM
Ultimately, it's the same security theater consulting firms that lobby all western governments.