EU council reaches position on Chat Control

(consilium.europa.eu)

32 points | by Aldipower 2 hours ago

7 comments

  • emptysongglass 21 minutes ago
    I am ashamed to be Danish. Where are the mass protests of hundreds of thousands, the mass walkouts from our workplaces until our government at last respects our human dignity?

    Our government has today turned the EU into a tool for total surveillance I don't know if there can be any return from. Our democratic processes have been abused, and our politicians shown to be nothing but craven, self-interested agents of control.

    • sam_lowry_ 16 minutes ago
      What about going out in front of your city hall with a poster saying no-chat-control?

      You risk nothing, do you?

  • aestetix 1 hour ago
    Honest question. The EU was created as an economic and trade institution. How has it morphed into a wierd political institution, which NATO was already supposed to be?

    The root question: how did an organization that ushered in things like the Euro become a body that decides whether Europeans are allowed to have personal privacy?

    • blibble 11 minutes ago
      ever closer union in the Treaty of Rome

      the entire point is to build a country called Europe

      and the EU is built on the "Monnet method", where it slowly ratchets forward taking more power from national parliaments and giving it to the EU council/commission

      (with a useless parliament there to make it appear democratic)

      the UK leaving is the only example of the ratchet being reversed

    • saubeidl 52 minutes ago
      > The EU was created as an economic and trade institution. How has it morphed into a wierd political institution, which NATO was already supposed to be?

      That is not the case.

      The 1957 Treaty Establishing the European Community contained the objective of “ever closer union” in the following words in the Preamble. In English this is: “Determined to lay the foundations of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe …..”.

      > The root question: how did an organization that ushered in things like the Euro become a body that decides whether Europeans are allowed to have personal privacy?

      Sensationalist framing aside, how does any government become a body that decides anything?

      • aestetix 46 minutes ago
        That treaty was established just over a decade after Hitler surrendered, when there were two Germanys, an Iron curtain across Europe, and a lot of other things which changed significantly after the Wall fell. Surely you would agree that those words meant something quite different then than they do now?

        I don't think my framing was sensationalist at all. Chat Control is using the threat of child porn to make people forget the reasons why the ECHR cares so deeply about privacy. I'm not sure why Denmark is pushing it so hard, but governments have long feared and hated encryption.

        • saubeidl 4 minutes ago
          Not only are you moving your goalposts from "this wasn't the original purpose" (it was - it's part of the founding document!), but it has been reaffirmed and strengthened over and over again since: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-...

          Don't get me wrong - I, too, care about privacy and think Chat Control is a horrible idea, that thankfully seems to be getting shut down. That doesn't mean the EU is somehow not legitimate as a governing body.

  • johnwayne666 1 hour ago
    Does this already include the parliament's position based on a trilogue or will there be amendments before it's voted in parliament?
    • throw_a_grenade 1 hour ago
      IIUC no, this is Council position before trilogue.
  • thecopy 2 hours ago
    Seems… fine? At least i dont see any invasion of privacy or encryption related obligations in this proposal.

    The EU ostensibly wants to improve innovation, i wonder how these new assessment regulations help with that, especially for SME and startups.

    • halJordan 1 hour ago
      "High risk" providers will be obligated to "contribute" technologies "to mitigate." Seems like a doublespeak way of saying enforced decryption or enforced backdoors.
      • potato3732842 58 minutes ago
        It's one of those things that will obviously be used to boil the frog over time via beurocratic rules.

        Year 1 a minimum viable effort manual process will be fine. But they'll say "not good enough" to someone every now and then and the minimum can do in order to get a) permission b) enforcers not crawling up your ass (IDK if it will be permission based or enforcement after the fact based) will ratchet up.

        By year 10 or 20 "everyone" will have an API or a portal or whatever.

        And worse, by creating a compliance industry they create a whole suite of business and people who will ask for more, more, more more.

      • stephen_g 1 hour ago
        Yes, I see this as the people pushing for surveillance and control taking what they can get for now, with the view to bring it back to mandatory scanning before all is said and done.
  • throw_a_grenade 1 hour ago
    The crux is in those „risk assessments”, to be approved by authorities. IIUC those authorities will be able to designate e.g. Signal „high risk” and slap penalties unless they „mitigate” the risk. Hard to tell what will happen without seeing final regulation.
  • jacknews 1 hour ago
    I know it's the recognized term for 'officially designated authority', but 'competent authority' seems to conflate two traits that do not necessarily co-habit.
    • pavlov 1 hour ago
      Legal competence is like a legal person — it's a subset of what we normally associate with the term.
    • Zaiberia 1 hour ago
      Just read it as ”we have the competence to make decisions with authority on this issue”, though we all wish it always meant ”we have authority to make competent decisions on this issue” xD
  • giuliomagnifico 2 hours ago
    In a nutshell, there will be no more intrusions into chats, but only obligations for the companies to provide preferential channels for victims of these crimes.