Chat Control passed first round in EU Parliament (heise.de)

225 points by miroljub 2 hours ago

90 comments:

by belowavgiq 2 hours ago

"The procedure now chosen gives the proponents of Chat Control a significant tactical advantage. Since the law is in its second reading, an absolute majority of 361 votes of all parliament members is required for amendments or a renewed rejection on Thursday. In contrast, a simple majority of the MEPs present is sufficient for the other side. As many parliamentarians have historically already departed by the last day before the summer break, the re-enactment of the regulation is considered almost unavoidable."

So, if I'm reading this correctly, Chat Control is bound to become law? and this is after I think 2/3 rejections, how democratic of the EU.

Oh, and parliamentarians starting their summer break whenever they want will never not be funny.

by isodev an hour ago

> how democratic of the EU

Well, these are the MEPs elected by member states. We don’t like the outcome but this means chat control is well supported within the government of each country.

by CrisMystik an hour ago

MEPs are directly elected by citizens, not governments. It's the Council instead where representatives (ministers) of all national governments sit

by isodev an hour ago

Yup, edited to clarify I mean the MEPs bring “the will of the people”. Clearly not enough has happened on local level to raise awareness / lobby against chat control. I don’t think many outside tech are even aware if the slippery slope of the surveillance machinery.

by afh1 25 minutes ago

Is it really supported by the people, or just the politicians?

If the former, the EU is an autocratic democracy. If the later, an autocratic oligarchy.

Either way bad. Only true democracy in Europe is Switzerland where the people actually get to vote on laws.

by kennywinker 15 minutes ago

Representative democracy vs direct democracy is the actual dichotomy you’re looking for.

by Balinares an hour ago

> So, if I'm reading this correctly, Chat Control [2.0, implied] is bound to become law?

Nope. This is bad, but not THAT bad.

This is an extension of the existing Chat Control 1.0, which was set to expire (or maybe already has, I didn't keep track). AIUI it gives chat companies permission to scan user chats for illicit content, but does not mandate it.

This is bad, but it's not the much worse still Chat Control 2.0 that was defeated several times already.

by delusional an hour ago

> or maybe already has, I didn't keep track

Literally second paragraph.

> to reinstate the transitional regulation for Chat Control, which expired in April

by raverbashing an hour ago

1 - this is about Chat Control 1.0

2 - The vote was on the "Urgency requirement"

> parliamentarians starting their summer break whenever they want will never not be funny

Eh. This is the least problematic thing here. Some MEPs might just be on official PTO.

by procaryote 4 minutes ago

The voting dynamics changing beacause elected representatives can't plan their vacations like any regular work place is pretty silly

by miroljub 2 hours ago

The EU is a dictatorship for some time already. The fact they push and push and push unpopular laws until they push them through is all you need to know about them.

They sneaked this atrocity in while all the EU-controlled media hype the football championship and blame Trump and FIFA boss Infantino for overriding a decision on whether a single player will play a single game or not.

by chrystalkey 2 hours ago

You have apparently no idea what an actual dictatorship is

by mikestorrent an hour ago

It's mostly a lack of properly descriptive words in the language. I think "totalitarian liberalism" or the "managerial state" is probably closer to what we're talking about here. Power is not concentrated in one individual; responsibility and accountability are diffused so far that it is impossible to find someone who actually can do or change anything. "Rational systems" of business process and rigour serve to remove individual wisdom and intuition from the equation entirely. Adding AI on top of this will probably only further entrench it - walls of words protecting people from really improving anything meaningfully.

In some ways, the concentration of power in a dictatorship might be better, if the dictator was well morally aligned with the people. Trouble is, the people are seldom even morally aligned with each other in a unified way, so a dictator cannot easily represent their conflicting interests. Representative democracy does at least take a step towards solving that issue.

by 73738384 an hour ago

The European Comission is the top decision maker of the EU. The European citizen has zero (0) influence on the members or actions of the EC. No different than the politburo in China.

by iamnothere an hour ago

It is slightly different than China, China has implemented hotlines/apps for citizen complaints in response to social pressure, and it actually attempts to address those complaints.

by pigpop an hour ago

Given a choice between China and the EU at this point I would choose to live in China.

by iknowstuff 34 minutes ago

ok lol objectively poor choice but go right ahead

by onraglanroad an hour ago

Apart from the fact it can't make decisions.

It can only propose; the decision is made by the EU parliament.

by raverbashing an hour ago

> The European citizen has zero (0) influence on the members or actions of the EC

Whenever one reads EC you need to read: "All of the heads of state in a trenchcoat". Macron, Merz, etc

And yet this is an EP maneuver

And let's not forget on the American lobbyists pushing for it (Including Big Tech)

by pigpop an hour ago

It's much more of an oligarchy where even though the members of the elite are elected the body of them as a whole appears to have enough influence over new members to force them to act in accordance with an ongoing plan. It seems like any real change would require a very large super majority of new members to be elected at the same time in order to change course. Even a country like the UK seems to still be under their influence after leaving the union which speaks volumes about the amount of backroom dealing that must be going on.

by iknowstuff 35 minutes ago

You think the UK is influenced by backroom dealing and not just the fact that they want to trade with the single market, which is the whole point of banding together as the EU?

by miroljub an hour ago

I suppose you know?

Now go enlighten us on how the EU is super democratic and way better than the worst dictatorship that ever existed, so we may be happy we are not the worst.

by skeptic_ai an hour ago

Tell me the difference please. Which country we compare to?

by nuka_coffee an hour ago

A dictatorship has a dictator. Who doesn't know that?

by aaomidi an hour ago

TBH modern dictatorships are a lot less obvious in the way you describing.

There are dictatorships, where a very select few people have absolute power, but there’s no visible dictator.

Iran is a country like this. There’s no visible dictator. It’s a game of power between the clergy, the military, and the civil government.

by wongarsu an hour ago

Those are more like aristocracies or oligarchies than dictatorships though. Though maybe those are not the best descriptions of Iran either

by lokar 11 minutes ago

Is there reliable polling that shows this is broadly unpopular?

by ChocolateGod 2 hours ago

Nearly every law pushed by the EU Commission has support from the EU Council.

Chat control is no different.

by iamnothere 2 hours ago

From a post on Mastodon:

> democracy is when you repeatedly push for unpopular laws until they pass, and the more times you do it the more democratic it is

It is unlikely that 60 additional “no” votes can be found by Thursday to stop this.

by ryandrake 44 minutes ago

They only have to win once. You have to win every time.

by soco an hour ago

So basically the people we elected will vote yes. How's that undemocratic? Because the majority doesn't vote the way I like it? I'm not even ironic, I truly don't understand those comments. You get what you voted for, garbage in garbage out.

by iamnothere an hour ago

All votes have a certain margin or fluctuation, as individual representatives can be pressured, swayed, or coerced by any number of means. If a vote fails over and over again then eventually passes under dubious circumstances (start of vacation when attention is elsewhere), that seems to be against the spirit of democratic rule. At least to me, but what do I know? Maybe everyone loves this outcome and all the prior rejections were just a fluke.

by poly2it an hour ago

The vast majority (72%) of European citizens are opposed to Chat control. Regardless, the proposal has been brought up and rejected relentlessly, mostly by action of politicians (commissioners) who are not directly elected to begin with. We have more than enough reasons to be furious.

https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/poll-72-of-citizens-oppose-...

by delusional an hour ago

Did you read the question of that survey? Talk about poisoning the well.

by echelon an hour ago

They keep voting on surveillance state measures that the oligarchy wants that will limit the freedom of the people.

They keep voting and voting and voting until the energy of the people to protest diminishes or they find a way to get it in.

There needs to be a counter-balance where politicians can be removed or even punished by the people for proposing unpopular bills.

by yreg 5 minutes ago

I was curious to see how the MEPs voted, you can check it here.

https://howtheyvote.eu/votes/195338

For once I'm pleasantly surprised that everyone I voted for was against.

by rollulus an hour ago

“We decide on something, leave it lying around, and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back.”

And

“If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue'.”

- Jean-Claude Juncker

by raverbashing an hour ago

And the worse part is: they do that because the alternative means you're building a railway on a surface tunnel because some people don't like it (or worse, not building anything)

by harrisoned 2 hours ago

Even if you are not in the EU, this will affect you. Some countries really like to copy such regulations from others. Once services starts complying, other governments will go like "if you did for them, you can do it for us, right? so it's not technically impossible", and things only get worse from there. Not all services will simply block the EU as well, which would be better to send a stronger message if approved.

I really fear where this is headed.

by pr337h4m an hour ago

Centralized messaging services won't last long, their capture is sadly inevitable. In the long run, only self-hosted/decentralized protocols can resist what's coming.

In the meantime though, Signal specifically should not do something stupid like blocking the EU, which is basically surrender. They are a non-profit headquartered in the US, so there are zero business risks to non-compliance - nothing in the EU to fine or seize. And the EU has no jurisdiction over servers in the US, all they can do is build their own Great Firewall. (However, they might pressure AWS to deplatform Signal - hopefully the team is prepared for the possibility that self-hosting will be necessary soon.)

by harrisoned an hour ago

> Centralized messaging services won't last long, their capture is sadly inevitable. In the long run, only self-hosted/decentralized protocols can resist what's coming.

Very much. I also fear they coming for this, we already have instances of where using secure alternatives tags you as a criminal[0], so i don't doubt a future where non-approved applications will get you in trouble. With everything happening around Android locking itself down[1] and Windows being a spyware[2] anybody who wants privacy will be 'different', and can be tagged and excluded from parts of society for not using the same services.

[0]: https://x.com/GrapheneOS/status/1940440326830989549

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48801059

[2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48815196

by iamnothere an hour ago

This is why you should be building parallel networks and even institutions, as the Czechs did under Soviet rule (look up “Parallel Polis”). Mutual aid will become critical.

by mikestorrent an hour ago

The trouble is that most conventional ways of building a new service are trivial to block. What is needed now is unstoppable messaging and social networking built on top of existing services and protocols that won't be blocked right away, services with more legal protection - like email with GPG, or some kind of steganographically encrypted layer on top of Instagram.

Imagine all I ever posted was cat pics... unless I have your public key and then all of a sudden those pics are decoded into messages of dissent

by iamnothere an hour ago

I am speaking beyond services, you need allies who are willing to come to each other’s aid, especially financially, but also for things like physically relaying data from place to place if that is ever needed. And for more mundane things like watching your house when you are out of town. Offline networks are going to become much more critical.

by earth-tattoo an hour ago

If I was signal CEO I would have self hosted years ago! There's many reasons for signal to be not on AWS.

by miroljub an hour ago

I wish you were right, but the EU only needs Google and Apple, both having big EU businesses, to block Signal.

Google is already working on closing the possibility to install apps from outside the app store, Apple has been like that since forever. The fact that a few technically savvy users with rooted phones will still be able to use Signal doesn't mean anything. It will be dead if the EU decides they don't want it.

by asxndu 32 minutes ago

Why are we so passive to the promotion of such scams?

I keep telling people about such things and I am looked at as nerdy, geeky or boring.

But this stupid reaction finally explains to me why human life for ordinary people will always largely be a life of suffering.

by kingleopold 20 minutes ago

average people never have skin in the game too. They barely understand a lot of the things that make things possible

by storus 2 hours ago

First they tried to approve software patents during an agriculture and fisheries council session, now they are bending procedural rules to hack it in before summer vacations. Some weird form of democracy™.

by iamsaitam an hour ago

The real joke is that these MEPs leave for summer break like they are school children and their attendance doesn't matter to the whole.

by Lio 8 minutes ago

Heads I win, tails you loose.

It seems they can propose anything they want and never loose a "vote".

by hlieberman 2 hours ago

Is this Chat Control 1.0 or Chat Control 2.0?

by MaKey an hour ago

This is about Chat Control 1.0 (voluntary scanning).

by big85 an hour ago

The Wikipedia entry on Chat Control doesn't go into enough detail on what exactly it does, only the history of its legislative process. Can someone update it?

by rsynnott an hour ago

Part of the confusion is that there are two things involved here; 'Chat Control 1', an existing (but expiring) derogation to the ePrivacy Directive which allows, but does not require, providers to scan messages. 'Chat Control 2', which you'll likely have heard more about, would _require_ providers to do this. The wiki article is quite poorly written and implies that 1 is an earlier version of 2, which isn't really the case.

Anyway, this is about Chat Control 1.

by cucumber3732842 an hour ago

It's probably line item 156/289 on some intern's list of things to check once a week and make sure it "looks good". Politicians engage in just as much publicity management as big corporations do.

by miroljub an hour ago

Just assume the worst: all your private messages would be read and shared between all governments and corporations in the world.

by big85 an hour ago

No, I want to know specifically.

by miroljub 43 minutes ago

The answer is already specific, but not complete.

by aquir an hour ago

Hopefully this could be the first good thing about Brexit...this might not get implemented in the UK or there will be a delay!

by Havoc 17 minutes ago

The way the uk is legislating online stuff lately I’m expecting UK version to be worse than EU

by MyMemoryfails 18 minutes ago

UK already technically banned encryption, causing Apple to remove the encrypted cloud service for UK customers. Check UK's "Investigatory Powers Act (IPA)"

by graemep an hour ago

> Hopefully this could be the first good thing about Brexit

Was having lots of people's lives saved by a much faster vaccine rollout not a good thing?

by miroljub an hour ago

Please mark sarcasm as /s

by musha68k an hour ago

This is the anti-EU move but they simply don't understand that.

Authoritarian centralization efforts need to be fought Huang style - with an European twist - as we might be behind on a lot of axis but we "Didn't Wake Up a Loser".

China / US leadership must not be the carte-blanche to formalize whatever low bar in how we handle our own privacy; going straight for the "self own" I guess?

Sorry for prompt mode but I hope this is at least somewhat legible to fellow Europeans, if not please listen to antirez in original Italian or auto translated:

https://youtu.be/cmYiWsFn3GM

I hear quite a few tangents in there; the main one being: especially in EU we need to go "agentic". Don't wait for politics to do The Right Thing. They should play retrospective backup at best.

I'm thinking they might be actually thankful for having been provided vision / imagination.

Team up with the bureaucrats after the fact but don't listen to them too much - again - to Do The Right Thing. Especially when they are potentially infected by lobbyists...

FFS I hate this timeline; we really need to show up for real. Again and again and again and again...

by nekusar 2 hours ago

The cypherpunks were right. Rights to encryption are only a part of what we need.

The other part is steganography, or hiding real messages within a innocuous anodyne message stream. And encryption can be used in conjunction as part of hiding said messages.

It can be within pictures with the lowest bit values. It can be constructed punctuation and spaces. Lots of things.

But hidden and plausibly deniable messaging is the ONLY way to defeat a government(s) that want to invade every communication aspect for humans.

by osigurdson an hour ago

What I don't understand is, what kind of legitimate criminal would not use such techniques? Are bank robbers planning things out on iMessage? If so, presumably they won't be criminals for very long. Therefore these types of initiatives only impact the innocent and inept but still active criminals.

by iamnothere an hour ago

The purpose of these efforts is not to catch criminals, at least not primarily, it’s to map the spread of “dangerous” ideas and the networks behind them. In other words, to prevent effective political change.

Found a new problematic meme? Someone leaked a video of you taking a bribe? Someone published a photo of damage from a missile strike? Add it to the database of forbidden media and quickly track down the source.

by cucumber3732842 an hour ago

They'll make sure to catch just enough criminals that when you say it's all bullshit some snooty waste of oxygen on HN can say "well akshually" and link you to some cherry picked news story that makes it all look like a good thing because they caught some small time house painter dumping waste paint in the sewer or nabbed someone for selling vapes to teenagers.

by mghackerlady an hour ago

Security is the reason given to us since most of us are too trusting or dumb to look any further into it. It becomes clear security isn't what they're doing it for after giving it more than a few minutes of thought

by __MatrixMan__ an hour ago

The trouble with pictures is that when you share them online the platform will likely compress them before serving them to others, spoiling your steganography. I think text-in-text is the way to go. Decrypt that recipe for brownies into the actual message. For example: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.20075

by Bender 31 minutes ago

One can host their own private or semi-private forum, chat server, chan board, etc... and choose not to re-encode the images and/or permit .tar .7z .zip archives and so on. Keep the bots away with basic auth to minimize skiddie risk to platform RCE's.

It's unlikely people can move their friends to their own platform but the best way I have found is to call it a "fall-back" platform for when Discord and others are temporarily offline. Get people used to the idea that is the place to share things they do not want leaked when the big platform 3rd parties expose files. The admin can encrypt the storage and periodically zero out files and zero out empty space for privacy.

People with slightly higher opsec may choose to block mobile proprietary devices.

by nullorempty 2 hours ago

That's an excellent take.

Unfortunately, verified devices will close that loophole.

by tadasZ an hour ago

i'm so tired of this bs, these elected people act as tsars, even when said NO they try again and again while employing shady tactics and there is no way of punishing these a**holes. Elections exist, but when same 35% (number taken out of butt, but point is - it's low) of people vote we get same sh*t who elects same sh*t to EU. And i don't know about other countries, but my country sends complete degenerates to EU, like litteraly degenerates.

by varispeed an hour ago

Effect of law enforcement not doing their jobs. Chat Control is illegal in many countries including Germany and that includes preparation for the roll out. Just need a prosecutor with a spine.

by tadasZ an hour ago

i'm so tired of this bs, these elected people act as tsars, even when said NO they try again and again while employing shady tactics and there is no way of punishing these a*holes. Elections exist, but when same 35% (number taken out of butt, but point is - it's low) of people vote we get same sht who elects same sht to EU. And i don't know about other countries, but my country sends complete degenerates to EU, like litteraly degenerates.

by miroljub an hour ago

> ... these elected people act as tsars, ...

They are not elected. Even the EU is illegal, since joining the EU was rejected by people of many European countries, but that was ignored.

They just do what they want and do thorough media coverage. In rare cases that doesn't work, people just dissapear.

by sunshine-o 11 minutes ago

So now that this is done the first thing we need is a list of platform covered and potentially covered by Chat Control.

It is still unclear to me if Proton Mail, Tuta, SimpleX servers, Signal, etc. fall under this or might.

Do they even have to officially declare if they are complying?

by zuzululu 44 minutes ago

Talked to a fellow European coworker recently and they seem very supportive of chat control and that it was necessary to stop "far right nationalism" and then I pressed on for them describe what it is and they got angry and refused to clarify. I think this is a good snapshot of where Europe is right now that chat controls have become politically weaponized and people who are supportive of it seem clueless as to what it actually is proposing.

Future looks very dim for EU as a whole, I'm glad I left it for America

by cynicalsecurity an hour ago

Local governments are likely to block the initiative. We need a Polish based messenger that won't bend to chat control fascist initiatives.

by DocTomoe 12 minutes ago

Nothing is brought to the Commission that local governments do not secretly want, but publically rage against because the voters are against it.

When Brussles then decides, 'there's nothing we can do, it's an EU thing' ... and a moustache-twirl.

The only thing that can stop this is to completely dismantle the EU. Which means, unfortunately, voting for people any good person should rightfully despise.

by Krasnol 14 minutes ago

I'm always astonished how democratic politicians willingly allow for tools which might be misused by a future undemocratic party.

I'm not a politician or some civil rights activist but I can see that. It's right there. We have a similar situation in Germany these days. We'll be giving more rights to the Federal Intelligence Service ( foreign intelligence) and the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (domestic intelligence). Basically allowing them to act more offensive (or offensive at all).

We're one or two elections away from having fascists in the government again.

Is it already a conspiracy theory if I suspect them of doing that deliberately because I can't imagine them being stupid?

by miroljub 2 hours ago

[[comment deleted]]

Thanks for the warning. Comment deleted to avoid jail time.

by patrakov an hour ago

I am not a lawyer, but, as a Russian citizen, let me warn you. The very fact that your comment criticizing the EU regime, that you yourself admit could send you to jail, is online and not deleted by Thursday, makes it a "lasting crime". For lasting crimes, it does not matter that the regulation criminalizing the action or state of affairs was not in force when they started. What matters is that the condition defined as illegal (comment existing) is true when the regulation outlawing it is in force - i.e., that you did not cease and desist. Yes, this is a creative way authorities circumvent the ban on ex post facto laws - they say "it is not ex post facto".

Commented on Tuesday, deleted the comment on Wednesday, the regulation is enacted on Thursday => OK.

Commented on Tuesday, did not delete before Thursday => jail (and it does not matter that you can't delete it anymore because it has a reply).

Sarcasm of course, as Russian laws do not apply here.

by iamnothere 2 hours ago

It’s a good time to download the source code for software that allows locally encrypted messaging, particularly without central infrastructure.

Delta Chat works with any email server and has a rich feature set, Bitchat is also good to have on hand. And of course the old standby GPG, flawed as it may be.

Also NNCP (https://nncp.mirrors.quux.org/) in case sneakernet solutions are ever needed.

by raverbashing an hour ago

And who's to say Drama is dead huh

I love how your average EU left-leaning cybertistic who has less serotonin than Werther and yet thinks all their country needs is more 3rd world "refugees" acts upon a tiny modicum of difficulty or government control (which should not be read as me advocating for it, naturally)

> Any advice from free people of China on circumventing government restrictions and control?

You should look into what goes on WeChat

But anyway the Chinese has way more agency and way less qualms about using air-conditioner so let me make a guess on who's surviving the heat waves

by 73738384 an hour ago

Gotta love the downvotes. At least we have free healthcare folks (for now lol).

by lostmsu an hour ago

You can't have access to the free healthcare until you get a mandatory calming vaccine.

Data from: Hacker News, provided by Hacker News (unofficial) API