this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2024
480 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
58303 readers
15 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think you got the point. Criminals use the same services as the rest of us. CSAM is being used as pretext to outlaw or bypass end-to-end encryption.
It's a noble cause, but it puts all of us in a vulnerable position. As post-communist countries know from past experience, once these measures are in place the next government will use it for surveillance of all kind when it's their turn.
Yes, I know. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. I'm not doing anything illegal at the toilet, but I still prefer to keep the door closed - even if I'm home alone.
Chat control 1.0 has been voluntarily inplemented by big platforms, but it has not been fruitful. Lots of false positives and not enough resources to look at the true positives. The delegates preparing this have demonstrated poor technical understanding.
Whistleblowers won't have confidence in anonymity. A journalist asked the author (Ylva Johansson) of the proposal if he, as a journalist, would still be able to receive tips from whistleblowers with secrecy. She stumbled ln her answer and said that CSAM should be illegal.
Police and officials are of course exempt from chat control 2.0. Secrecy for me, but not for thee. . .