The EU Commission’s New Proposal Would Undermine Encryption And Scan Our Messages

This article has been indexed from

Deeplinks

The executive body of the European Union published today a legislative proposal (text) that, if it became law, would be a disaster for online privacy in the EU and throughout the world. In the name of fighting crimes against children, the EU Commission has suggested new rules that would compel a broad range of internet services, including hosting and messaging services, to search for, and report, child abuse material. 

The Commission’s new demands would require regular plain-text access to users’ private messages, from email to texting to social media. Private companies would be tasked not just with finding and stopping distribution of known child abuse images, but could also be required to take action to prevent “grooming,” or suspected future child abuse. This would be a massive new surveillance system, because it would require the infrastructure for detailed analysis of user messages.

The new proposal is overbroad, not proportionate, and hurts everyone’s privacy and safety. By damaging encryption, it could actually make the problem of child safety worse, not better, for some minors. Abused minors, as much as anyone, need private channels to report what is happening to them. The scanning requirements are subject to safeguards, but they aren’t strong enough to prevent the privacy-intrusive actions that platforms will be required to undertake. 

Unfortunately, this new attempt to mandate a backdoor into encrypted communications is part of a global pattern. In 2018, the Five Eyes—an alliance of the intelligence services of Canada, New Zealand, Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States—warned that they will “pursue technological, enforcement, legislative or other measures to achieve lawful access solutions” if the companies didn’t voluntarily provide access to encrypted messages. With th

[…]
Content was cut in order to protect the source.Please visit the source for the rest of the article.

Read the original article: