Support NeoGAF

[Caayn]

Engadget

The European Union might want it to be easier for police to obtain data, but that doesn't mean it'll be easy for officers to read that data. The European Parliament has proposed amended regulation that would not only require end-to-end encryption when available, but forbid backdoors that offer guaranteed access to law enforcement. EU residents need to know that the "confidentiality and safety" of their data is "guaranteed," according to the draft, and backdoors risk "weakening" that privacy.

If they do clear, though, they could set up a conflict between the EU and countries that aren't so fond of encryption. The UK is undoubtedly the main concern, even after it leaves the EU. A ban on backdoors would make it difficult for the country to enforce the Investigatory Powers Act's requirement that companies remove "electronic protection" when possible. How would that be meaningful when virtually every tech company in Europe is encrypting data traffic? You're not likely to see UK-specific versions of apps that introduce security holes.

This would also thwart the efforts of some American politicians (such as Senators Richard Burr and Dianne Feinstein) to effectively ban airtight encryption.

Telegraph

The proposals, from MEPs on the European Parliament's Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee, have been tabled as amendments to draft EU privacy legislation.

Buried in the amendments, the documents state: ”When encryption of electronic communications data is used, decryption, reverse engineering or monitoring of such communications shall be prohibited.

"Member states shall not impose any obligations on electronic communications service providers that would result in the weakening of the security and encryption of their networks and services."

The proposals will first have to be approved by MEPs and scrutinised by the EU Council. Kristina Holt, a senior associate at law firm Pinsent Masons, said the Government may be able to achieve some exemptions on national security grounds, which the EU does not have power over.

Tom's Hardware

We've lately seen some EU member states push for increased surveillance and even backdoors in encrypted communications, so there seems to be some conflict here between what the European Parliament institutional bodies may want and what some member states do.

However, if this proposal for the new Regulation on Privacy and Electronic Communications passes, it should significantly increase the privacy of E.U. citizens' communications, and it won't be so easy to roll back the changes to add backdoors in the future.

Draft of the EU report

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL concerning the respect for private life and the protection of personal data in electronic communications and repealing Directive

 

[eizarus]

I can definitely understand why many people would support the idea of a backdoor, but I'm glad that the EU doesn't give in to fear when it comes to personal privacy.
Abuse of power (especially when it comes to laws surrounding terrorism) isn't something new.

 

[John Kowalski]

EU looking for its peeps

 

[Palette Swap]

Genuinely surprised as this runs counter to the demagoguery that wants messenging service providers to offer backdoors to governments and security services.

Edit: I wasn't thinking this through. This isn't so much about "oh no, terrorists use iPhones and WhatsApp" so much as it is about all these platforms that aren't beholden to national interests and could give foreign powers way to directly tap our coms. i.e. they're laying the legislative groundwork to tell NSA (or China or whoever) to go fuck themselves.

 

[Dirtyshubb]

EU just rubbing it in now “Hey UK, I now we are discussing our divorce from today but have a look at all the things you are gonna miss”.

 

[Weckum]

Genuinely surprised as this runs counter to the demagoguery that wants messenging service providers to offer backdoors to governments and security services.

Edit: I wasn't thinking this through. This isn't so much about "oh no, terrorists use iPhones and WhatsApp" so much as it is about all these platforms that aren't beholden to national interests and could give foreign powers way to directly tap our coms. i.e. they're laying the legislative groundwork to tell NSA (or China or whoever) to go fuck themselves.

Wasn't that stuff also mostly suggested by the UK, not the EU?

 

[hodgy100]

For for fuck sake UK

 

[_Ryo_]

This is good stuff. If only US had just as good ideas...

 

[fanboi]

EU just rubbing it in now “Hey UK, I now we are discussing our divorce from today but have a look at all the things you are gonna miss”.

I mean, current government in the U.K. would most likely be against this either way.

The people tho...

 

[Dascu]

Another misleading headline.

The European Parliament proposed in the first draft of one of its Reports to strengthen encryption.

This Report still has to:
- Pass through the Committee votes.
- Pass through the Plenary vote.
- Not face a veto by the EU Council and Commission.

The chance that this proposal from MEP Lauristin actually makes it through is slim to none, unfortunately.

The original Telegraph and Tom's Hardware articles are much better, more detailed and accurate:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...cryption-setback-meps-propose-ban-government/
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/european-parliament-end-to-end-encryption-communications,34809.html

 

[Acorn]

Wasn't that stuff also mostly suggested by the UK, not the EU?

Yes and tories use what's app groups for communication too.

We need to end the extremist message in tory groups.

 

[nubbe]

The sooner the UK pisses off the better
FULL BREXIT

 

[Caayn]

Another misleading headline.

The European Parliament proposed in the first draft of one of its Reports to strengthen encryption.

This Report still has to:
- Pass through the Committee votes.
- Pass through the Plenary vote.
- Not face a veto by the EU Council and Commission.

The chance that this proposal from MEP Lauristin actually makes it through is slim to none, unfortunately.

The original Telegraph and Tom's Hardware articles are much better, more detailed and accurate:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...cryption-setback-meps-propose-ban-government/
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/european-parliament-end-to-end-encryption-communications,34809.html

If you can provide snippets/quotes from those articles that can be a good addition to the OP, I'd gladly add them.

 

[Dirtyshubb]

I mean, current government in the U.K. would most likely be against this either way.

The people tho...

Oh for sure, its just a shame that our government are so hell bent on doing everything the wrong way.

I can guess how this all came about, May or some other higher up decided that encryption was bad and that we had to get a way through regardless of how feasible, ethical or safe it is to do.

I have seen it time and time again in the Civil Service, you get an order from above that you have to do things a specific way or focus on one specific area regardless of what the teams who are considered experts think.

Honestly I think the Civil Service works best when the actual CS have more decision power, rather than some minister who at most have a meeting with a department head or seen a dashboard and made their decisions based on that little info.

 

[Ogodei]

EU bans encryption backdoors, UK bans encryption that doesn't have backdoors, suddenly iPhones are only available on the continent, contraband smuggled in through Northern Ireland.

 

[TedMilk]

Keep winning, EU.

 

[LordRaptor]

Nobody is going to defend terrorist attacks - which is what 'governmental backdoors' will always cite as their justification, but if WannaCry didn't make it super clear that security service exploits have wider impact than just spooks snooping, I don't know what will

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

Please go through with it,EU.

 

[Dascu]

If you can provide snippets/quotes from those articles that can be a good addition to the OP, I'd gladly add them.

Telegraph

The proposals, from MEPs on the European Parliament’s Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee, have been tabled as amendments to draft EU privacy legislation.

Buried in the amendments, the documents state: “When encryption of electronic communications data is used, decryption, reverse engineering or monitoring of such communications shall be prohibited.

"Member states shall not impose any obligations on electronic communications service providers that would result in the weakening of the security and encryption of their networks and services.”

The proposals will first have to be approved by MEPs and scrutinised by the EU Council. Kristina Holt, a senior associate at law firm Pinsent Masons, said the Government may be able to achieve some exemptions on national security grounds, which the EU does not have power over.

Tom's Hardware

We’ve lately seen some EU member states push for increased surveillance and even backdoors in encrypted communications, so there seems to be some conflict here between what the European Parliament institutional bodies may want and what some member states do.

However, if this proposal for the new Regulation on Privacy and Electronic Communications passes, it should significantly increase the privacy of E.U. citizens’ communications, and it won’t be so easy to roll back the changes to add backdoors in the future.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

Planeintosunset.gif

 

[Earthpainting]

I'll never stop being impressed by and be appreciative of the EU's technical literacy. It feels so rare that you can trust a type of governing body to know what they're doing when it comes to consumer-level technology, and still have your best interest in mind.

 

[CadetMahoney]

Another misleading headline.

It could be political bluster with no real chance of passing. Hope I'm wrong though and this does happen.

 

[Dascu]

It could be political bluster with no real chance of passing. Hope I'm wrong though and this does happen.

It's from a particular MEP that has campaigned on this issue before and is quite genuine in her concerns. It's just that the odds are stacked entirely against her, in Parliament and Council. Even if she finds a majority in Parliament, the Member States all want more access and control regarding Over-the-top communication services and will push this through.

 

[Caayn]

...

Thanks, added them to the OP.

 

[Xando]

Someone's trolling theresa may

 

[Jonnax]

UK can try doing all it's backdoor laws and shit. But then they won't be able to store any EU data. Ho ho ho.

 

[Sulik2]

The EU parliament is so much more sane then the US and UK at this point. They just seem to get technology issues on a much higher level then we do in the USA.

 

[Acorn]

I mean, current government in the U.K. would most likely be against this either way.

The people tho...

UK can try doing all it's backdoor laws and shit. But then they won't be able to store any EU data. Ho ho ho.

Precisely. It's why all this shit is pie in the sky nonsense.

 

[Zaph]

Even if May's batshit crazy manifesto was technically feasible, the moment the first (of many) mass financial/personal information leaks happens thanks to a backdoor, the blame will be laid squarely at her feet. Though tbh, I'm starting to think public humiliation is her kink.

 

[KDR_11k]

Moves like this are why I'm glad we have the EU because the national governments usually don't pass such laws.

 

[Billy_Pilgrim]

Because of work I've recently become intimately familiar with a piece of legislation known as GDPR.

The upshot of it is if you want to deal with a business that has any kind of presence in the EU then you need to follow some exacting and stringent data protection rules.

Mana for compliance nerds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5WJOncaHt4