EARN IT ACT, a workaround for banning E2EE #1677
No reviewers
Labels
No Label
🔍🤖 Search Engines
approved
dependencies
duplicate
feedback wanted
high priority
I2P
iOS
low priority
OS
Self-contained networks
Social media
stale
streaming
todo
Tor
WIP
wontfix
XMPP
[m]
₿ cryptocurrency
ℹ️ help wanted
↔️ file sharing
⚙️ web extensions
✨ enhancement
❌ software removal
💬 discussion
🤖 Android
🐛 bug
💢 conflicting
📝 correction
🆘 critical
📧 email
🔒 file encryption
📁 file storage
🦊 Firefox
💻 hardware
🌐 hosting
🏠 housekeeping
🔐 password managers
🧰 productivity tools
🔎 research required
🌐 Social News Aggregators
🆕 software suggestion
👥 team chat
🔒 VPN
🌐 website issue
🚫 Windows
👁️ browsers
🖊️ digital notebooks
🗄️ DNS
🗨️ instant messaging (im)
🇦🇶 translations
No Milestone
No Assignees
1 Participants
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: privacyguides/privacytools.io#1677
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "pr-earn_it_banning_e2ee"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
I guess AG Barr is back from Christmas holidays!
Latest news on the war on end to end encryption.
Deploy preview for privacytools-io ready!
Built with commit
e056338ada
https://deploy-preview-1677--privacytools-io.netlify.com
okay done, now I'm waiting for my $11
Seems technical and would probably need more focusing than I am able to provide while attempting to focus on listening event around me, so I am mostly trusting you
The TLDR of it is that, companies like Facebook, Twitter etc have "safe harbor" meaning if someone uploads something illegal they are not held responsible for the possession of the content on their servers. They obviously do remove such content and report to law enforcement.
In this case they're talking about CSAM, (child pornography). The issue being here is they want to set up a "commission" that basically makes "best practices" in dealing with the content. The thing is if the company doesn't follow the "best practices" they lose their safe harbor protection.
The commission only requires 10 of the 15 members to agree, and none of them are civil liberties representatives. Language is extremely weak, for example they "shall consider" in "interests in privacy, data security, and product quality", which basically means nothing, they can consider it for 5 seconds and then go "nope".
They also say that the officers must "certify" regardless of if they know what they are saying is a lie. In the end all the "recommendations" are signed off by the AG unilaterally, which is currently William Barr.
So it will end up being very much law enforcement saying, ban all E2EE because child pornographers could use it, so it's a best practice that nobody has it. That document also says it won't really help with that because there is absolutely nothing stopping such criminals from either using self contained networks, (Tor, I2P, Freenet etc) or encrypting the files before they upload them.