The European Commission has far too much power, and answers far too little to the populace. In reality, they want to be dictators.
If you don't know, the unfortunate way thf EU is structured, the Parliament cannot initiate legislation. They can only vote on whatever the Commission puts in front of them.
If the Parliament votes "wrong", the Commission just repackages the idea in a new bill, pulls a couple of dirty tricks, and tried again. They only have to succeed once. See ChatControl for a prime example.
So the EU will eventually require backdoors in encryption. It's only a question of how many tries it takes...
bradley13
And, of course, no thought is given to the implications this could have in conjunction with the next Orban. Europe is aligning against Russia as a threat, while at the same time shooting itself in the foot by disabling basic rights like privacy with absolutely no memory of how much more basic lack of privacy (enabled by Facebook) was leveraged with relatively simple tools (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook–Cambridge_Analytica_d...) to help Brexit happen (effectively breaking Europe apart).
This quote from Apocalypto stuck with me
"A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within."
random3
With all the current concerns about rogue and mis-aligned AI, and about how we've made essentially zero progress on making sure that AI is safe and trustworthy, NOW you want to put backdoors in encryption algorithms? We should be doing everything we possibly can to make our systems more secure, not less.
This type of policy was terrible when they first thought of it. Now it's outright negligent and dangerous.
Is the actual text of the workplan somewhere? The linked article refers to the text
more effective tools for law enforcement
in the press release and then infers or implies that this means more encryption backdoors, but I could not find that in an actual EU text?
(Edit: I'm not doubting that they want to make backdoors mandatory, I'd just like to see the actual text.)
microtonal
According to the EU this will protect us from ”hostile states, and powerful criminal groups and terrorists”
Because said criminals will politely follow the law and use the broken, backdoor-ed encryption? Instead of the widely available opensourced true encryption? Of course not.
The true goal is mass surveillance - not protection from <insert-bad-thing-everybody-has-to-agree-is-bad>
catoc
This is from April 2025.
Also, whether the plan pushes for backdoors is debatable since those are not actually mentioned.
AnssiH
Oh man I will never let them read my private comms. So what are they going to do to me? I’m afraid that I, as a good person and father, am going to be punished for not letting them read my private messages. I’m afraid for my future in the EU.
teekert
Why are European citizens unable to put this to rest? Why aren't there mass protests against these totalitarian plans?
I believe it has to do with the influx of Muslim migrants and the instability it brings in European societies which could lead to civil war. Politicians realize they need more tools in their toolbox to put a lid on possible unrest, dissent, protests against immigration and upheaval.
hn_submit
How is this not an indication of a failed system? Why does EU/EC/etc system even allow for the same failed initiative to be pushed again and again under a different candy wrap with a rate of a machine gun?
Not always a different wrap even. They can essentially do "let's end the encryption this quarter, eh?" "No? Okay, we'll try in 3 months".
Sure, this may be a topic that flies under the radar of common people, because they mostly do not understand implications well enough, but what if it was a push for something that is understandable as very sinister by everyday person?
comments (10)
If you don't know, the unfortunate way thf EU is structured, the Parliament cannot initiate legislation. They can only vote on whatever the Commission puts in front of them.
If the Parliament votes "wrong", the Commission just repackages the idea in a new bill, pulls a couple of dirty tricks, and tried again. They only have to succeed once. See ChatControl for a prime example.
So the EU will eventually require backdoors in encryption. It's only a question of how many tries it takes...
bradley13
This quote from Apocalypto stuck with me "A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within."
random3
This type of policy was terrible when they first thought of it. Now it's outright negligent and dangerous.
jbstack
Leaving holes might not be the best plan atm
Kim_Bruning
more effective tools for law enforcement
in the press release and then infers or implies that this means more encryption backdoors, but I could not find that in an actual EU text?
(Edit: I'm not doubting that they want to make backdoors mandatory, I'd just like to see the actual text.)
microtonal
Because said criminals will politely follow the law and use the broken, backdoor-ed encryption? Instead of the widely available opensourced true encryption? Of course not.
The true goal is mass surveillance - not protection from <insert-bad-thing-everybody-has-to-agree-is-bad>
catoc
Also, whether the plan pushes for backdoors is debatable since those are not actually mentioned.
AnssiH
teekert
I believe it has to do with the influx of Muslim migrants and the instability it brings in European societies which could lead to civil war. Politicians realize they need more tools in their toolbox to put a lid on possible unrest, dissent, protests against immigration and upheaval.
hn_submit
Not always a different wrap even. They can essentially do "let's end the encryption this quarter, eh?" "No? Okay, we'll try in 3 months".
Sure, this may be a topic that flies under the radar of common people, because they mostly do not understand implications well enough, but what if it was a push for something that is understandable as very sinister by everyday person?
Would the system allow that?
glub