Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> So, something has got to give.

Something does have to give: the constant demands for interception capabilities on end-to-end encrypted protocols. Those demands must be thoroughly destroyed every time they rear their head again.



It's interesting that this initiative seems to be mostly driven by influential actors in the "online safety" space that want their flawed scanning tech embedded into every device. Thorn is the most public-facing one, but if you dig into advocacy groups you'll find there's a dozen or so more, and they competed for being the technical solution to the UK online safety act too. But if it involves CSAM it's an even more perfect monopoly - only a very select group of people can train these models because the training data is literally illegal to possess.

If you needed any indication for how these pseudo-charities (usually it's a charity front and a commercial "technology partner") are not interested in the public good, SafeToNet, a company that up until last year was trying to sell a CSAM livestream detection system to tech companies to "help become compliant" ("SafeToWatch") now sells a locked down Android phone to overprotective parents that puts an overlay on screen whenever naked skin can be seen (of any kind). It's based on a phone that retails for 150 pounds - but costs almost 500 with this app preinstalled into your system partition. That's exceptionally steep for a company that up until last year was all about moral imperatives to build this tech.


I haven't seen anything that suggests chat control would do anything to e2e. I am genuinely curious. It seems to be an often parroted point but... ?

It's just local image hashing and matching? Or is this only one implementation idea?


Chat Control is in some ways a response to E2E, by saying "let's backdoor the endpoints, then".




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: