The Register Home Page

back to article EU 'Chat Control' snoopfest returns after vote to kill it falls short

An effort by European parliamentarians to block the reintroduction of an interim rule allowing tech companies to scan chats for evidence of child sexual abuse failed today, despite securing more votes than the MEPs who want to keep it alive. Commonly referred to by critics as Chat Control, or Chat Control 1.0, the interim rule …

  1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    Leadership by prime example ...... is a very long lost art in the politicians and admins. of today

    The CSAR is intended as the EU's permanent framework for detecting and tackling online child sexual abuse. Unlike the interim measure, it would create lasting obligations for platforms to assess and mitigate the risk of their services being used to spread CSAM or facilitate grooming.

    What is stopping EU MEPs from the obligation of proposing an action that assesses and mitigates the risk of MEPs using or ignorirg the[ir] services being used to spread CSAM or facilitate grooming.

    Such would make it a very easy job for platforms to follow their lead.

    WTF are they actually being overly well paid for?

  2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    "suspicionless mass surveillance,

    More like universal suspicion, or presumption of guilt.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    EUSSR

    Brussels moves another step closer to one day resembling the Politburo of the former USSR...

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge
      Devil

      Re: EUSSR

      How a Hollywood star lobbies the EU for more surveillance

      The European Union debates a new law that could force platforms to scan all private messages for signs of child abuse. Its most prominent advocate is the actor Ashton Kutcher.

      And it turns out he has some client-side software to sell and he's been lobbying since 2020 to get the EU to change the law to use it.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    This is so wrong...

    This whole shitshow is so wrong I do not know where to start.

    - mass AI surveillance of every subject

    - big tech will hoover even more of our data

    - rejected multiple times and pushed again and again until it passed

    - passed using every kind of trickery to make it pass

    Is this our democracy at work?

    SHAME, SHAME, SHAME.

    SHAME ON THE EUROPEAN UNION.

    1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

      Re: This is so wrong...

      - big tech will hoover even more of our data.

      I doubt it. Big tech + assorted data rapists and brokers already hoover up every bit of PII that they can get their grubby mitts on. Chat Control just normalises and formalises this to let the EU share in the take. Then Palantir will be along with contracts to help the EU analyse a firehose of bulk data and generate fines automagically. Inserting some form of judicial oversight means there should be some level of suspicion, but that doesn't help with revenue generation when it's easier to just crunch 6 months of an individual's traffic and spit out fines.

      Is this our democracy at work?

      It worked for the Stasi, it'll work for the EU. Time the vote just prior to the EU breaking for their summer hols, and if there weren't enough votes against it because EuroMPs had already left the building, thanks to the magic of the EU, it would pass anyway.

      SHAME ON THE EUROPEAN UNION.

      Yep. And shame on the UK. In theory, the UK could be immune to this, instead thanks to the UK's habit of gold-plating EU legislation, we'll have Chat Control with the added feature of mandatory online ID verification.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: This is so wrong...

        I doubt it. Big tech + assorted data rapists and brokers already hoover up every bit of PII that they can get their grubby mitts on

        Yes, they already do. But they had to fight for it, fight against GDPR, rules, etc. Now they are free to take everything. Even better, they will ASK TO BE PAID FOR IT. They will ask the EU to pay them to spy on us. After all AI is not free.

        They went from being somehow hindered by the law, to being free to do what they want, and even get paid for it.

        I'm sure the tech bros and their political enablers in the EU were all throwing big cocaine parties yesterday evening, complete with underage sex slaves of course. After all, they are immune to chat control, or to any form of control. Just look at the whole Epstein shitshow.

        1. elsergiovolador Silver badge

          Re: This is so wrong...

          GDPR rules were created FOR companies like Meta so they could have legal basis for processing data. It followed Cookie law where population was trained to consent to anything without thinking.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: This is so wrong...

      Is this our democracy at work?

      You appear to be labouring under the mistaken belief that the EU is a democratic organisation. The fact that unelected bureaucrats are responsible for crafting all of their laws should've been a big enough clue!

      1. R Soul Silver badge

        Re: This is so wrong...

        And how is that different from any other pariiamentary democracy?

        Do you really think our elected representatives draft the legislation they vote on?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: This is so wrong...

          In terms of UK law, Parliament is sovereign. The same is not true for the EU and its elected MEPs. This is really basic stuff. Please educate yourself!

          1. _wojtek

            Re: This is so wrong...

            kinda yeah, but this is just a rotten compromise that was created becase member states (including UK) were so butt hurt to give up the power... so glee ended up with the Council (head of member states that drive the agenda), Commission that writes that into law and Parliament (which is actually elected) that votes on it.

            There were proposals to give EU Parliament legislative powers but guess who screeched against it?

            EU is, in a way, disfuncional because of this power struggle between democratically elected MEPs and member states and I don't see how this could be reformed in a any meaningful way without countries giving up their powers (and veto)... :/

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: This is so wrong...

          Yeah, among parliamentary democracies, the EU is one of the least democratic in terms of lawmaking.

          The (unelected) European Commission has a near monopoly for legislative initiative, whereas in many parliamentary systems there is a mechanism whereby members of the parliament may introduce bills. This ranges from insignificant in the UK Parliament (see private members' bills in the Parliament of the United Kingdom), through quite significant in the Israeli Knesset, to being the only way bills can be introduced in the US Congress. In most parliaments, the ability of members to introduce legislation is common practice because parliament and government are constructed as antagonist under the system of separation of powers. Under the Treaty of Maastricht enhanced by the Lisbon Treaty, the European Parliament has an indirect right of legislative initiative that allows it to ask the Commission to submit a proposal, though to reject the request the Commission only needs to "inform the European Parliament of the reasons". Member states also have an indirect right of legislative initiative concerning the Common Foreign and Security Policy.

          Over 80% of all proposals by the Commission were initially requested by other bodies.

          Some politicians, including Jean-Pierre Chevènement and Dominique Strauss-Kahn, feel that the Commission's monopoly on legislative initiative prevents the emergence or development of real democratic debate.

          Citizens also have legislative initiative in the EU by the procedure of a European Citizens' Initiative, in which at least a million signatures by EU citizens need to be obtained in at least a quarter of EU member states.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_initiative_(legislative)#European_Union

  5. harald-hardrada

    Chat Control.....

    Some chat might be difficult to read!

    - Diffie/Hellman

    - chacha20

    - 25119

    - multiple encrytion passes

    - air gaps (meaning no plain text on the internet)

    Yup....some privacy advocates are making sure that their communications

    do actually remain private!

    .......despite ignorant lawmakers turning over "decryption" to lunatics like Peter Thiel.

    Snooping might even be immune to NSO Pegasus or Paragon Graphite.

    Snoop on....but some of us remember Jamal Khashoggi!

    1. stiine Silver badge

      Re: Chat Control.....

      What you've missed is that they plan on scanning your input on your device as you enter it and before its encrypted for transmission.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Chat Control.....

        @stiine

        You missed the point about air gaps. The idea is that ALL messaging is enetered and encrypted OFF LINE.

        The privately encrypted material crosses the air gap.....and that privately encrypted material is all that the snoops get to see!

        The procedure is reversed at the receiving end. NO PLAIN TEXT ONLINE for snoops to review!

        Get it?

        1. Kurgan Silver badge

          Re: Chat Control.....

          Yes, it works... but:

          1- if you don't produce your amount of cleartext data, you'll be put on the watch list

          2- if your communication system requires spy-level operational security practices, it will be so inconvenient to use that almost no one will use it.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Chat Control.....

            @Kurgan

            Pick your poison!!!

        2. elsergiovolador Silver badge

          Re: Chat Control.....

          Yes, under Stasi people had ways to communicate to evade caring eye of their case officer. This is no different.

    2. Filippo Silver badge

      Re: Chat Control.....

      In a world where snooping is normalized, anyone who behaves in the way you describe will be put on a watchlist.

      You cannot fix a political problems via technical means.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Chat Control.....

        @Filippo

        Quote: ".....anyone who behaves in the way you describe....."

        Assumptions again! You assume that my online life is COMPLETELY described by private encryption/decryption and air gapped work stations.

        But for any sensible person who wants some privacy online, this behavour only needs to be a small part of my online life.

        Most of my online life can be an open book to snoops!

        How would they know? Sort of like Dorian Gray!

      2. Paul Crawford Silver badge

        Re: Chat Control.....

        You cannot fix a political problems via technical means.

        Well you can, by employing the Chinese to do the work for you (cheaper, proven ability) and making sure every politician and civil servant is included (saves cost on account screening)...

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Warrantless surveillance

    I've not much to say that hasn't already been said countless times over: this is default mass surveillance on the assumption that you're about to commit a crime and need to be watched, every conversation listened to and read. Client-side scanning will not solve anything, only open huge, gaping holes in users' devices and force them to collect even more private information for those who know where the holes are.

    Nobody in their right mind would say that citizens need to have police/government officers sitting in their home 24/7, in the corner, writing down everything you say, everyone you speak to, each letter you write and comparing it against a pre-defined list of bad words, phrases or topics that you're not allowed to look at. That is essentially what this does for digital communication, even if the notes are thrown away if you don't say anything illegal. Why don't the MEPs and other politicians bringing this up every chance try it for two years straight, for themselves and all of their immediate and extended family, no exceptions, and see how they react to having their conversations eavesdropped upon?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Warrantless surveillance

      Perhaps the political class looked at Epstein and concluded that the real problem was relying on one private middleman.

      The mechanism here is that once some machine considers private content suspicious, it may be copied to provider servers and placed in front of human moderators.

      So the system creates, by law, a pipeline carrying the most intimate material imaginable from private devices to corporations, contractors and whoever else eventually gains access.

      Surely none of the thousands of moderators, administrators, police officers and outsourced contractors will ever save, leak, trade or privately circulate the juicier material.

      We know this because nobody with privileged access to sensitive databases has ever abused it before.

      It is not outside the realms of possibility that material collected under the child-protection banner eventually becomes pornography, blackmail material, political intelligence or simply entertainment for people inside the system.

      Perhaps that is the real innovation.

      Not merely mass surveillance, but the ultimate involuntary content-sourcing platform, built by Parliament and stocked by the entire population.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Warrantless surveillance

        @AC

        Quote: "....some machine considers private content suspicious....."

        Elsewhere in this thread there is a discussion of "air gaps" and "private encryption".

        So....in my own case...the snoops are welcome to consider private encryption as "suspicious".

        However, the same snoops have some very hard work to do in order to recover plain text.

        And (thanks to Diffie/Hellman) neither I nor my friends have ANY CLUE AT ALL about the

        encryption/decryption keys which were used. So.....lock me up for not disclosing that

        which I do not know (and never did know).

        Sigh!

  7. elsergiovolador Silver badge

    EU Stasi

    When jealous partner reads their spouse's private messages, installs spyware or demands access to the phone, we call it coercive control and abuse.

    In many jurisdictions this can land the person in jail.

    When corporation does the same thing to few hundred million people, with blessing from politicians, apparently it becomes child protection.

    The legal context differs, but the human nervous system does not magically stop responding because the observer is Meta rather than a jealous spouse.

    The person knows their private messages may be scanned, even if they have done nothing wrong.

    So they stop discussing certain topics. Mental health, sexuality, family problems, politics, relationship issues, anything which some machine may flag or some unknown employee may read without context.

    Then after some time they no longer write what they think, but what they think is safe to write.

    No private self for you.

    There is research on the victims of Stasi surveillance showing long-term depression, anxiety, trauma and even physical effects linked with chronic stress and inflammation.

    It is sometimes called Stasi syndrome for a reason.

    People seem to think that surveillance causes no injury because there is no bruise and nobody has kicked the door in.

    But spending years knowing that every private conversation may be inspected is psychological violence. Long-term psychological violence can lead to clinical depression, physical illness and, in the worst cases, death by suicide.

    Then someone will surely say that nobody is forced to use Messenger or similar platforms.

    Of course.

    You only have to leave family chats, school groups, local communities and most social contact. Then explain to everyone why you are being difficult and what exactly you have to hide.

    It is like saying worker is free not to accept surveillance at work. They only have to become unemployed.

    History has plenty of mass surveillance systems. Somehow none of them ended with population becoming safer, freer and mentally healthier.

    They usually ended with dossiers, false accusations, self-censorship and institutions finding new reasons why the temporary powers must remain forever.

    But apparently abuse stops being abuse when Parliament gives it legal basis, Meta runs the machinery and politicians put a child on the poster.

    1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

      Re: EU Stasi ........ Imitations and Iterations of which Guarantee Orange/Green Type Troubles* ...

      ..... delivering Rogue Virtual Competition and Renegade Remote Opposition against which there is never neither a Successful Defence Move nor any Viable Attack Strategy to be made possible and available.

      It appears all too clear to even the dimmest of souls that past lessons of the explosive danger of popular free speech censorship and denials of freedom and imposition of state detention without due proven cause or trial ..... Special Powers Action**/internment ....... haven’t been learned and heeded. So what else can one expect other than a similarly angry response drawing on the successful? tactics of the past ..... however, this time would it certainly be completely different with a vast array of SMARTR NEUKlearer HyperRadioProACTive Tools available for repurposing as Existential Threat Weapons of War for Peace in Greater IntelAIgent Games Play in the hands, for the capture of hearts and minds, of a new kind of noble otherworldly player.

      You definitely don’t want to be even thinking of going into battle against any of those Almightily ARMed Forces and Sources ..... nowadays with Immaculately Resourced Assets of Universatile Virtualisable Force.

      Take care ....... and beware, and be aware y’all have been very clearly and simply warned. Ignorance will be no defence for failures and defeats suffered because of foolish actions prepared and authorised and executed in arrogant indifference and criminal negligence and abdication of a duty of care to protect and preserve life and limb against well known to be psychotic and suicidal attacks against a Not Entirely Unkown Uknown and Almightily ARMed Forces and Sources.

      * ........ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles

      ** ...... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Authorities_(Special_Powers)_Act_(Northern_Ireland)_1922

    2. Kurgan Silver badge

      Re: EU Stasi

      This is the whole point. Stop talking, then over time stop thinking. You are now a perfect sheep, the good citizen every government wants.

    3. Jellied Eel Silver badge

      Re: EU Stasi

      When jealous partner reads their spouse's private messages, installs spyware or demands access to the phone, we call it coercive control and abuse.

      But the EU is the most jealous partner. It'll have the private messages between you and !spouse. And in another bit of news-

      https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=PI_COM:C(2023)4523

      Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 of the European Parliament and of the Council 1 mandates motor vehicles of categories M and N to be equipped with advanced driver distraction warning (ADDW) systems from 7 July 2024 for new types and from 7 July 2026 for all new vehicles. The ADDW is defined as a system that helps the driver to continue paying attention to the traffic situation and warns the driver when he or she is distracted. For example, this function can be fulfilled by a system capable of recognising the driver’s level of visual attention to the traffic situation and warning the driver when distracted.

      ADDW is further defined as cameras that can maintain a constant watch on the driver and provide distractions, if they think the driver isn't attentive enough. Plus it'll be linked into the EUrocar's black box that monitors speed & location so road charging can be implemented. Or detect that passenger is !spouse and driver is pulling up to a hotel, or house that doesn't belong to the registered keeper. Oh ,and it'll also provide audio recording.

      Currently the system is supposed to keep recordings local, but you can bet that will change. Car detected as speeding? No more problems identifying the driver and tickets can be issued complete with picture. Crash? It'll have surprised pikachu faces as driver runs off the road after being distracted while trying to figure out which bit of 'driver assistance' is beeping at them.

      1. elsergiovolador Silver badge

        Re: EU Stasi

        Car detected as speeding?

        Car detected political activist? Off to the oncoming traffic!

  8. The Central Scrutinizer Silver badge

    Welcome to Minority Report, citizen.

    Papers please!

    1. An_Old_Dog Silver badge

      Papers, Please

      Officer Friendly will not ask you for your papers.

      Officer Friendly will already have had them auto-transmitted from your legally-mandated, you-must-keep-it-within-three-feet-of-your-body communication device.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @The_Central_Scrutinizer

      Yup.......They will bang me up for "pre-crime".....................................

      ..........that's the FUTURE crime that AI has predicted that I will commit!

      ..........and you thought the STASI was a problem..............

      Sigh!

      1. The Central Scrutinizer Silver badge

        Yeah well. It seems that "pre-crime" is becoming a "thing".

        I'm about ready to throw my phone away and only use Tor on my browser.

        Seriously, this is so fucked up.

  9. Groo The Wanderer - A Canuck Silver badge

    I'm very surprised the EU would allow unfettered, unlimited scanning of citizens personal accounts without a warrant; that flies in the face of every piece of privacy legislation they have ever enacted. I think it is clear that any such scanning should require a warrant from the courts in any nation in the civilized world. Uncivilized hell holes are likely to opt out of the limitations and spy on their own citizens without limit, such as the way China monitors their internet for "dissidents."

    1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

      I'm very surprised the EU would allow unfettered, unlimited scanning of citizens personal accounts without a warrant; that flies in the face of every piece of privacy legislation they have ever enacted.

      And yet this is exactly what they have done. I'm not that surprised given the way the EU has been transitioning into a federal superstate that interferes with ever more aspects of our daily lives. They're thinking of the children, and the nanny state is treating all its citizens like children.

      I think it is clear that any such scanning should require a warrant from the courts in any nation in the civilized world.

      That's how it used to work, ie a recognition that states have great powers, and surveillance is intrusive and should be justified and proportionate. Plus-

      https://fra.europa.eu/en/eu-charter/article/7-respect-private-and-family-life

      Article 7 - Respect for private and family life

      Everyone has the right to respect for his or her private and family life, home and communications.

      Article 7 of the EU's Charter of Fundamental Rights has been quietly repealed. They'll probably still argue they're respecting those rights to privacy, after scanning all our files & messages to make sure we're not doing anything naughty.

      Obey, Citizen.

  10. Manolo
    Mushroom

    Dirty tricks

    "Although 314 politicians voted to scrap Chat Control, while 276 voted to keep it, the vote required 360 MEPs to reject the Council of the European Union's position."

    So they scheduled the third vote during the holiday season, when a lot of MEP's had already left Brussels.

    So far for a "democratic" EU.

    1. BoHu
      Windows

      Re: Dirty tricks

      Yeah, that's the feeling I got from Bruno Ferreira's piece on this at Tom's Hardware [ https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/cyber-security/chat-control-1-0-sneaks-through-the-eu-parliament-letting-companies-scan-user-data-without-warrants-legal-tactic-used-to-force-a-majority-required-re-vote-on-eve-of-parliament-break ].

      Essentially (as also in TFA) "Chat Control 1.0 has already been shot down repeatedly" but "European Parliament President Roberta Metsola forced a 2nd reading [invoking orange-inspired] Rule 163's 'urgent procedure' mechanism", "exploiting the second-reading requirement that demands an absolute majority vote" and scheduled that on "the very last day before the European Parliament summer recess".

      It's the type of political manoeuvering that the roots of the Maltese PN party Metsola represents would be proud of afaik [(2016) https://www.maltatoday.com.mt/comment/opinions/61363/requiem_for_a_partys_fascist_roots ].

      The European Parliament needs more Pirate-Party-like MEPs, knowledgeable ones on privacy rights and right-to-repair among others, like TFA's "former MEP Patrick Breyer", and generally sensible folks like former President David Sassoli (deceased 2022) in my view, rather than political acrobat wolves camouflaged in sheepish disguises, imho.

      1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

        Re: Dirty tricks

        The European Parliament needs more Pirate-Party-like MEPs, knowledgeable ones on privacy rights and right-to-repair among others, like TFA's "former MEP Patrick Breyer", and generally sensible folks like former President David Sassoli (deceased 2022) in my view, rather than political acrobat wolves camouflaged in sheepish disguises, imho.

        Agreed, but MEPs are still pretty powerless to prevent legislation like Chat Control 2.0, or in-car surveillance. So the new ADDW requirement is a solution looking at the wrong problem. It'd be interesting to analyse what drivers are looking at in the 3s when the system thinks they're not paying attention to the road. I suspect the answer would be in the ergonomics of modern cars, ie replacing good'ol fashioned switch gear with multi-function displays and scroll wheels. It's easy to learn the muscle memory for where switches are, and their position without taking our eyes off the road. It's much less easy if drivers are forced to look down at their centre console displays to navigate and set the right option.

        But cars also are a right-to-repair problem with manufacturers using coded components that make it much harder and more expensive for people to service and maintain vehicles. Which means drivers might not bother, even though lack of servicing potentially makes the vehicle dangerous. It also doesn't seem to stop chop shops given those just upskilled and got hold of devices that can re-flash components to reset them. But the black box mandate, now with added surveillance might boost the market for older vehicles and resto-mods that don't have the spyware fitted. Which will probably mean those vehicles will be declared undriveable or uninsurable.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Democracy at work!

    314 politicians voted to scrap Chat Control,

    276 voted to keep it.

    Chat Control lives on.

    If 360 votes are needed for it to fail, why are 360 votes not needed for it to pass?

    And why is a majority not enough?

    Its a corrupt org.

  12. Missing Semicolon Silver badge
    Unhappy

    so much for democracy

    I keep being told that the EU is democratic, as decisions by the unelected Commission are subject to review by the Parliament. Looks like you need a supermajority to overturn a Commission edict.

    1. Paul Crawford Silver badge

      Re: so much for democracy

      You forget the "unelected Commission" are chose by the governments to do any dirty work.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon