this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2023
347 points (98.3% liked)

Europe

8484 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Ί

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old

Banning geoblocking - based

Forcing websites to be transparent about cookies - based

Forcing websites to apply proper data security - based

Forcing Apple to use usb c - based

Ending end to end encryption - fucking clowns

Ending streaming service geoblocking - back on track, hopefully?

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

what those posts have in common is that they're both about EU attempts to reduce the power of US tech companies. (In the first they're reducing those companies' power to violate privacy, and in the second they're reducing their power to protect it.)

[–] FMT99@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

Nobody spies on our citizens but us

[–] Varcour@lemm.ee -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This doesn't restrict TLS, a protocol, it restricts the implementations of TLS by the handful of companies who develop and distribute widely-used web browsers - which are mostly US-headquartered multinationals.

[–] Varcour@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Mandating trusted CAs opens the door to fucking with the communication in progress. Ie undermining TLS whose job it is to protect that communication. Spinning this as an attack on the companies making the browser is a bit too creative for me. That's like saying wiretaps are an attack on the telco, not the phone calls being listened in on.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

Currently browser vendors are able to make their own decisions about which CAs to trust, and how to validate certificates. Most browsers trust a lot of nation states' CAs, but they (the browser vendors) are currently free to unilaterally stop trusting them when they learn of abuses.

That’s like saying wiretaps are an attack on the telco, not the phone calls being listened in on.

Often it is both. Remember MUSCULAR?

[–] jojo@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's categorically false, they want to inject their own trusted certificates into browsers that're distributed in the EU, so that any MITM traffic will "just function". Basically they're forcing a backdoor for every encrypted channel.

Furthermore they want to make certificate transparency next-to-illegal; remove protections and warnings for when someone is requesting certificates for your domain when you haven't requested them, plus other uses.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not sure what part of my comment you're saying is categorically false? I agree with your assessment of eIDAS! I even made a meme about it.

I guess you're disagreeing with me saying this restricts companies' implementations of TLS rather than TLS itself? I'm saying that because the law is specifically talking about web browsers, and doesn't appear to apply to other uses of TLS.

[–] CJOtheReal@lemmy.sdf.org 21 points 1 year ago

Yeah someone has to (verbally of course) beat the crap out of the people constantly wanting to destroy democracy and privacy...

[–] crackajack@reddthat.com 11 points 1 year ago

The EU is the ultimate centrist. They can be people-friendly, but also corporate-friendly. They're accused of being a neoliberal for a good reason.

[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A quick google finds me a government website explaining eidas and what it's for. By that, I know it's not behind closed doors or undisclosed, nor requiring compromised certificates.

With a quick google, you might find the same. The eu's website, are a reliable source for information about the EU I think

[–] Masimatutu@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 3 points 1 year ago

That's a lot, I'll have a better look this afternoon. Here's my government's website on this feature

https://www.government.nl/topics/online-access-to-public-services-european-economic-area-eidas/everything-you-need-to-know-about-eidas

[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com -1 points 1 year ago

reading further, (summarising) the change is to no longer exclusively trust parties like Google to rule who is and isn't considered trusted online and instead delegates this to EU member states. This does not affect the use of encryption, or a safe dns provider. No worries about your data being recorded.

However, it does stop large organizations like google and Mozilla from abusing their position of authority to harm competitors availability and trust online

[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

also, last-chance-for appears to be from mozilla and worried about article 45. I can recommend reading it for yourself. If there is one thing I learned in recent years its that orgs funded 95% by google might not be the most trustworthy when talking about internet regulations. So I suggest to not take mozilla by their word, cuz without google funding they're dead

here is the legal text if you'd like to read

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.2014.257.01.0073.01.ENG

[–] Masimatutu@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If you really don't trust Mozilla I recommend you to directly check out this open letter (which is signed by more than 300 experts).

Edit: fixed link, changed language

[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 0 points 1 year ago

Looks like I might have had an old version of the doc. Clicking the link I read this morning I find a 404. After finding it again, I do find a doc where recognize what they're concerned about