Europe
News and information from Europe πͺπΊ
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org
view the rest of the comments
You can't really make e2ee messaging illegal, at least it is impossible to enforce with decentralized open-source messengers.
It is much more likely that the US will mess with Signal, than that you will stop being able to use an e2ee messenger like XMPP, which is just as secure as Signal regarding the e2e encryption.
The issue is that it's already pretty hard to convince people to use something easy like Signal, most people just don't care enough for something "complicated" like XMPP-based messengers, especially if mainstream app stores had to stop letting EU-based users install messengers with these features.
Well, yes. But when it comes to digital independence Signal isn't better than WhatsApp. At least recommend something like Threema if you think the much better alternatives are too hard.
Except Meta fully owns the WhatsApp metadata, and frankly Signal is a lot more trustworthy about its e2e implementation being actually, in practice, secure.
All you need is a central registry where licensed messengers register their e2ee connections. Then network providers only have to report all ip addresses with connections that are not on that list.
Impossible with VPNs, but politicians have already announced their desire to make them illegal.
What? You are not making much sense. What is a "e2ee connection"?
An encrypted connection between two endpoints.That's required for "decentralized open-source messengers".
Currently it's impossible to prevent because of all the encrypted video calls of the Meta messengers and similar connections between endpoints.
If those video streams are marked then it is known which endpoints use software that evades surveillance.
I am not sure you understand what you are talking about. There is no easy way to distingish between different connections and pretty much all internet traffic is encrypted these days.
My argument is that a central registry, where all controlled software registers their connections, is all that is needed to identify the connections that are outside the control of the surveillance state.
How would you register all connections of the internet?
Only e2e connections have to be registered.
If every human has 10 e2e connections per hour, that's 80G connections. If that requires 10k bytes for communication that would be 800T bytes per hour, 250G byte per second. That should be possible.
Use the routers of the exchange points to track the connections. Let them report any connection that hasn't received a validation from the registry.
Again, what is a "e2e connection"? There is no such thing and it is nearly impossible to distingish a e2e encrypted data stream inside a TLS connection from regular TLS encrypted connection.
It is a connection between network Endpoints. The connection that is e2e Encrypted.
IP ranges show which IP belongs to a server in a data center and which is an endpoint.
Yes, but how do you distinguish between two identical TLS connections? You can't and hence you can't figure out if the content inside is additionally e2e encrypted. So what you are suggesting just doesn't work technically.
The registry tells me if a connection is from an app that uses encryption that I can break. Everything else is suspect, needs investigation and after an introduction time, will be forbidden. Routers can easily discard everything that is not approved by the registry.
How? You have two arbitrary computers exchanging TCP packets. There is no way to tell any difference.
As I wrote before, trustworthy apps register their connection at the registry.
You are not making sense. You can register as many apps as you want, if there is no way to distinguish non-registered app traffic from regular internet traffic.
There is no need to distinguish the traffic. IP adresses and ports identify the streams.
The app creates a connection and registers both IPs and ports at the registry.
Then the app starts sending data.
The first router at an internet exchange point asks the registry if the IPs and ports are registered. If they are, the packets are delivered, if not they are dropped.
That way no unregistered app can exchange data.
So you are saying the entire internet needs to be shut down?
All websites keep working. All commercial apps will be adjusted and keep working. At first users just receive warnings and all apps keep working.
The internet won't shut down when finally the packets are dropped. Only democracy will die, silently.
Look, this discussion is going nowhere, as you clearly have no idea how the internet actually functions. If websites keep working you can continue sending e2e encrypted messages from an unregistered app. Please educate yourself first and then you will realize how nonsensical your idea is.
You can also send e2ee messages with Whatsapp if you copy and paste them. At some point, encryption of messages doesn't help because it's suspicious enough that further investigations are triggered.
Of course you can create a secret messenger service hidden on a regular website. But it's either unknown which makes it useless, or popular which will attract an investigation.
No, any normal easy to use federated XMPP app will work with built in e2ee. There is no real difference between an app communicating with a server and a browser communicating with a webserver, and for an outside observer there is no easy way to tell them apart.
Please educate yourself better about this topic. You make yourself look really stupid π€·
Oh and WhatApp is already e2ee.
The problem is
So everything on a server must be accessable and all regular messengers with e2ee must have a backdoor.
So the only possibility for secure communications are direct connections that no server can scan with AI.
Shut that down, too, and no community bigger than a couple of people can communicate unsupervised.
The EU can try to make it illegal, but as I said, there is no way to enforce such a law and no real way to prevent decentralized e2ee messengers from continuing to work.
So really what you are saying makes little sense.