[HN Gopher] New EU Chat Control proposal moves forward
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       New EU Chat Control proposal moves forward
        
       Author : ericzawo
       Score  : 101 points
       Date   : 2025-11-18 19:16 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (techreport.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (techreport.com)
        
       | dataking wrote:
       | https://fightchatcontrol.eu/
       | 
       | As far as I understand, people using this site to contact their
       | elected officials were instrumental in making lawmakers back down
       | from ChatControl v2.0. Hoping the same will be true this time
       | around.
        
         | ryandrake wrote:
         | On the contrary, it doesn't seem to have had any effect at all.
         | Nobody actually _defeated_ anything if it just gets re-proposed
         | a few weeks later.
        
           | pixl97 wrote:
           | Ah, the US way, just keep trying to pass the bill again and
           | again until people get tired and it eventually passes
           | quietly.
        
           | danaris wrote:
           | Every time we stop it from becoming law, _that is a victory_.
           | 
           | Viewing it as anything else is actively counterproductive.
           | 
           | The fact that they will keep bringing it back until we have
           | better people in the EU Parliament just means that we have to
           | win more victories.
        
           | jononor wrote:
           | Winning a battle and living to fight another day is useful.
           | Does not mean the fight is over, of course.
        
       | getcrunk wrote:
       | How would these types of proposals deal with foss non
       | centralized/fully p2p messaging system? Just make them illegal?
       | 
       | What if the foss app has the "scanning" but can be disabled with
       | a compile time flag
       | 
       | Is my email client going to have to implement this scanning if I
       | use pgp?
        
         | dmitrygr wrote:
         | the worst (and the only) way possible: hold authors or
         | distributors of the said software responsible: Order apple and
         | google to remove apps, Order ISPs to block domains that host
         | PWAs, Issue arrest warrants for authors of software that does
         | not or cannot comply.
        
         | layer8 wrote:
         | The proposals apply to "providers" of "hosting services", of
         | "interpersonal communications service", and of "software
         | application stores" (you can look up the definitions for
         | yourself in the published texts). It's hard to see how that
         | would apply to purely P2P systems, except that distributing an
         | app for it via app stores would likely require user age
         | verification.
        
           | thewebguyd wrote:
           | Flathub, the snap store, gnome software, etc. all technically
           | meet the definitino of software application store.
           | 
           | Makes me wonder (and worry) if they can stretch the
           | definition to apply to standard package repos as well. Are we
           | going to be entering an era where you have to verify your
           | identity & age to apt-get software?
        
             | layer8 wrote:
             | Or switch to P2P distribution.
             | 
             | The real danger is if hardware becomes dongled by firmware
             | that doesn't allow you to install anything you want
             | anymore.
        
               | thewebguyd wrote:
               | I think that real danger is a very real possibility with
               | legislation like this. Not in the way that you won't be
               | able to buy "unlocked" devices, but that web services and
               | government services just flat out won't be accessible to
               | you if you aren't on a sanctioned device (with the
               | sanctioned spyware).
               | 
               | Think things like requiring play integrity attestation to
               | access banking, or an equivalent service baked into
               | macOS, Windows, iOS. If you aren't on one of those
               | proprietary and spied on OSes, you can't access most of
               | the web.
               | 
               | So technically the hardware will remain relatively open,
               | but they'll make it so you can't interact with the rest
               | of society with it.
        
               | layer8 wrote:
               | That would still be the relatively benign outcome. You
               | can have one device for all the official stuff, and
               | another device for your own software, "free" OSs and the
               | "free" internet. However, I could see a future where
               | anything that accesses the internet is required to be an
               | iPhone-like clamped down device.
        
       | varispeed wrote:
       | The EU has been taken over by terrorists and law enforcement does
       | nothing. People behind Chat Controls should be arrested.
       | 
       | These proposals are against German laws and other EU countries.
       | It can be treated as terrorist attack attempt.
       | 
       | It creates psychological and physical harm, indiscriminately for
       | ideological gain. Textbook terrorism, except done by nice people
       | in suits and there is no blood (yet).
        
       | dang wrote:
       | Recent and related:
       | 
       |  _The disguised return of EU Chat Control_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45929511 - Nov 2025 (340
       | comments)
        
       | kotaKat wrote:
       | It's almost as if the EU keeps getting it wrong, time and time
       | again with technology.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-11-18 23:01 UTC)