this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2023
920 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

59549 readers
3440 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 13 points 11 months ago (2 children)

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The eSafety regulator has stressed in an associated discussion paper it “does not advocate building in weaknesses or back doors to undermine privacy and security on end-to-end encrypted services”.

But privacy and security groups argue the draft standards, as written, could allow the eSafety commissioner to force companies to compromise encryption to comply.

Andy Yen, the founder and chief executive of Proton, told Guardian Australia the proposed standards “would force online services, no matter whether they are end-to-end encrypted or not, to access, collect, and read their users’ private conversations”.

“These proposals could not only force companies to bypass their own encryption, but could put businesses and citizens at risk while doing little to protect people from the online harms they are intended to address,” he said.

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner said Inman Grant welcomed feedback on the draft standards – including on the technical feasibility exception.

“Having mandatory and enforceable codes in place, which put the onus back on industry to take meaningful action against the worst-of-the-worst content appearing on their products and services, is a tremendously important online safety milestone,” Inman Grant said.


The original article contains 468 words, the summary contains 187 words. Saved 60%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The eSafety regulator has stressed in an associated discussion paper it “does not advocate building in weaknesses or back doors to undermine privacy and security on end-to-end encrypted services”.

Just straight up lying with that one.

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Technically maybe, but not necessarily. This is tactic that executives use all the time to force their employees to do illegal, or unethical actions, without ever telling them to.

For example, Wells Fargo executives didn't tell their bank employees to commit fraud, but they set their sales targets such that the ONLY way to reasonably achieve them was to defraud their customers.

However, I didn't read the actual white paper, so maybe it does explicitly say backdoors need to be built.

[–] x4740N@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

Hey inman grant if you ever see this, fuck you

We know your acting intentionally obtuse