Attached: 1 image
Danish Minister of Justice and chief architect of the current Chat Control proposal, Peter Hummelgaard:
"We must break with the totally erroneous perception that it is everyone's civil liberty to communicate on encrypted messaging services."
Share your thoughts via https://fightchatcontrol.eu/, or to jm@jm.dk directly.
Source: https://www.ft.dk/samling/20231/almdel/REU/spm/1426/index.htm
Some context, which I’m sure will be downvoted because we don’t like chat control.
The Danes currently hold the rotating presidency for the council. As such they are required to be the architects of the council position, good initiatives and bad.
The EU holds countries that are against government access to chat services and countries that believe access should be routine and warrant-free.
The Danish “architect of chat control” is thus required, by EU law, to define a compromise position and see if that can be voted through in the council.
The compromise position is a combination of “scanning at source” using both known fingerprints and AI, with a warrant based access process for police sources.
As a compromise position that’s possible passable in parliament and council.
I personally think the whole thing the entire thing is unworkable in practice. But the Danes are getting involved because they have to.
Some context, which I’m sure will be downvoted because we don’t like chat control.
The Danes currently hold the rotating presidency for the council. As such they are required to be the architects of the council position, good initiatives and bad.
The EU holds countries that are against government access to chat services and countries that believe access should be routine and warrant-free.
The Danish “architect of chat control” is thus required, by EU law, to define a compromise position and see if that can be voted through in the council.
The compromise position is a combination of “scanning at source” using both known fingerprints and AI, with a warrant based access process for police sources.
As a compromise position that’s possible passable in parliament and council.
I personally think the whole thing the entire thing is unworkable in practice. But the Danes are getting involved because they have to.
He doesn’t have to go to the press with authoritarian statements defending chat control. This is what he said:
“We must break with the totally erroneous perception that it is everyone’s civil liberty to communicate on encrypted messaging services.”
This is Putin-style authoritarianism coming from Peter Hummelgaard.