Discussion
@je5perl That's what I thought, so essentially the privacy of a user's device is in the hands of?
I mean, I assume we're talking the very corporations that specialise in violating privacy because it makes them money.
If this is a win, I don't understand something.
#ChatControl
@happyborg Voluntary for service providers (this is sometimes called #ChatControl 1.0 https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/chatcontrol-1-0-pirates-condemn-extension-by-parliament/)
@je5perl That's what I thought, so essentially the privacy of a user's device is in the hands of?
I mean, I assume we're talking the very corporations that specialise in violating privacy because it makes them money.
If this is a win, I don't understand something.
#ChatControl
@happyborg No service provider is doing voluntary detection for end-to-end encrypted services, whereas the proposed mandatory scheme would apply to #E2EE services as well (forcing them to implement client-side scanning).
This is the big difference. It's not the ideal outcome, I fully agree about that.
A space for Bonfire maintainers and contributors to communicate
