Re: [arch-d] IAB Statement on Encryption and Mandatory Client-side Scanning of Content

Exactly.

Any rational policy making has to begin with a statement of goals and ask
what is the best and most reliable means of achieving them.

Deployment of intercept capabilities is a means, not a goal. The criminals
have been using countermeasures against intercept for a very long time and
they have been using secure E2E applications since the mid 1990s. And they
are pretty ineffective for pedophile groups attempting to recruit new
members from outside their circle.

Infiltration rather than intercepts is the strategy that is delivering
results.

On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 9:25 PM Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
wrote:

>
>
> On 12/17/2023 4:44 PM, Andrew Campling wrote:
> > At 8:08 PM 16-12-2023, S Moonesamy<sm+ietf@elandsys.com>  wrote:
> >
> >> I would like to commend the members of the IAB for acknowledging the
> concern about societal harms.
> > The document states that "The IAB shares concerns about societal harms
> through the distribution of illegal content and criminal action on the
> Internet and recognizes the need to protect Internet users from such
> threats".  Whilst the document rules out the use of client-side scanning (a
> definition of which could usefully be added), it does not go on to indicate
> how the IAB recommends Internet users should be protected from such
> threats; is there a plan to produce a separate document that addresses this
> important issue?
>
> The current police powers seem sufficient to catch these criminals. See
> for example the recent arrest of 80 alleged pedophiles in France
> (
> https://www.lemonde.fr/en/france/article/2023/12/09/france-detains-80-in-largest-child-sex-crime-swoop_6327996_7.html)
>
> The article is a bit short on how the police did it, but it smells of
> old fashioned police work, infiltrating networks, seizing documents and
> eventually rolling up these networks.
>
> The hoopla in Europe seem to have been whipped up by a "non profit"
> organization that wanted to sell Artificial Intelligence systems to the
> police, and somehow required access to clear text exchanges for their
> system to work, be sold to the police, and make them money. It was
> probably amplified by police organizations in search of extra
> surveillance powers (e.g., Europol). The whole thing was debated in the
> European parliament, where the proposal was voted down.
>
> -- Christian Huitema
>
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture-discuss mailing list
> Architecture-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss
>