Swedish government wants a back door in signal for police and ‘Säpo’ (Swedish federation that checks for spies)
Let’s say that this becomes a law and Signal decides to withdraw from Sweden as they clearly state that they won’t implement a back door; would a citizen within the country still be able to use and access Signals services? Assuming that google play services probably would remove the Signal app within Sweden (which I also don’t use)
I just want the government to go f*ck themselves, y’know?
You must log in or register to comment.
And I want a better future. Guess we’re both gonna be disappointed ain’t we
Stop this!
Would anyone accept if the government installed a door into your house that only they have the key to?! Just in case they need to come in and avoid kicking the normal door when I am not home…
“Every house should break open a wall and build a door only to be used by the police whenever they want to. It will only be used for your protection ;)”
With a universal key to every single door that is easily copyable and sharable, but not really possible to know if one bad cop decides to share it for $$$$
A rep for the Centerparti literally used this argument on the news today, they are very against it. It is just a proposal at the moment, even the military passovely criticized it as they use Signal for communication.
Hopefully that’s enough for it not to pass but you never know. If it passes that’s a new low.
You can still download the APK from their repository, install it, and use signals built in censoring-evasion setting as far as I know.
They are even working on self updating app feature IIRC.
This is why I donate to signal. I know there are decentralized alternatives but I can barely get my family and friends to use Signal.
Really? I got my family to use it with a simple explanation of why, and why they shouldn’t use other things. None of them are very tech-literate. And also simply saying it’s where they can reach me.
I feel like this is a you problem, you don’t explain it well to them and make them understand why they should use it.
I’m not going to say it’s not a me-problem, but disregarding the fact that if it was that simple it would be more widespread amongst people is making it seem as if we don’t try seriously and downplays the effort many like myself put in.
I care about privacy and about my close ones (as many here do) and I explain the issue to them in a nice way so to not come across as a pushy salesman, and they readily admit that they don’t want to put the effort in (effort as in learning something new, upkeeping with multiple apps, etc).
It’s not that I don’t know why they don’t switch immidiately - I know why. It’s simply that they don’t. It’s okay not to switch as long as you know the risks and I’ve explained the risks and they seem to understand it, but it’s not enough to get everyone to switch.
If life was that simple with everyone (I know some switch without hesitation) the world would be completely different.
You can explain to a decent normal person the imminent doom we are facing with climate change and they may understand it very well, but they still wont give up on using their car and switch to public transport immidiately, because it is an inconvenience.
How does this even make sense? The criminals would just move to another platform like SimpleX or use a VPN.
Whole article in English:
The encrypted messaging app Signal is growing - now even the Swedish Armed Forces use it.
But the government wants to force the company to introduce a technical backdoor for the police and Säpo.
- “If this becomes a reality, we will leave Sweden,” says Signal’s CEO Meredith Whittaker, in an exclusive interview with SVT.
If the government gets its way, the bill will be passed in the Riksdag as early as March next year.
The bill states that companies such as Signal and Whatsapp will be forced to store all messages sent using the apps. Leaving Sweden
Signal - which is run by a non-profit foundation - has now told SVT Nyheter that the company will leave Sweden if the bill becomes reality.
- “In practice, this means that we are being asked to break the encryption that is the basis of our entire business. Asking us to store data would undermine our entire architecture and we would never do that. We would rather leave the Swedish market completely,” says Signal’s CEO Meredith Whittaker.
She says the bill would require Signal to install so-called backdoors in its software.
- “If you create a vulnerability based on Swedish wishes, it would create a path to undermine our entire network. Therefore, we would never introduce these backdoors.
But don’t you have a responsibility as a supplier to support anti-crime efforts?
- Our responsibility is to provide technology that upholds human rights in an era where those rights are being violated in more and more places. In today’s digital world, there are very few places where we can communicate privately or whistleblow. Armed forces critical
Whittaker cites the 2024 attack by the Chinese state actor Salt Typhoon on several internet service providers in the US, where text messages and phone calls were leaked. She argues that a Swedish backdoor would open up for the same thing.
- “There are no backdoors that only the good guys have access to.”
The aim of the bill is to allow the Security Service and the police to request the message history of criminal suspects after the fact. Both authorities were positive in the consultation.
- “The ability of law enforcement authorities to effectively access electronic communications is crucial,” said Minister of Justice Gunnar Strömmer (M) earlier at a press conference.
But the Swedish Armed Forces are opposed and recently urged their personnel to start using Signal to reduce the risk of interception.
In a letter to the government, the Swedish Armed Forces wrote that the bill could not be implemented “without introducing vulnerabilities and backdoors that could be exploited by third parties”.
This is why you should prefer a better protocol like SimpleX
What are you talking about?
Centralized communications are susceptible to government controls, while decentralized systems are more difficult to stop, like Lemmy for example.
Wherever a service with encryption exists any government in the world thinks they need to be the special child with the access to the contents.
E2E with privately generated and held keys, have you published your PGP public key yet?
E2E with privately generated and held keys, have you published your PGP public key yet?
Exactly. You can’t stop secure encryption.
I remember in the very old days of the internet when only the US had strong encryption and thought it was some gotcha. They labeled it a weapon to prevent overseas export. Phil Zimmerman created PGP, lobbed the source into a book (protected under 1st amendment) then shipped it overseas.
If strong encryption exists and people want to use it, you’re just not going to be able to stop them.
Article with no trackers
The encrypted messaging app Signal is growing – now even the Swedish Armed Forces are using the app.
But the government wants to force the company to introduce a technical backdoor for the Police and the Swedish Security Service.
“If it becomes a reality, we will leave Sweden,” says Signal’s boss Meredith Whittaker, in an exclusive interview with SVT.
If the government has its way, the bill will be passed in the Riksdag as early as March next year.
The bill states that companies such as Signal and Whatsapp will be forced to store all messages sent using the apps.
Leaving Sweden Signal – which is run by a non-profit foundation – now states to SVT Nyheter that the company will leave Sweden if the bill becomes a reality.
“In practice, this means that we are being asked to break the encryption that is the basis of our entire business. Asking us to store data would undermine our entire architecture and we would never do that. We would rather leave the Swedish market completely,” says Signal’s head of Meredith Whittaker.
She says the bill would require Signal to install so-called backdoors in the software.
"If you create a vulnerability based on Swedish wishes, it would create a path to undermine our entire network. Therefore, we would never introduce these backdoors.
But don’t you as a supplier have a responsibility to support efforts against crime?
"Our responsibility is to offer technology that upholds human rights in an era where those rights are being violated in more and more places. In today’s digital world, there are very few places where we can communicate privately or whistleblow.
The Armed Forces critical Meredith Whittaker mentions the Chinese state actor Salt Typhoon’s 2024 attack on several internet service providers in the United States, where text messages and phone calls were leaked. She believes that a Swedish back door would open the door for the same thing.
"There are no back doors that only the good guys have access to.
The purpose of the bill is to enable the Security Service and the police to request subsequent notification history for persons suspected of crime. Both authorities were positive in the consultation round.
“The opportunities for law enforcement authorities to effectively access electronic communications are absolutely crucial,” Justice Minister Gunnar Strömmer (M) said earlier at a press conference.
But the Armed Forces are negative and recently the Armed Forces urged their personnel to start using Signal to reduce the risk of eavesdropping.
In a letter to the government, the Armed Forces writes that the bill will not be able to be realized “without introducing vulnerabilities and back doors that may be used by third parties”.
