New attacks on encryption and privacy are posing a threat worldwide: with this basic argument, 22 civil society organizations are calling on representatives of the EU states and the European Commission to address shortcomings in the repeatedly revised draft of the UN agreement on fighting cybercrime. Organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Access Now, DigitalCourage, Epicenter.works, European Digital Rights (EDRi) and Privacy International particularly criticize the “overly broad scope that grants intrusive surveillance powers without strong human rights and data protection guarantees.” There is only a short time left to limit the planned contract and formulate clear principles to protect privacy.
Advertisement
A The UN committee is scheduled to meet for the last time in New York at the end of July And adopt the cybercrime convention, which was initiated by Russia and China. Without any major amendments, I will give it Current draft “Abhorrent practices by governments” such as spying on citizens and online censorship “give the appearance of international legitimacy”, Write to the signatories of the open letter to EU authorities. If no concrete improvements can be achieved, the initiative should be rejected. The scope currently also includes cyber-based and other content-related crimes. In this context, the hacker paragraphs repeatedly lead to bizarre decisions, for example when judges consider the use of plain text passwords a criminal offense.
Freedom of expression is in danger of being lost
“Article 18 of the draft lacks clarity regarding the liability of online platforms for crimes committed by their users,” civil rights activists say. This creates the risk that online platforms could be held liable for information generated by third parties even without actual knowledge of the illegality of the content. The latter is required by the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA). Operators would be encouraged to engage in “overly extensive content moderation,” “which comes at the expense of freedom of expression.” Even the Council of Europe’s controversial Cybercrime Convention is not so comprehensive. In other areas, the bill contains no specific human rights guarantees. At least a reference to the general principles of legality, necessity, proportionality, non-discrimination and legitimate purpose should be included.
According to the petition, large parts of Articles 28, 29 and 30 should be removed “because they contain excessive surveillance measures that open the door to invasion of privacy without adequate guarantees.” Also, technological protection mechanisms such as cybersecurity and encryption would be weakened. Clauses on international legal assistance went significantly too far, allowing international access to personal data in the cloud without effective fundamental rights protection. A series of EFF reports focused on the proposed deal For example, the threat of data retention And Criminalization of IT security researchers Published. Leading scientists in the field opposed the project in February. The EU actually promised to uphold human rights in the negotiations.
(There)
