The key is that, while there is suspicion (the people arrested have a far left ideology, have been to Syria to fight against the Islamic state, own weapons and encrypt all of their communications), there is <i>no crime nor proof of an intent to commit a crime</i>.<p>These people have been sent to prison because they are suspicious, not because of an action they have done (something made possible as a special case of an older antiterrorism law). And, amongst other things, using Signal and Linux with the encryption-on settings are <i>explicitly</i> listed as some of the things making them suspicious in the eyes of the law.<p>That is a slippery slope.
As others have mentioned, context matters a lot. The arrested group came back from Syria (where they fought alongside YPG against ISIS) radicalised, and were monitored ever since then. Their alleged crime isn't using Signal, it's just that a French anti-terrorism law allows to be arrested for "organisation with the intent to commit terrorist acts", which the DGSI(internal intelligence services) claims a radicalised group of people calling for a revolution, using encrypted communications, having a bunch of hunting weapons and ammunition, and materials for explosives is. A big stretch on the surface, but they were monitoring them for years, so who the hell knows what else they have.<p>The real problem is the unlawful detention of one of the men, for which a court finally intervened and he has been freed under surveillance.
Situation in France will not end well.<p>Both rule of law and liberal democracy are increasingly damaged. Our institutions are so weak that we are one election away from a complete disaster.<p>Our constitution always concentrated a lot of power in the hand of the president but there is no effective counter-power left. The government set multiple precedent that violate freedom of assembly and association and parliamentary rights. I skipped a lot of authoritarian practice that happened and are still happening but the situation is egregiously bad<p>I don't say that because I am a political opponent. I voted for this government in 2017, I am a founder, I am pro business. But also I am a father of two and I would rather raise my children in a democracy.<p>I am seriously pessimistic about this situation. EU knows and complains about Poland & Hungary but France is going to be a shitshow of a far worse magnitude. We should NOT get a pass because Macron knows how to play the game
In the mean time, the French government is also sending out a call for projects [1] that increase cybersecurity, digital sovereignty and promote encryption of data. Just not for the common folk, but for startups.<p>I find it funny (/s) that my current project is funded by the French government to develop end-to-end encryption in web applications [2]. Am I a terrorist too?<p>[1] <a href="https://www.bpifrance.fr/nos-appels-a-projets-concours/appel-a-projets-developpement-de-technologies-innovantes-critiques" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.bpifrance.fr/nos-appels-a-projets-concours/appel...</a><p>[2] <a href="https://github.com/SocialGouv/e2esdk/">https://github.com/SocialGouv/e2esdk/</a>
OK, I can see where they're coming from with things like Signal. Not that I agree, but at least I can understand the reasoning behind it.<p>But what is uBlock Origin's sin? A law-abiding citizen is supposed to be OK with seeing ads, or something?<p>Can someone who reads French please elaborate on what the linked piece is saying about it?
Oh dear, they used to be able to monitor everything through alcatel backdoors.<p>I guess they lost that ability now, and are trying to criminalize private communication.
English version of the article doesn't mention uBlock Origin at all<p><a href="https://www.laquadrature.net/en/2023/06/05/criminalization-of-encryption-the-8-december-case/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.laquadrature.net/en/2023/06/05/criminalization-o...</a>
Related:
The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web
<a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/tech/fbi-recommends-ad-blocker-online-scams-b1048998.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.standard.co.uk/tech/fbi-recommends-ad-blocker-on...</a>
"radioactive materials can be used to make bombs, let's ban them altogether"<p>"knifes can be used to stab people, let's ban them altogether"<p>"cleaning supplies can be used to poison people, let's ban them altogether"<p>#logik<p>also, potential = guilty until proven innocent
And now, the parliament is currently discussing a bill about forcing hardware manufacturers to include a remote switch in their products so that the mic and camera could be activated at distance by the authorities, so that the police can listen on potential terrorists[1].<p>This is fine…<p>[1]: <a href="https://www.francetvinfo.fr/societe/justice/le-senat-donne-son-feu-vert-a-l-activation-a-distance-des-cameras-ou-micros-des-telephones_5875187.html#xtor=CS2-765-[autres]-" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.francetvinfo.fr/societe/justice/le-senat-donne-s...</a>
This article should be taken with care: La Quadrature Du Net is a stark defender of liberties (which is good, we need those more than ever), but I found they have a tendency to cherry-pick what aligns with their views to dramatic effect.<p>I'm not saying there is no cause for concern - there usually is - but more often than not they have this tendency to overlook some elements and overblow some others to serve their narrative.<p>My recommendation would be to carefully read the source material and cross-read other reports to form one's opinion.
Users of the telephone, the postal system are potentially terrorists. Users of speech in groups of two or more people are potentially conspirators. Simply to think is to be a potential terrorist.
this article miss a whole part of the story. among other things, these person came back from a warzone. looks at <a href="https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affaire_du_8_décembre_2020" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affaire_du_8_décembre_2020</a>
An important detail is that the state has been condemned for that.<p>This goes to show that France is <i>not</i> a totalitarian regime. The government fucked up, justice, as an independent power punished it and the illegally detained suspect is now free. The whole story is freely reported by French media.<p>So is it bad: yes. Is it tolerated and are dissenters being silenced: no.<p>For the rest, we will have to wait until the trial, but if the accusers don't have anything better than the use of Signal and uBlock, it probably won't end well for them, even if they represent the government.
Wasn't there a time when French FidoNet could not exchange zipped mail, because that would be considered encryption? Maybe my memory is inventing things though.
The US isn't immune either.<p><a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/boston-college-prompt-commands-are-suspicious" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/boston-college-prompt-...</a>
The constitute project [1] (which I just discovered and seems like a fantastic initiative) offers a way to compare what different countries' constitutions say about citizen's right to privacy. Apparently 174 countries have some provision that is in force. France does not appear at all on this topic. Not sure if its some technical / linguistic reason.<p>[1] <a href="https://www.constituteproject.org/constitutions?lang=en&key=privacy&status=in_force" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.constituteproject.org/constitutions?lang=en&key=...</a>
Leaving aside the supposedly technical ineptitude of the French authorities (even though I think they're quite competent and that they full know what those apps do and how they work), cases like this one make me think that, going forward, one of the best strategies for "defeating" the powers that be will consist in avoiding the use of encrypted communications via special apps and the like and trying to blend in with how the general population, i.e. the normies, communicates.<p>Of course that the message will still need to be encrypted in a way, but that won't happen by using Telegram or Signal or WhatsApp or by encrypting your hard-drive using dedicated software, but the new "encryption" should work in a sort of "out in the open for anyone to see way", like in the famous E. A. Poe <i>The Purloined Letter</i> [1] short-story, with the stolen letter that was "hidden" in plain view for everyone to see.<p>Again, I realise that this new strategy isn't ideal, that it will most likely make it harder to keep constant the rate of encrypted communication that is now carried out using dedicated apps, but the reality on the ground is that by using Telegram or Signal or any other dedicated app that focuses on technical encryption one just manages to paint a target on his/her back.<p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Purloined_Letter" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Purloined_Letter</a>
These guys are up to no good and intentionally misuse the loaded language. Because it's loaded.<p>-----<p>terrorism<p>noun<p>the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.<p>"the fight against terrorism"
What is really appaling and frightening here is the level of ignorance, incompetence and technical illiteracy shown by the various magistrates, and how they can be manipulated by the storytelling. Unfortunately, I think it's fair to say that it's representative of the general level of expertise in the french judicial system. Want some laughs ? Look for "Olivier Laurelli", "Altice vs reflet.info"...
Oh yeah i definitively am a POTENTIAL terrorist... and if the nations of the allegedly free world are keeping their trajectory regarding encryption and civil rights there might even come a day to turn form POTENTIAL to ACTUAL...
Well, if some dipshit in a costume is gonna show up and point a gun at me for using open source software of my choice, I just may contemplate responding with violence, possibly in a coordinated manner.<p>Governments would be wise, so long as I'm not doing anything to hurt anyone else, to mind their own business and fuck off.<p>Don't make me get out my AR-15 with its standard rapacity 45rd mag
Will it be paving the way of replacing French government with a sixth form of republic or a 25th form of a government?<p>I mean, we all know that president dissolving the parliment/congress/house is an unworkable mechanism for a sustainable government.<p>A government that is afraid of its citizens is the right kind of governance: it keeps them within their expected functions: "expected" is the operative word.
We changed the URL from <a href="https://www.laquadrature.net/2023/06/05/affaire-du-8-decembre-le-chiffrement-des-communications-assimile-a-un-comportement-terroriste/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.laquadrature.net/2023/06/05/affaire-du-8-decembr...</a> to the translation, which was suggested by a reader. Thanks!
Most people want a simple answer to complex questions, the truth is that the French government is hundreds of people. Some sponsor e2ee projects to protect the people, while others consider use of such projects to be indicators of terrorism. Not the only indicators of course, but definitely something investigators might react to.
I mean, everyone is a <i>potential</i> terrorist - so since putting everyone in prison is obviously not practical, maybe the politicians should put themselves in prison then hold a committee meeting on redefining the terms "inside" and "outside" to make themselves feel better.
I support some protests in France, this is what fueled the state we have today with is social safety nets.<p>I do not support the protests that destroy public and private property.<p>Someone who supports such violence should have their house destroyed and looted and then affirm "well done!". Somehow this does not happen.<p>Neither the leaders who support squatting do not advertise their house address and when they go for vacation to incite the squatters to take their house and make it a trashbin.<p>There are different ways to protest but when you go for violence do not be surprised you get violence back (including non physical).<p>This is not talked to any political wing - as someone said the extremes usually meet.
Url changed from <a href="https://www.laquadrature.net/2023/06/05/affaire-du-8-decembre-le-chiffrement-des-communications-assimile-a-un-comportement-terroriste/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.laquadrature.net/2023/06/05/affaire-du-8-decembr...</a>, which points to this.
It is worth remembering that France got its current constitution in a bloodless coup:<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_1958_crisis_in_France" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_1958_crisis_in_France</a><p>It amazes me that the constitution that was put in place then is largely unchanged today, insofar as the French president is still incredibly powerful, parliament is subservient, and the electoral system is deeply majoritarian.<p>I don't know exactly <i>what</i> it says about a society that it keeps a constitution that was imposed this way, but it isn't anything good. The frank craziness in this article (F-Droid, lol) is in keeping with that.