According to the latest draft text of the controversial EU Child Sexual Abuse Regulation proposal leaked by the French news organisation Contexte, EU interior ministers want to exempt professional accounts of staff of intelligence agencies, police and military from the envisaged scanning of chats and messages (Article 1 (2a)). The regulation should also not apply to ‘confidential information’ such as professional secrets (Article 1 (2b)). The EU governments reject the idea that the new EU Child Protection Centre should support them in the prevention of child sexual abuse and develop best practices for prevention initiatives (Article 43(8)), writes Pirate Party MEP Patrick Breyer.
  • @[email protected]
    30•5 months ago

    Obviously important but “Published 2 months ago, on April 15, 2024” so would be good to also have an up to date link to understand what has changed, if anything, since that leak.

    • @[email protected]
      33•5 months ago

      https://www.patrick-breyer.de/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/csam_cleaned.pdf

      Leaked updated proposal (14.06.2024)

      (12a) In the light of the more limited risk of their use for the purpose of child sexual abuse and the need to preserve confidential information, including classified information, information covered by professional secrecy and trade secrets, electronic communications services that are not publicly available, such as those used for national security purposes, should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation. Accordingly, this Regulation should not apply to interpersonal communications services that are not available to the general public and the use of which is instead restricted to persons involved in the activities of a particular company, organisation, body or authority.

      = it has stayed the same. They still want to exempt themselves

      • brianorca
        3•5 months ago

        That sounds more like they are excluding most corporate internal systems, (which would also happen to cover the systems run by government.)

        • @[email protected]
          2•5 months ago

          Yes it does, but why would that exception be needed if it was such a good infallible system that they are proposing. They know of the problems of their proposal and are not willing to have it in a corporate or their own systems but it’s supposed to be fine for the masses to have security and privacy issues