
Hungarian government briefly proposes to criminalize encrypted services - randomname2
https://mappingmediafreedom.org/#/2058
======
Vivtek
This appears to be a rather sensationalist headline for a move that is
admittedly boneheaded on Orbán's part. To ensure the state's ability to
surveil, the government had a plan to enforce the inclusion of backdoors.

However, it appears that after some consultation with people that had a clue -
of which Hungary actually has a large number - the government has decided that
would be a Bad Idea and has tabled the plans.

Source: Hungarian Civil Liberties Union ([http://tasz.hu/en/news/hungarian-
government-plans-enforce-en...](http://tasz.hu/en/news/hungarian-government-
plans-enforce-encryption-backdoors)).

This is actually very typical of Fidesz (Orbán Viktor's ruling party). They
_love_ making abrupt and sweeping changes to the law, then leaving everybody
else to pick up the pieces. Occasionally, cooler heads prevail before the law
is actually broken, but normally there's just a mess.

~~~
afandian
For international readers, in US English 'table' means 'postpone', whereas in
British English it means 'to present for discussion' which has almost the
opposite meaning!

~~~
toyg
I've never seen 'table' being used as 'postpone' by any American, either in
literature or on the intertubes; is it some sort of professional / niche
usage?

~~~
stephenhuey
Winston Churchill wrote about a misunderstanding during World War 2 which was
caused by the different meanings for this expression:

 _The enjoyment of a common language was of course a supreme advantage in all
British and American discussions. The delays and often partial
misunderstandings which occur when interpreters are used were avoided. There
were however differences of expression, which in the early days led to an
amusing incident. The British Staff prepared a paper which they wished to
raise as a matter of urgency, and informed their American colleagues that they
wished to "table it." To the American Staff "tabling" a paper meant putting it
away in a drawer and forgetting it. A long and even acrimonious argument
ensued before both parties realized that they were agreed on the merits and
wanted the same thing._

You'll see that in the 3rd paragraph on this page:
[https://books.google.com/books?id=zVdux2KfenoC&lpg=PP1&dq=wi...](https://books.google.com/books?id=zVdux2KfenoC&lpg=PP1&dq=winston%20churchill%20table%20second%20world%20war%20grand%20alliance&pg=PA609#v=onepage&q&f=false)

~~~
Mikeb85
Interesting bit of history. The usage I've heard is that 'tabling' means to
postpone, putting something on the table means to present something. Generally
just 'table' means, well a table. Then again, Canadian here.

~~~
slavik81
I'm a Canadian too, but my understanding matched the British usage. Newspapers
are full of stuff like this quote from The Globe and Mail: "Mr. McCallum told
reporters Tuesday that the government will table its annual immigration report
before March 9."

~~~
Mikeb85
Hmm, guess I need to read more newspapers. I do find though that as time goes
on our language tends to use both American and British spellings/meanings
seemingly at random, due to the various influences (plus a few Canadianisms).

------
pestaa
I'm Hungarian. This bullshit is actively being reverted.

Originally there was a plan to put encryption app users in jail for up to two
years.

But not all communication apps would be treated equal: mainstream applications
already using encryption, such as Skype or Viber, would be perfectly okay.
Only using those applications specifically written to encrypt communication,
primarily CryptTalk, would have been punishable.

Edit: Our speculation is that this is the same strategy seen with the internet
tax. Spreading FUD and stealing state wealth while everybody runs in circles.

Edit 2: They did ban using CryptTalk and similar products (all communication
services with encryption as their main selling point). No information on how
they plan to enforce this decision: their only tool is to ask mobile app
stores nicely to hide these apps from plain sight.

~~~
JustSomeNobody
This should give everyone pause when choosing to use Skype.

~~~
mhurron
Pretty sure Microsoft never advertised Skype as something they couldn't
intercept, so you probably shouldn't have been using it for anything you
wouldn't say over the phone line in the first place.

~~~
mtgx
I don't think it did, but when Microsoft bought it, Skype was still considered
"hard to eavesdrop" due to its P2P architecture.

Microsoft left everyone to believe that it's still secure even after it
centralized its nodes and would constantly refuse to respond to questions
about whether Skype can be intercepted. I remember at one point about 50 civil
liberties groups sent an open letter to Microsoft about it, and it refused to
answer it then, too.

I also remember that some people were noticing that their https links would
get blocked on Skype, which also meant Microsoft can MITM the Skype chats
between users and it was no longer P2P (if I remember correctly Microsoft also
tried to hide the fact that Skype was no longer P2P for quite a while, again
leaving people to believe their chats could not be intercepted).

Microsoft also killed TOM-Skype in China, which was _specifically_ designed to
allow interception and censorship that bypassed Skype's P2P architecture. At
the time, everyone who was paying attention _knew_ that this meant Skype could
now be intercepted _everywhere_ , otherwise Microsoft wouldn't have deprecated
TOM-Skype for China.

[http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/01/24/skype_urg...](http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/01/24/skype_urged_to_come_clean_on_eavesdropping_capabilities_and_policies_in.html)

[https://en.greatfire.org/blog/2013/nov/tom-skype-dead-
long-l...](https://en.greatfire.org/blog/2013/nov/tom-skype-dead-long-live-
microsoft-surveillance)

~~~
mhurron
My point is more without explicitly saying so and explaining how, you
shouldn't have been assuming it was any more secure.

Even when it was P2P, it was assumed it was hard to eavesdrop, it was never
proven to be.

------
dtf
Ironically, parliament awarded CryptTalk an innovation award last week.

[http://budapestbeacon.com/economics/crypttalk-given-
innovati...](http://budapestbeacon.com/economics/crypttalk-given-innovation-
award-parliament-now-govt-plans-ban-app/33507)

------
tobbyb
There is a now a growing awareness of the unhealthy level of obsession
governments have about citizens communications.

This is in effect the same as the Burr-Feinstein encryption bill, one
penalizes users, the other service providers. The bottom line is there is a
lot of posturing about privacy but little commitment. All governments without
exception are obsessed with your communications and data. It is unsettling and
creepy.

I really think some users will have to take 'secure communications' into their
own hands depending on the level of need and address metadata exposures. If
its remotely life threatening or impacting it would be foolish to depend on
any service provider or technology.

You can't win an encryption 'arms race' against state level actors with near
endless resources, capabilities and the will. And the law and willingness to
arm twist service providers and projects with secret courts, orders,
intimidation, harassment.

One can't help feeling current technologies however committed fall way short
and are only lulling us into a false sense of privacy and complacency. A
solution that does not acknowledge a state actors sheer range of capabilities
and clearly articulate how it is addressed is not a solution. Perhaps
something that completely randomizes metadata and makes it too expensive to
break per user.

------
lossolo
This is what happens when someone that do not know anything about internet
architecture tries to make something illegal. Good luck in enforcing this law.

~~~
bandris
I fear that they have jailing opponents in mind.

~~~
tankenmate
They intend to jail anyone who uses GMail, WhatsApp, or any other encrypted
service? Such a effort will fail, if only because there isn't enough space in
the jails...

~~~
075
No, they will jail anyone who they think have done something, but have no
proof. This law will make them able to jail anyone without a reason.

~~~
freehunter
It's more common than you might think, even in the US. A common example I see
is major cities where the freeway speed limit is 45 or 55, but everyone is
doing 70 or 80mph, even the police officers. Most of the time that cop will
drive right past you even if you're doing 20mph or 30mph over the speed limit,
but if they want to pull you over, now they have a free reason to arrest you
and impound your car. But if you're driving the speed limit while everyone
else flies by you, you could be pulled over because driving too slow is
suspicious.

It seems that, given enough time, governments will find ways to implement
enough contradictory laws that everyone is a criminal.

------
adambrenecki
So, does this make (for example) visiting a website over HTTPS illegal? Or
does it compel Hungarian ISPs to MITM their customers? It seems to imply one
in one sentence, then the other in the next.

------
SixSigma
If you want to get technical, ASCII is a single-alphabet substitution cipher.

Remember, lawyers have tried asserting that copying to RAM is copyright
infringement.

[http://newmedialaw.proskauer.com/2008/08/20/ram-copying-
an-i...](http://newmedialaw.proskauer.com/2008/08/20/ram-copying-an-issue-of-
more-than-transitory-duration/)

~~~
imjustsaying
UTF8 is encryption for writing systems

The International Phonetic Alphabet is encryption for human voices

Language is encryption for ideas

I suppose the irony here is that Hungarian, as a language, is intricately
encrypted

------
negrit
I can't access the article right now. But I'm fairly certain that a couple of
stupid deputies who don't understand anything about technology/cryptology want
to introduce a law against it and everyone is going ape shit "Hungary want to
criminalize the use of encrypted services".

The same thing happens in France from time to time.

~~~
Piskvorrr
That's not _stupid_. That's _chaotic evil_ , almost by definition: "let's just
float this thing again and again, see if we can get away with it. If not, just
pretend we didn't see it coming and retry sometime later. Repeat until law
passes."

------
venomsnake
I cannot open the page. Can some Hungarian provide context and explanation. A
lot could be lost in translation. Or bias.

The title suggest that it will run afoul of a thousand EU regulations.

But it is hard to be alive in Europe and not run afoul of any EU regulation -
but that is another topic.

~~~
kowdermeister
I'm Hungarian. This is just another populist act of the Fidesz government.
They recently went full retard with anti-terrorism and this is part of their
action plan.

I doubt they are serious, but it would be potentially used against the enemies
of the state or it's perfect to distract the media so they could carry on
stealing.

~~~
aries1980
Indeed. These nonsense plans makes the journalists busy, so they don't have
remaining resources to investigate and make as loud the things happening in
the shadows.

------
a_imho
I would say encryption is somewhat of a red herring. It is the introduction of
similar surveillance policy that is quickly becoming widespread, I don't even
think Hungary is an early adopter here. The sources even citing roughly
'granting powers other governments already have' and establishing an agency
TIBEK with similar access to data (without warrant IIRC) as common 3 letter
agencies. They even use the same terrorism/ISIS/Brussels/France reasoning. I
guess in the end everyone can pick their surveillance point on the safety -
freedom graph.

~~~
Piskvorrr
"The sources even citing roughly 'granting powers other governments already
have'" \- do you think that government bullshits not? I do remember a similar
way of reasoning "but Iraq has WMDs aplenty", coming from a Prime Minister or
somesuch.

------
jkot
> _anyone caught using encrypted software can be punished by 2 years of
> prison_

> _The providers would be obliged to ensure access to the content of the
> encrypted messages_

I am not sure if users can be punished. I could only confirm that providers
have obligation to provide data under penalty.

European countries are pretty benevolent to end users, for example in some it
is legal to download copyright protected music and videos for personal use.
And providers already have obligation (by EU law) to provide information and
archive it for some time.

------
haddr
So.. no HTTPS for them?

But the general question is this: would companies rather exit from such
country and protect some values, or provide a non-encrypted version of their
services to secure their userbase?

------
IvanK_net
Ok, so people in the government realised, that there exist encryption methods,
which can not be "decrypted", and technology makes encryption accessible to
everyone.

When will they realise, that there is no way to detect, whether a message is
encrypted or not-encrypted, and there may be multiple levels of "tunneling".
It is not possible to find out the original form or the source (app) of
information.

Monitoring online communication is in not any simpler, than monitoring verbal
communication between every 2 people.

~~~
Piskvorrr
In other words, now you can imprison anyone, while pretending to uphold the
rule of the law.

------
markhahn
Stasi called and want their infamy back.

------
vox_mollis
Meanwhile, the Burr-Feinstein draft dropped today and it's absolutely
horrifying.

------
jdalgetty
Are these governments really spending all day spying on us?

~~~
Zigurd
This case points out an interesting difference between Hungary and the US: In
the US, surveillance is real, and when policy-makers get briefed about what
the surveillance state wants, that's based on things they have, or plan on
implementing.

This law in Hungary appears to be based on a wish list. Otherwise they would
have known what is practical and what isn't. So, DO governments spend all day
spying on us? Only the ones that have the budget and technical means to make
it real. The rest are just authoritarian wankers.

------
xufi
Urban really seems to be on tyrant mode for the pasty ear. Especially when he
restricted the media laws and tried to censor opinions about government

~~~
bonoboTP
Orban has no idea about any technology, let alone encryption. He probably
can't even use email. Seriously, the guy only got a mobile phone in the last
few years. He has no computers in his office.

------
acbabis
Does anyone know if the proposed Hungarian law considers a web browser to be
an "application intended for encrypted communication"?

~~~
pestaa
No. The browser's main intention isn't to encrypt communication, so this law
doesn't apply.

------
gragas
John von Neumman is turning over in his grave!

------
zackkatz
Pig Latin will be outlawed!

