Canada’s Bill C-22 Is a Repackaged Version of Last Year’s Surveillance Nightmare
88 points
2 hours ago
| 7 comments
| eff.org
| HN
EmbarrassedHelp
34 minutes ago
[-]
Both the mandatory data retention and encryption backdoor requirements will cause encrypted messaging services like Signal, WhatsApp, iMessage, Matrix, and others to block both Canadians and Canadian businesses from their services.

If you live in Canada or are impacted by this legislation, then you need to tell both your MP and the Minister of Public Safety of Canada to reject this legislation.

---

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) published information about Bill C-22 here just over a week ago: https://ccla.org/privacy/coalition-to-mps-scrap-unprecedente...

The blanket metadata retention and encryption backdoor requirements of Bill C-22 are illegal in the European Union.

Multiple groups have made easy to use tools for sending your MP and (other members of government) an email about rejecting this terrible legislation in its current form:

* The Internet Society's tool: https://www.internetsociety.org/our-work/internet-policy/kee...

* OpenMedia's messaging tool: https://action.openmedia.org/page/188754/action/1

* ICLM's messaging tool: https://iclmg.ca/stop-c-22/

I'd also recommend emailing Minister of Public Safety of Canada (Gary Anandasangaree: gary.anand@parl.gc.ca), and the Minister of Justice (Sean Fraser: sean.fraser@parl.gc.ca).

reply
wewewedxfgdf
53 minutes ago
[-]
Just keep bringing legislation back eventually it gets through.
reply
frakt0x90
37 minutes ago
[-]
That's p-values for you.
reply
black6
47 minutes ago
[-]
The legislative process has a check valve. Vote on it until passes, then it can't be undone ever.
reply
subarctic
1 hour ago
[-]
I've noticed a lot of bad digital rights stuff on HN over the last couple weeks - more pushes on age verification, attacks on end-to-end encryption, and now this. Is there something about the time of year? Maybe because the world cup is coming and people will be distracted?
reply
fidotron
59 minutes ago
[-]
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9q3x19ddl7o is perhaps an unintentionally good summary of this situation.
reply
EmbarrassedHelp
31 minutes ago
[-]
That article appears to be slightly biased in favor of attacks on privacy, and it omits important details like the UK's ongoing consultation includes questions on banning VPNs.
reply
nitrix
1 hour ago
[-]
I'm doubtful the venn diagram intersection of engineers and the world cup is as big as you think it is.
reply
NooneAtAll3
13 seconds ago
[-]
engineers sure

non-permanently-online activists on the other hand...

reply
dylan604
57 minutes ago
[-]
My engineering team would all take long lunches to catch matches, and most of us would have windowed streams for games not aligning to a lunch break. I'd be willing think it would be a larger intersection that you think it is
reply
jasoneckert
52 minutes ago
[-]
I'm reminded of a speech Barack Obama gave many years ago about the difficulty and necessity of finding a "happy medium" between protecting individual liberties and providing law enforcement with the abilities to provide security in a digital world.

I think the topic itself is difficult for everyone involved - there will likely be a lot of uproar for many years as we get closer to finding this happy medium.

reply
jimmar
5 minutes ago
[-]
Don't we all inherently know that government surveillance will constantly increase over time if we give in? In theory, we could achieve a "happy medium," but the same access used by a thoughtful law enforcement agency are the same tools that a fascist government would use to suppress dissent or other "wrong" thinking.
reply
tw85
5 minutes ago
[-]
There would of course be much more of a public uproar about C-22 and the steady diet of online censorship and surveillance bills served up over the last 6 years if they were being pushed by a Conservative government. But it's the Liberals, and they get a free pass from mainstream media who are subsidized handsomely for their complicity.

If anyone believes the real intent behind this authoritarian legislation is to protect the kids or crack down on organized crime or to keep the public safe, I have a bridge to sell you. This is an administration that did away with mandatory minimum sentences for serious crimes, considers pedophilia to be a minor offence, allow repeat violent offenders out on bail repeatedly, refuses to convict migrants if it might impact their chances of obtaining citizenship, has allowed thousands of terrorists to enter the country with minimal vetting, and openly tolerates election interference from China. Public safety is far, far down the list of their priorities. They are very thirsty to silence their online detractors, however.

reply
jmclnx
53 minutes ago
[-]
The is the thing and it happens in every Country. If a bill fails to pass it or none like it should be brought up for 5 years.

I know doing that would be crazy, but Companies keep trying and trying until it is passed.

Tin Fol hat time: It almost looks like it is a way to funnel Political Contributions (bribes) to the politicians. The politicians fail the bill because they felt they did not get enough Contributions :)

reply
dyauspitr
1 minute ago
[-]
> If a bill fails to pass it or none like it should be brought up for 5 years.

The republicans would bring up a bill for everything they don’t like and ceremonially vote it down which would make it inaccessible to the next round of democratic leadership.

reply
josefritzishere
1 hour ago
[-]
Why are they so determined to do evil?
reply
AlanYx
1 hour ago
[-]
It's a confluence of two things: (i) Canada's government policy community tends to be heavily influenced by legislative trends in the UK/Aus/NZ; this particular one is almost a direct import from the UK's ill-advised Online Safety Act, though worse in some ways, and (ii) a series of Canadian Supreme Court decisions, most notably 2024's Bykovets, which the security intelligence apparatus in Canada feels has totally hamstrung data collection.

Both (i) and (ii) have led the government to this dark place, thinking they're doing good.

reply
EmbarrassedHelp
23 minutes ago
[-]
I think there could also be some lobbying from Canadian Centre for Child Protection (C3P). C3P's site is filled with anti-encryption and anti-privacy disinformation, and they are a major Chat Control lobbyist in the EU. They are also currently trying to kill the Tor Project by attacking anyone who funds it.
reply
dmitrygr
1 hour ago
[-]
> led the government to this dark place, thinking they're doing good.

I'll take the other end of the bet claiming that they think they are doing good. I am pretty sure they know what they are doing full well, and it ain't good.

reply
AlanYx
53 minutes ago
[-]
I'm in the middle. I have some sympathy for the Canadian intelligence community's perspective here; in recent years, much intelligence potentially preventing major criminal public safety incidents has had to come through five eyes partners because the legal situation for domestic collection has become unworkable. CSIS refers to the situation as "going dark", which is an unfortunate US terminological import.

That being said, C-22 goes way beyond what would be halfway reasonable to solve the main issues in a fair and rights-respecting way, and I have absolutely no sympathy for the reasoning and goals imported from the UK's Online Safety Act.

reply
Izikiel43
1 hour ago
[-]
> Both (i) and (ii) have led the government to this dark place, thinking they're doing good.

You can summarize a lot of government actions of any spectrum with: "The road to hell is full of good intentions"

reply
jauntywundrkind
1 hour ago
[-]
What a deeply troubled time. It's accelerating so fast. All this age verification/surveillance shit is intensifying super fast.

Meanwhile personal computing is being savagely destroyed, as consumer channels to ram and storage disappear.

It's so bad. These people need to be punished. This is so so so unacceptable and the forces for state intrusion into all digital systems and pervasive survelliance have gotten so so so far in the past couple years.

reply
themafia
55 minutes ago
[-]
Usually? Money.

There's an exceptional amount of money to be had in creating the new digital feudal state.

Given that most everyday digital technology is in the hands of a few powerful monopolies they feel they have the opportunity to actually pull this off.

reply
briandw
15 minutes ago
[-]
This is clearly a government power grab, not a corporate one.
reply
fidotron
1 hour ago
[-]
Because we've removed the ability for anyone non-evil to succeed politically.
reply