🚨 Canada’s Bill C-22 is here & it’s the same surveillance bill from last year's failed C-2.
-
Canada’s Bill C-22 is here & it’s the same surveillance bill from last year's failed C-2. What does this mean?
Your metadata would be stored by service providers for up to 12 months. The government would force these companies to build surveillance capabilities directly into their platforms.Government calls it “lawful access” but we know that forcing providers to enable access to encrypted data puts EVERYONE'S privacy & security at risk.
-
Canada’s Bill C-22 is here & it’s the same surveillance bill from last year's failed C-2.
What does this mean?
Your metadata would be stored by service providers for up to 12 months. The government would force these companies to build surveillance capabilities directly into their platforms.Government calls it “lawful access” but we know that forcing providers to enable access to encrypted data puts EVERYONE'S privacy & security at risk.
Because we know that there is no backdoor for the good guys only!
Help us fight for Canadian's privacy & say no to this surveillance bill.
Send a letter to reject Bill C-22 here
https://www.internetsociety.org/our-work/internet-policy/keep-canada-protected/ -
D dansup@mastodon.social shared this topic
-
Canada’s Bill C-22 is here & it’s the same surveillance bill from last year's failed C-2.
What does this mean?
Your metadata would be stored by service providers for up to 12 months. The government would force these companies to build surveillance capabilities directly into their platforms.Government calls it “lawful access” but we know that forcing providers to enable access to encrypted data puts EVERYONE'S privacy & security at risk.
@Tutanota Forcing a backdoor is a non-starter. It's an insane ask for a small shop, and a massive, predictable security hole for everyone else. This kind of legislation is just technically illiterate.
-
Canada’s Bill C-22 is here & it’s the same surveillance bill from last year's failed C-2.
What does this mean?
Your metadata would be stored by service providers for up to 12 months. The government would force these companies to build surveillance capabilities directly into their platforms.Government calls it “lawful access” but we know that forcing providers to enable access to encrypted data puts EVERYONE'S privacy & security at risk.
@Tutanota As I can see, the Canadian politicians have gone crazy too. Their neighborhood with the USA is affecting them badly.
-
Canada’s Bill C-22 is here & it’s the same surveillance bill from last year's failed C-2.
What does this mean?
Your metadata would be stored by service providers for up to 12 months. The government would force these companies to build surveillance capabilities directly into their platforms.Government calls it “lawful access” but we know that forcing providers to enable access to encrypted data puts EVERYONE'S privacy & security at risk.
Why people blame China and Russia for being Authoritarian regimes while other countries are trying to be like them. Privacy is a Fundamental Human Right countries should respect it.
-
Because we know that there is no backdoor for the good guys only!
Help us fight for Canadian's privacy & say no to this surveillance bill.
Send a letter to reject Bill C-22 here
https://www.internetsociety.org/our-work/internet-policy/keep-canada-protected/All these "Let's make things even worse" activities from democratic governments are really discouraging.
-
Canada’s Bill C-22 is here & it’s the same surveillance bill from last year's failed C-2.
What does this mean?
Your metadata would be stored by service providers for up to 12 months. The government would force these companies to build surveillance capabilities directly into their platforms.Government calls it “lawful access” but we know that forcing providers to enable access to encrypted data puts EVERYONE'S privacy & security at risk.
@Tutanota dan is het tijd Canadese internetbedrijven en software makers vaarwel te zeggen.
-
Canada’s Bill C-22 is here & it’s the same surveillance bill from last year's failed C-2.
What does this mean?
Your metadata would be stored by service providers for up to 12 months. The government would force these companies to build surveillance capabilities directly into their platforms.Government calls it “lawful access” but we know that forcing providers to enable access to encrypted data puts EVERYONE'S privacy & security at risk.
@Tutanota Canada does NOT want your data, just SOME of Canada does. (Those that do are not the ones I would trust with anyone's data!)
-
Canada’s Bill C-22 is here & it’s the same surveillance bill from last year's failed C-2.
What does this mean?
Your metadata would be stored by service providers for up to 12 months. The government would force these companies to build surveillance capabilities directly into their platforms.Government calls it “lawful access” but we know that forcing providers to enable access to encrypted data puts EVERYONE'S privacy & security at risk.
@Tutanota and here I was naively thinking europe was an exception in its love for mass surveillance...
The WhatTheFucks are never far away these days -
Canada’s Bill C-22 is here & it’s the same surveillance bill from last year's failed C-2.
What does this mean?
Your metadata would be stored by service providers for up to 12 months. The government would force these companies to build surveillance capabilities directly into their platforms.Government calls it “lawful access” but we know that forcing providers to enable access to encrypted data puts EVERYONE'S privacy & security at risk.
@Tutanota
Is Carney using the israeli spy software on us? -
R relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
-
All these "Let's make things even worse" activities from democratic governments are really discouraging.
@smallcircles @Tutanota Also they usually don't define "good guy". This is a very subjective concept
-
Canada’s Bill C-22 is here & it’s the same surveillance bill from last year's failed C-2.
What does this mean?
Your metadata would be stored by service providers for up to 12 months. The government would force these companies to build surveillance capabilities directly into their platforms.Government calls it “lawful access” but we know that forcing providers to enable access to encrypted data puts EVERYONE'S privacy & security at risk.
@Tutanota The biggest tell is when government and law enforcement themselves have no requirement for backdoors. Just as "consumers." Why that would be intolerable. "Consumers" as they call us, are always disrespected. We need to just shut up and shop.
