While this guy may be controversial, the discussion is a good one. More companies like Threema also suffer from that law and they should all team up to fight against that.
this post was submitted on 17 May 2025
218 points (97.8% liked)
Privacy
5971 readers
155 users here now
A community for Lemmy users interested in privacy
Rules:
- Be civil
- No spam posting
- Keep posts on-topic
- No trolling
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Threema isnt really an alternative. They dont even provide email encryption with non-threema users.
The bill did not pass in the first stage of the law making process as all the parties rejected it. Also, I'm very confident that even if it passed the first few hurdles, someone would make an initiative against it and that initiative would win 9 out of 10 times as most Bünzlis are privacy minded people and would feel like their freedoms are being taken away by such a law.
quote
The Federal Council's plans to reform the monitoring of postal and telecommunications traffic have been rejected in the consultation process: All the major parties that have expressed an opinion on the matter reject the plan.
In their statements, the Greens, SP, Green Liberals, FDP and SVP speak of endangered data protection, a threat to Switzerland as a location for innovation, disproportionate interference by the state and unclear effects of the planned changes to the ordinance.
The Green Liberals and the FDP also see the planned changes as contradictory to current law. The Center Party declined to comment. Organizations such as the Swiss Digital Society and companies such as the Swiss messenger service Threema have also criticized the plans.
The Federal Council sent the partial revisions of two implementing decrees out for consultation at the end of January. This ended on Tuesday. According to the Federal Council, this involves a "clear definition of the categories of cooperation obligations" for providers of communication services, for example in the case of surveillance authorized by the authorities as part of criminal proceedings.
This primarily affects traditional telecommunications services such as Swisscom, Sunrise and Salt, but also service providers that provide communication services without their own infrastructure, such as messaging, VoIP, VPN, cloud or email services such as Whatsapp, Threema, Protonmail or Skype.
With the revision, the latter are to be divided into three new groups with different obligations, depending on the number of users and turnover. According to the federal government, this is intended to achieve a "more balanced gradation of obligations".
Confederation plans to introduce new types of information and monitoring According to the Greens, companies that provide a service for 5,000 users would now have to be able to identify the latter by storing their IP address. Companies with more than one million users would be obliged to store marginal data such as the geolocation of customers for six months.
This "vastly expanded data retention" would make it impossible to operate secure messenger or email services and would be a "massive intrusion" into privacy. For the SVP, the new definition of obligations "obviously has the potential" to burden a number of SMEs instead of relieving them.
The federal government also plans to introduce new types of information and surveillance. It writes that the two revisions to the ordinances basically provide for the obligation to remove encryption. However, end-to-end encryption such as messenger services are exempt from this.
On Swiss television's "Tagesschau" program, Jean-Louis Biberstein, deputy head of the Federal Postal and Telecommunications Surveillance Service, recently said that the requirements for service providers would not be tightened. They would be clarified.
After the revision, a company like Threema would have the same obligations as before. Threema contradicts this in a statement sent to various media at the end of April. The revision of the VÜPF would force the company to abandon the principle of "collecting only as little data as technically necessary".
The Swiss internet service provider Proton also wrote to the news agency Keystone-SDA on request that the Federal Council's proposals would "massively expand" state surveillance. In its statement, the association "Digitale Gesellschaft Schweiz" speaks of a "serious attack on fundamental rights, SMEs and the rule of law".
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
end quote
That's the translation from the article.
Surprising considering their whole marketing point is "Swiss privacy"
You say that like this was their decision...
jfc i just bought a year of pcloud...is there anything that doesn't just up and turn shitty all of a sudden
FOSS doesn't
It can as it turns out
In general it is less problematic though
Nope. Self hosted software isnt an issue.
Proton has loads of code that isnt Foss. That's a problem here.
cough Hyprland cough
What about it
A horribly toxic and hateful community, to the point I do not use it.
Far from the only FOSS communities like it, but it's a very prominent example of a piece of software I would not associate with at all.
Compare it to Tesla and Musk.
where they gonna go?
Any other country except Russia
I mean as long as you dont say anything about Putin, Russia provides the best freedom of speech
thats an interesting way of putting it lol
The law is so bad it makes Switzerland second to Russia?
Just going on whats in the article
"This revision attempts to implement something that has been deemed illegal in the EU and the United States. The only country in Europe with a roughly equivalent law is Russia," said Yen
"I think we would have no choice but to leave Switzerland," said Yen. "The law would become almost identical to the one in force today in Russia. It's an untenable situation. We would be less confidential as a company in Switzerland than Google, based in the United States. So it's impossible for our business model."
damn.
Isn't Russia known for censorship in surveillance?
The US is better than Russia and the US isn't exactly setting a high bar
Sweden or Germany would work
Sadly Sweden has a government that wants to force backdoors to encrypted services. They haven't succeeded yet, but Sweden might not be safe in the future.
All governments want this. Everywhere.
The difference is where the people allow it and they don't.
I couldn't translate, can someone tell me who is behind this bill?
Yo dog I heard you love trump so we made you surveillance laws
I dont think Trump passed bad surveillance laws in the US. The worst of those are from Bush and Obama.
Trump inherited a mass surveillance apparatus. He didn't build it.
Just the other day there was a news about how Russia was basically given free access to US citizens data through Starlink. They don't need to pass laws, they just ignore them.
I've seen similar sentiment shared by people that follow privacy topics. It's a bad take and you are minimizing the significance of the surveillance state being built.
There is a difference between 'anyone' can be watched and 'everyone' can be watched.
There is a difference between implementing laws that could be used to monitor anyone and implementing systems that will be able to monitor everyone very cheaply and easily.
This is not the same as the patriot Act https://www.businessinsider.com/ice-palantir-new-technology-30-million-visa-overstays-self-deportation-2025-4
US has contracted out to Palentier for years. This isnt new.
I guess you're new here, but we learned over 10 years ago that the NSA had a goal of targeting literally everyone.
What's new is that the power is shifting from groups like the FBI and NSA to ICE.
Where will, Andy, the fascist Krasnov supporter go?
i fail to see how liking a single decision made by trump makes them a supporter of him
That's how it works on Lemmy. Support absolutely any decision made by Republican = literally a nazi.