[drdebug]

The wording in the current draft seems to indicate that it applies to "providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available interpersonal communications services". So unless this includes ISPs, I wonder if that means a decentralized P2P service is not covered.

[uyzstvqs]

Not applicable, nor enforceable. If this were to pass then the next Signal will be P2P. There are already some good protocols like Tox.

Ironically the pervs will still be using WhatsApp, and just put their CSAM in a password-protected zip file before sending.

[cryptonym]

You should scan on the device before it goes on the network. P2P networking or not, the app should include a scanner.

Even if you use an open-source clone without scanner, your contacts most likely will use an app with builtin scanner. Your communications will be scanned on their end.

At that point I'm wondering why we don't also open and scan regular mail at the post office before delivery.

[jcul]

I also wonder how it applies to Matrix, which is encrypted and technically decentralized.

However most users will be using the matrix.org homeserver, which makes it effectively centralized. Though I can still create my own homeserver that talks to matrix.org.

Would matrix.org be forced to offer scanning / a backdoor on the homeserver? Or would they be forced to add something to the official apps, which is pretty ineffective as there are many client apps.

All in all this proposal seems like a complete mess.

[tekknik]

Reading the text, they will require the operators of the server to provide the filtering and would be liable if they didn’t.