Yeah, if this can be done remotely then all smartphones by design are very insecure devices that shouldn’t be trusted to doing card transactions or entrusting with password management and two factor authentication…
I wish they would go into more detail on the how of remote activation is made. Is it a law saying it is okay to do if it becomes possible? Is this through an exploit that was found and requires physical access to the device to initiate, or is it just a setting present on all phones by default.
Sure, the issue is that, with no transparency, cops will use it even if they are just courios what they friends are doing. This is already known to happen in the US, where cops used it to stalk their SOs or even in extreme cases women they were starting to date.
If they already have the technology in their hands, there is no way to stop them.
They should also need it in the US. The issue is, that if the tool is in the hands of the cops, there is no way to check who they spied on (and therefore if they had warrant).
At least if it was executed by a comercial entity, they can check the warrants and be liable if they do it without one. But that is very likely not how it will be implemented. The cops will get the tools to do with as they please.
As an example, one state in the US (forgot which one) put in a law that requires the police to submit every data search warrant into a public database so that they could be audited by the public. After they compared the contents of the database to number of requests in companies transparency reports, it turned out there were over 5 times as many requests in the state then what was reported in the database, despite reporting being required by law.
I really hope the power isn’t abused. The second it is it will lead to more riots and even though I have in no way been directly affected where I live, it is a pain to get messages from friends abroad asking “Why is France on fire again?”
After a terrorist attack, emergency state was declared (nomally used in case a war actually put the survival of the country’s institutions in jeopardy). First use of the extra-powers: assign some targeted pacific climate activist at home so that there would not be a protest during the COP.
Anti-terrorism bill was passed some time ago. It was used to repress the protests against the retirement bill, literally banning anyone from carrying a saucepan in the street (ban of “noise emitting devices”) during a protest.
Climate protesters have been labeled “eco-terrorist” even though they never put nor attempted to put anyone’s life in danger.
France is under requests from the UN for fixing severe issues regarding right to protest, police excessive violence and systematic racism in the police force. France is taking a dire path, joining Hungaria, Turkey in authoritarism, maybe evolving to a clone of Russia, as there were hint of a will to change the constitution to let Macron run again after his second mandate.
I have 0 trust this bill is intended to be used for severe crimes. It’s another attempt to control and repress.
Online piracy already carries punishment up to 3 years. All it takes them is make a law that technically holds 5 years but gets pardoned in practice.
Labeling someone a terrorist can be as simple as “collective undertaking with the aim of seriously disturbing public order through intimidation” aka protesting…
Considering this is France, you'd think those at the top would be more aware than anyone of the risks of pissing off your citizens, but looks like they've become too comfortable and are practically begging for a refresher crash course..
gazettengr.com
Hot