🇩🇪 EU will anonyme Websites verbieten und Identifizierungspflicht für Domaininhaber einführen inkl. Telefonnummer in Whois. Begründung: .

patrick-breyer.de/cybersicherh

So haben die deutschen Abgeordneten in LIBE gestimmt:

Follow

🇬🇧 : EU to ban anonymous websites and “whois privacy” services. The LIBE Committee supports indiscriminatory identification of domain registrars:

patrick-breyer.de/en/cybersecu

This is how the MEPs voted yesterday:

The data are not to be published, but to be accessible in case of a "legitimate interest". This can easily be constructed. The data might also be hacked. Therefore, the security of activists, threatened and harassed persons, and many more is at risk.

EU to ban anonymous domains and “whois privacy” services. The LIBE Committee supports indiscriminatory identification of domain registrants incl. your phone number:

patrick-breyer.de/en/cybersecu
(fixed typo)

@echo_pbreyer

Parliament is mined i guess 🙈 those topics about privacy should be discussed with the citizens and not behind curtains..
that's not what Eu is about

@echo_pbreyer feel like setting up a bunch of junk domains and setting the phone number to various committee members offices.

@echo_pbreyer It’s at times like this I’m slightly pleased Brexit happened.

@echo_pbreyer
Personally I tend to welcome the openness. When the data protection regulation closed the #WHOIS information, free journalism was hindered, whereas governments still had access.

I then discussed with my registrar whether I could opt-in or set at least the general-request field by my own, but it led to nothing.

A #voluntary opt-in/opt-out model would be fine for me. I don't understand why I got forced to the empty variant, and now I get forced to the full variant (incl. #phone)

@echo_pbreyer

Actually I'm one of the few people whose phone number can be found in the internet. From time to time I get a call from "Microsoft" (maybe an automated is-he-at-home mechanism?) but all-in-all I cannot see harm.

[Though I should not talk to much about this - once I told I was getting very few spam messages and eventually the amount of spam increased, at least subjectively ...]

@jbechtel @echo_pbreyer

"Personally I tend to welcome the openness. When the data protection regulation closed the #WHOIS information, free journalism was hindered, whereas governments still had access."

That's all bla bla bla, Eu can't stop the grand theft of data from fakebook, g00gl£

@echo_pbreyer

It'll never happen.

And if it does, just use a non-EU registrar who offers privacy by default, and domains that are not EU TLDs.

@echo_pbreyer Great, we can call it the "women can't register domains for fear of doxxing" law.

Where do these bad ideas keep coming from, and why do so many MEPs vote for them seemingly without thinking for two damn minutes first?

@echo_pbreyer "but what about nazi's hosting anonymous websites??"

well what about Jews / POC / etc. hosting websites??? their real name and street address (or phone number tied to a street address in a whitepages?) needs to be visible to every nazi on the internet, now?!?

or am I reading this wrong?

@echo_pbreyer I assumed the who.is privacy services would give your details to law enforcement or whatever anyway, so what does this achieve except for enabling stalkers

@echo_pbreyer
This data will be public like before gdpr in whois or just in the registrar db when justice need it?

@wallace It will be in the data base and accessible also to private persons/entities in case of a "legitimate interest". You won't be notified.

@echo_pbreyer I don't like this asymmetry. If Police has access to registrant's personal data, I want to.have that access as well. First they ruined it with GDPR and now this....

Sign in to participate in the conversation
chaos.social

chaos.social – a Fediverse instance for & by the Chaos community