French lawmakers agreed to a justice reform bill that includes a provision granting police the power to get suspects' geolocation through phones and other devices.

i dont like that…

    • morsebipbip@lemm.eeEnglish
      27·
      1 year ago

      we are going through a very authoritarian drift right now. Flashballs used to be exclusively used against terrorists, hostage situations : 19 000 were fired during the yellow jjackets crisis and they’re now basic police equipment. Drone usage is increasing, the government bought 90 armored personnel carriers with multiple grenade launchers exclusively for riot control… and now the phone spying.

      edited to add : they’re also starting to qualify any protesters as “terrorists”. Climate activists planning to disassemble an inanimate, illegally-built, ecocidal infrastructure ? they get the eco-terrorist tag.

    • LightDelaBlue@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      6·
      1 year ago

      its not for nothing i got 2 phone my main at home work ect and the one for… hum “funny party at paris” sadly they dont care anymore. the left protest? ITS TERRORISME! the eco protest? its ECO-TERO blabla

    • TZUI1hRq@kbin.social
      15·
      1 year ago

      Does it not strike you in the least that actions like this are counterproductive? They provide an excuse the many people will readily accept. Violence is the language of the state and they speak it better than you. They know how to respond to it.

        • TZUI1hRq@kbin.social
          11·
          1 year ago

          Mockery. They know how to respond to violence but they do not know how to respond to laughter. Satire is the greatest weapon. When they lose their legitimacy and people just stop complying that is when we win. If you use violence you are just as bad as them.

  • LeadSoldier@lemmy.worldEnglish
    30·
    1 year ago

    Funny! In America it is against our constitution but we allow the NSA to do it because when we protest we get killed, arrested or our lives ruined.

    I protested the illegal separation and detention of children at the border. It was literal torture. The government later found that their own actions were illegal. In the meantime, I was arrested and beaten and on bail conditions for over 6 months before being found not guilty. The officers who beat me were given immunity. They decided not to keep the tapes at the facility after we requested they keep them because of the assault.

    I am a disabled veteran and was a career federal employee.

    This is America.

  • massacre@lemmy.mlEnglish
    5·
    1 year ago

    This is terrifying enough of a privacy invasion at the nation-state level. It’s catastrophic to give police this authority and capability. If this comes to the U.S., we are fucking doomed.

  • Firipu@startrek.websiteEnglish
    4·
    1 year ago

    Maybe a dumb question, but how the hell would they access my camera/geolocation etc? On e.g. a stock pixel device, would the french police have an actual backdoor through google? Or would it be through compromised shitty apps (like the chat app that was being used by criminals a while back, which was actually made by the police)?

      • Firipu@startrek.websiteEnglish
        1·
        1 year ago

        Ok, so I guess the risk is not really big if you use common sense and use some digital hygiene. The bigger OS exploits can’t really be protected against anyway as an end-user…

    • JoeKrogan@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      Probably a targeted attack or perhaps they could go to a provider to request they give you a tailored update. These agencies buy exploits from various firms too.

  • Borg286@kbin.social
    3·
    1 year ago

    Is this new law allowing the police to go to carrier companies and demanding to know the phone numbers of people near the riots, or is this closer to the police using your camera without your permission? I would have thought security restrictions on devices would have blocked such intrusive ability.

    • ShadowRunner@kbin.social
      12·
      1 year ago

      JFC, the answer to your question is literally the first sentence of the article. It would have taken you less time to read it then to post your question.

  • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.comEnglish
    2·
    1 year ago

    I wonder how some of these activities would come across if they were accompanied with a legal requirement to publish the numbers and a follow-on public vote to keep it or not. How many times was it used? How many convictions per use? How many sentences were 5+ years? How many failures to prosecute?

    Catching an actual terrorist is a good thing, but not at the expense of hiding bad actors from the people paying taxes. Show the people, transparently, it’s doing what you say it will, or stop.

  • Synapse@lemmy.worldEnglish
    42·
    1 year ago

    The only way to defend against that is to be extremely mindful of what apps you install. The police will need a backdoor to activate the spybug, this will come in the form of an app that a large amount of people install willingly and are relying on.

    In China the police can get immediate and total access to any citizens’ phone my simply scanning an ID (driver license, etc). This is probably a feature built into WeChat or another app that all Chinese people are relying on.

  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.mlEnglish
    45·
    1 year ago

    During a debate on Wednesday, MPs in President Emmanuel Macron’s camp inserted an amendment limiting the use of remote spying to “when justified by the nature and seriousness of the crime” and “for a strictly proportional duration.”

    Are “nature and seriousness” defined in an objective or concrete way? And for a proportional duration to what?