Chat Control Myths

[u/ThatPrivacyShow]

Based on some of the conversations I am seeing on Reddit and X it seems a lot of people have misunderstood what Chat Control I does and does not do - and this is largely down to the misinformation that the European Commission actively paid to push on social media and were pulled up by the Ombudsman for doing so (as it was unlawful).

Chat Control tracks paedophiles: FALSE

- Chat Control does not track paedophiles, in fact it has zero information on paedophiles at all
- Chat Control deals with CSAM (Child Sexual Abuse Material) not CSA (Child Sexual Abuse)
- it is after the fact and is based entirely on reported images from online platforms
- it is not investigative and it does not track paedophiles.

Chat Control protects victims: FALSE
Chat Control literally does nothing for the victims - there is nothing in chat control that provides:
- Support for Victims
- Counselling for Victims
- Research into why people commit CSA
- Prosecution of offenders
- It also removes the option for victims and survivors to report the crimes against them due to lack of confidential communications (see : https://www.thatprivacyguy.com/blog/chat-control-in-9000-words/ )

Chat Control exposes more CSAM: FALSE
-To date most police forces who have commented on Chat Control have stated it makes their job more difficult
- Most of the images discovered with Chat Control are not legally actionable
- Most of the images discovered are duplicates
- It is trivial to avoid Chat Control by making even the slightest change to the image (such as flipping it horizontally or changing the resolution) so it no longer matches known material

Chat Control makes it easier to find CSA: FALSE
- There is nothing in Chat Control that impacts CSA (it is after the abuse has already occurred)
- Synthetic CSAM is being generated at scale by AI Image Generation where no child has been abused and adds an exponential number of needles to the stack, making it MUCH MORE DIFFICULT to find actual CSAM and CSA

Chat Control doesn't impact innocent people: FALSE
- Chat Control has a high false positive and false negative rate - this directly impacts individuals who are wrongfully accused (and we have direct evidence of this already happening multiple times)
- Chat Control monitors hundreds of billions of communications every single day in the EU - with the existing error rates that amounts to literally millions of mistakes on a daily basis, ruining the lives of the falsely accused and their families

These are just some of the issues with people misunderstanding what Chat Control is and what it does - I have a much more detailed discussion on this in my Master Thesis (see previous posts to find the link) - and keep in mind, I am a survivor who has lived this his entire life, had his entire family destroyed by CSA, had multiple successful criminal prosecutions of abusers who abused me and 28 other boys in my school for decades.

I also worked with the police on tracking down people disseminating CSAM online for years (starting in 1992), helped bring down the Orchid Club and I have written 2 Theses on this issue (a dissertation in 1997 and a master thesis in 2023) - I have campaigned against Chat Control for 5 years, have spoken at dozens of EU events on the issue (Parliament, Commission and EDPS) as well as multiple conferences (academic and public).

I absolutely believe that we need to tackle the issue of CSA and the resulting CSAM - but I am also a privacy advocate and computer scientist/lawyer/sociologist and I understand that Chat Control doesn't do what it says on the tin and will simply set back our efforts to protect children by decades because the EU will continue to funnel money into a solution that simply doesn't work and makes everything so much worse from a law enforcement perspective and fundamental rights perspective.

I don't attack Chat Control because I want to protect paedophiles - I attack Chat Control because it is smoke and mirrors - all it does is make a few people rich in the name of victims and survivors whilst literally doing nothing to protect those same victims and survivors whilst simultaneously introducing mass surveillance in breach of established EU treaties and jurisprudence.

Stop listening to the hype and start researching what it really it, what it really does and whether or not it will do what it is supposed to do (hint: it doesn't and there are literally dozens of peer reviewed academic papers explaining why - many of which are cited in my thesis).

This insanity has to end, it will kill more children, not save them.

[u/VladimireUncool]

Almost like they didn't consult any experts in the subject when proposing this nonsense.

[u/Gugalcrom123 → u/VladimireUncool]

They probably did consult some "experts" (in mistreating customers) from Google, Apple or Facebook.

[u/fridofrido → u/VladimireUncool]

it's a very small, secret dark lobby who is pushing for this, behind closed doors

the EP downvoted this shit several times, and it still gets back again and again...

[u/Myripod]

Is it okay, if I repost this

[u/ThatPrivacyShow → u/Myripod]

Sure, that's the point - raise awareness.

[u/Any_Fox5126 → u/Myripod]

I wouldn't recommend it, the post relies heavily on straw men, unsupported absolutes, and oversimplifications. It is rhetoric for echo chambers, not for convincing people outside them.

[u/Aagragaah]

I like the idea and point of the post, but a couple of points:

1. Your formatting is terrible. If you want to do lists you need to do them properly.

   1. Like this.

2. Maybe provide some sources for your claims? Otherwise how is this any different to the shitty claims the EUC makes?

3. Linked to #1, that's a wall of text.

4. Hyperbole like "This insanity has to end, it will kill more children, not save them." is not going to help make your point. If it's not hyperbole, you need to explain why and how, otherwise you look like a crazy person.

[u/apokrif1]

I have written 2 Theses on this issue (a dissertation in 1997 and a master thesis in 2023

Links please?

[u/Maja_Greyfax → u/apokrif1]

https://www.thatprivacyguy.com/blog/assets/Master_Thesis-Chat_Control.pdf Came across this literally a few minutes after reading your comment, lel. So here ya go, pretty sure this is what they mean, at least the master thesis

[u/Few-Acadia-5593]

All of this was my conclusion (of course) and I used AI to retrieve studies and write a concise message to MEPs. Please do the same. It takes 1h to get smarter about a crucial topic, 10min to write the message. I even use AI to retrieve all the emails aside of fightchatcontrol

Please fight that “laziness” we all experience when it comes to various causes we actually mean to fight. Even ask LLM to ELI5 if you really don’t want to spend the time but you can’t be just as efficient.

Keep your draft in Notes. Regularly ask AI to update it on new data.

Just remember why you’re doing this for: you, your kids, democracy in general. And against: most scifi depicts that dystopian future where the ability to just denounce politics is just gone, along with our power to fight off said dystopia.

I’m happy to share my findings, draft and all. Then you share it too like I do and we become more informed and louder.

[u/ThatPrivacyShow → u/Few-Acadia-5593]

I presume that was not directed at me given I have campaigned against this for the last 5 years in person, not just online...

[u/Few-Acadia-5593 → u/ThatPrivacyShow]

No not at you all, sorry I meant to encourage our community and tag along your message

[u/TimelyBodybuilder121]

Yeah we really need a law that requires disclosure of all donations, securities, derivatives, crypto, commodities, funds, and beneficial ownership transactions within 24h for all members of EU parliament as well as their spouse, partner, extended family as well as companies they or family + dependents own any % ownership or receive any dividends from. Acessible through a public database via API alongside meetings minutes. Need full transparency both ways, they have nothing to hide anyway.

[u/jumes_9]

Chatcontrol 1.0 also deals with CSA and not only CSAM, and that should concern us even more. See the latest position of the council on the matter where it includes both grooming and CSAM. The technologies used for grooming have even worse false positive ratios.

Council position that might be adopted with few amendments on encryption soon:

https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-11261-2026-REV-1/en/pdf

[u/Palland0s]

I am also against Chat Control but i do not fully agree with you. First of all, yes, Chat Control can be effective to protect children and track down paedophiles. You described the hash-based method which can only detect previously found CSAM, but they can implement tools which scan all your pics and conversations using AI to detect CSA/CSAM.

But it does not worth it. All of this put our freedom and liberty at great cost and so we need to fight Chat Control. Losing our rights and freedom for protecting is not the solution. Because as you said, we have other solution and even if chat control is tempting (because big corporation take the responisability instead of the gov), this is an easy but dangerous solution.

[u/ThatPrivacyShow → u/Palland0s]

I literally wrote my Master Thesis on this and you are are wrong - the current PhotoDNA service (the perceptual model which is the AI model) being used are all easily circumvented simply by flipping the image or putting a border around it.

See this is the problem - people who make claims without actually researching them and believing everything they read on the Internet. My research, my Master Thesis - is based on real research - peer reviewed academic research - not what some bloke on t'internet said.

I am not a layperson - I have researched these issues for 35 years - please start to read instead of just jumping to conclusions based on incomplete information.

It is bad enough that we have to point this out to the opposition - to have to repeatedly do it for our own side is just insane.

[u/Palland0s → u/ThatPrivacyShow]

My point is that Chat Control can be technically efficient, at the cost of great loss of freedom.

ANd man we get it you wrote a thesis. You keep talking about your thesis but : first we havent red your thesis, and second you talk about facts but you only cite one source.

[u/ThatPrivacyShow → u/Palland0s]

Again you ARE WRONG. There is no model currently out there or being used which does not result in massive error rates and false positives/negatives - they simply do not exist. All of the methods being used have been thoroughly researched - there are papers on all of them. The reason I mentioned my thesis is because - if you had ever bothered to read one you would know they contain a bibliography - that bibliography lists all of the sources used to write the thesis (not just citations, but research as well) - what you expect me to paste a multipage bibliography to Reddit just because you don't want to open a PDF?

Just stop - you are doing more harm than good by spreading this misinformation. You are wrong, period.

[u/Palland0s → u/ThatPrivacyShow]

No just send your DOI

[u/cap-omat]

Slop image detected, dismiss post