Maximilien FOURT
LightNews LightNews
fourt-avocat.bsky.social
Maximilien FOURT
@fourt-avocat.bsky.social
24 followers 190 following 0 posts
Avocat pénaliste
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Maximilien FOURT
nhervieu.bsky.social
Même le sénateur LR Francis Szpiner (fort peu suspect de "droit-de-l'hommisme" gauchisant) a souligné combien les mesures de ce texte (dont il est rapporteur) sont contraires à tous les principes essentiels.

Mais pour certains, le « bon sens », c'est uniquement quand ça les arrange...
Vous pouvez partager un article en cliquant sur les icônes de partage en haut à droite de celui-ci. La reproduction totale ou partielle d’un article, sans l’autorisation écrite et préalable du Monde, est strictement interdite. Pour plus d’informations, consultez nos conditions générales de vente. Pour toute demande d’autorisation, contactez syndication@lemonde.fr. En tant qu’abonné, vous pouvez offrir jusqu’à cinq articles par mois à l’un de vos proches grâce à la fonctionnalité « Offrir un article ». https://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2025/03/25/bataille-politique-au-senat-autour-de-la-proposition-de-loi-sur-la-justice-des-mineurs_6585992_3224.html Avocat historique de la droite dans plusieurs affaires politico-financières, Francis Szpiner assume totalement sa fronde. « Ce n’est pas un complot contre Attal. C’est juste du bon sens. Ce texte n’est pas conforme ni à la jurisprudence du Conseil constitutionnel ni à la pratique judiciaire. Il n’y a rien de pire que de voter des lois écrites dans la précipitation et qui ont une portée uniquement symbolique », affirme-t-il. L’élu parisien s’est aussi payé le luxe de réécrire totalement l’article qui prévoyait la création d’une amende pour les parents qui ne répondraient pas aux convocations de la justice, en la remplaçant par un dispositif permettant à l’assurance-habitation de se retourner contre les parents, pour participer à l’indemnisation du dommage pour lequel l’enfant a été condamné. « Ce sera bien plus efficace », assure-t-il.
March 25, 2025 at 4:16 PM
Reposted by Maximilien FOURT
bmann.ca
"Signal would exit the French market before it would comply with this law as written"

Meredith Whittaker @meredithmeredith.bsky.social, President of Signal @signal.org
Screenshot of X post: https://x.com/mer__edith/status/1902383162065400296, part 1 BAT SIGNAL: A law in France that would mandate a backdoor in end to end encrypted communications is set for a vote within the next day, after some start-stop skirmishes. The French Narcotraffic law would require encrypted communications providers—like Signal—create a backdoor by giving the government the ability to add themselves to any group or chat they like. In the name of (checks notes) fighting drug trafficking. While those hyping this bad law have rushed to assure French politicians that the proposal isn’t’ ‘breaking encryption’ their arguments are as tedious as they are stale as they are laughable. For those catching up, let’s review the basics: end to end encryption must only have two ‘ends’—sender and recipient(s). Otherwise, it is backdoored. Whatever method is devised to add a ‘third end’ —from a perverted PRNG in a cryptographic protocol, to vendor-provided government software grafted onto the side of secure communications that allow said government to add themselves to your chats—it rips a hole in the hull of private communications and is a backdoor. Indeed, the ghost participant proposal was roundly rebuked (humiliated, even) when it was first proposed in 2019 in the UK. The technical community was united, and it was never implemented in law or otherwise. Screenshot of X Post, Meredith Whittaker, President of Signal https://x.com/mer__edith/status/1902383162065400296 We cannot accept any backdoor, however it’s dressed up. Communications don’t stay within jurisdictional boundaries. Which means a hole created in France becomes a vector for anyone wanting to undermine Signal’s robust privacy guarantees, anywhere. Instead of contending with unbreakable math, they only have to compromise a French government employee, or the vendor-provided software used to sideload government operatives into your private chats. This is why, as always, Signal would exit the French market before it would comply with this law as written. At this moment especially, there is simply too much riding on Signal, on our being able to forge a future in which private communication persists, to allow such pernicious undermining. We hope—WE HOPE—that this callow, dishonest attack will fail, and will be the last. We would love to get back to the work of maintaining and improving our core technologies, instead of fighting legislation which is distinguished in nothing as much as its refusal to listen to decades of expert consensus in its drive to imperil global cybersecurity and the human right of privacy.
March 19, 2025 at 7:54 PM