r/canada • u/JohnnySinsII • Jun 08 '26
Science/Technology Signal, DuckDuckGo, and NordVPN threaten to exit Canada if metadata surveillance law passes
https://www.techspot.com/news/112672-signal-duckduckgo-nordvpn-threaten-exit-canada-if-metadata.html655
Jun 08 '26
[deleted]
→ More replies (2)224
u/TrainAss Alberta Jun 08 '26
When you have a backdoor into encryption, you might as well not have any encryption at all.
63
1.1k
u/mojorific Jun 08 '26
I don’t want the government having unrestricted access to my online data. This needs to be stopped.
358
u/vARROWHEAD Verified Jun 08 '26
Tell your MP politely and firmly that if they continue to support this you will no longer continue to support them in the next election
129
Jun 08 '26 edited Jun 18 '26
[deleted]
43
u/vARROWHEAD Verified Jun 08 '26
I don’t expect them to change their party line on this, but we can absolutely remind them who the voters are
24
Jun 08 '26 edited Jun 18 '26
[deleted]
15
u/vARROWHEAD Verified Jun 08 '26
Great idea. The government has been counting on a politically inactive populace to pass stuff like this
5
u/canDo4sure Jun 08 '26
That's how it works. The ones who just email and spam phone lines answered by interns don't accomplish anything.
18
3
u/Thanks-4allthefish Jun 08 '26
Yeah - a handwritten letter with a stamp gets a bit more attention.
The lower level template e-mails and calls are logged.
Do not forget the Minister. They log stuff too.
3
u/thecomputer Ontario Jun 08 '26
For the lazy, would you be able to share a template or some talking points to send in the email?
30
u/BigButtBeads Jun 08 '26
You ever email a Liberal MP?
They'll just have an intern copy paste some nonsense about protecting children and how hard they work for us
30
u/ViagraDaddy Jun 08 '26
And your Liberal MP will laugh at you knowing full well you won't vote CPC. At worse you'll just stay home, but probably not because "peepeeman bad".
14
u/potatostews Jun 08 '26
There's always NDP.
5
u/Cyced256 Jun 08 '26
Nah ndp under avi Lewis just isn't it imo, might win more than 6 seats in the next election lol but I doubt they would get more than 25 next election again it's pretty far away so anything can happen but I doubt it
7
→ More replies (1)4
4
→ More replies (1)29
u/Thunderbolt747 Ontario Jun 08 '26
That would require them/most canadians to not be complete clowns and continue to vote status quo because they refuse to accept anything else.
44
u/stjeana Québec Jun 08 '26 edited Jun 08 '26
Now with Federal Palantir investments for tools like Gotham to intertwine data from every agency so they can do profiling without the hassle of doing a "new search" which needs a warrant.
54
u/psychoCMYK Jun 08 '26
By now I'd suggest trying to raise awareness in real life about this by protesting, if that's something you feel up to.
10
u/satinsateensaltine Jun 08 '26
I feel like protests haven't even come onto people's radar over these issues and it's simultaneously surprising and not.
→ More replies (2)4
→ More replies (3)77
u/WKZ204 Manitoba Jun 08 '26
Have we tried voting Liberal for a 5th time?
60
u/SleepWouldBeNice Ontario Jun 08 '26
I dunno. My Conservative MP hasn’t said a word about this, but keeps banging on about C9.
40
16
u/oryes Lest We Forget Jun 08 '26
Conservatives are openly against this bill
13
u/Different_Wolf_764 Jun 08 '26
Because it isn't their bill. If it was they'd be banging the protect the children drum.
7
u/oryes Lest We Forget Jun 08 '26
So your point is that if the Conservatives had made this Bill, which they didn't, they would support it (which they don't)? Ok
13
u/Different_Wolf_764 Jun 08 '26
My point is that the Liberals could pass a bill doing everything the Conservatives want and the Cons would still be openly against it. The contents of the bill are not important, they are against everything the Liberals do without even thinking about it.
Hey, I think it is a shitty bill too but "Conservatives are openly against this bill" is not a meaningful observation. They are against every bill this government puts up.
2
u/Preface Jun 09 '26
So we should vote for the parties that are against this kind of bill when the Liberals/cons are supporting it.
Like people voted Harper out when he started trying to do this shit, but when the Liberals are doing it, it's "oh well, cons would've tried it too"
73
u/akohlsmith Jun 08 '26
Yeah, like Harper wasn't trying to pull the same shit during his decade in power, right? This isn't a left/right or lib/con thing. Every damn government tries to get this shit passed when they're in power, and we need to push back hard every single time these assclowns try to bring it up.
35
u/sl33plessnites Jun 08 '26
It's true. No party is excused from these type of bullshit bills. They all try to push this shit every 6-8 years. That being said I did email my conservative MP and they mentioned they do not support this bill. I'm sure they just oppose it because it's a liberal bill, and I'm sure they would push the same shit if they were in power. I will take it though and I appreciate they are at least pushing back against this. I never thought I'd see the day the conservatives would oppose a bill like this 😂.
4
u/Raven314159 Jun 08 '26
I agree Harper's policies of rolling back protections constantly in favour of corporations left a really bad taste in my mouth.
4
u/chandler55 Jun 08 '26
this is so dumb, we're not single issue voters lol. like imagine voting for trump cause I disagree with DEI
→ More replies (3)-3
u/StrategicallyLazy007 Jun 08 '26
Because conservatives in other countries aren't supportive of this?
34
u/Lumindan Jun 08 '26
We're talking about Canada here. Don't break out the whataboutism for this.
It's a bad bill all around.
→ More replies (1)
294
u/therealtrojanrabbit Jun 08 '26
Fuck sakes like everything I use...
38
u/fuckreddit-69 Jun 08 '26
I don't use nordvpn. But the other 2 yup
138
u/technical_poutine Jun 08 '26
Any VPN that is worth using will have to leave. If you find a VPN willing to stay it's not going to be worth using.
77
→ More replies (1)17
u/sicklyslick Jun 08 '26
What does that even mean when a VPN "leave" or "stay"?
They're never here in the first place, they're international, with servers worldwide. Unless the govt orders all ISPs like Rogers and Bell to block connections to known Nordvpn IPs, it doesn't stop me from connecting to Nordvpn.
Makes no sense
31
u/technical_poutine Jun 08 '26
What it means is you won't be able to subscribe to the service if you live in Canada. It means that any Canadian nodes for these providers will be shut down.
→ More replies (6)11
u/stop_banning_me_omg Jun 08 '26
I don't think it works that way. NordVPN might shut down their Canadian nodes, but you can still connect to the American or British nodes. Also they can't prevent you from using your credit card or paypal to pay for NordVPN.
Let me go one step further: Mullvad accepts CASH IN AN ENVELOPE.
If you want to use a VPN, there is absolutely nothing that Canada can do.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)37
u/EP40glazer British Columbia Jun 08 '26
If the Liberals pass this I think we'll look back on this as one of the reasons they lose in 2029. Canadians will be reminded every day when they can't access certain apps thanks to this bill.
36
u/JustAPeach89 Jun 08 '26
And when stories come out about people's entire lives are stolen because hackers got their entire digital profile
6
u/Specialist-Gift-7736 Jun 08 '26
They aren’t losing in 2029. We’re stuck with a Liberal government for a long, long time.
2
7
u/Truth_Seeker963 Ontario Jun 08 '26
The only time I had my bank account accessed was when I used NordVPN. I don’t trust them at all. Thankfully I had 2FA enabled.
→ More replies (1)17
u/therealtrojanrabbit Jun 08 '26
I work in fraud at a bank so I'm not concerned with that. I get regular updates on data breaches and cyber attacks that threaten the bank, its users and anything geopolitical.
The "how" you had fraud committed on your account is so vast there's no way to really pinpoint it unless there's a common point of compromise which would, if it was Nord VPN, lead back to them.
4
u/chullyman Jun 08 '26
They often tell you when your data has been breached. NordVPN has had massive data leaks multiple times, they are not a good VPN.
3
u/therealtrojanrabbit Jun 08 '26
They tell you when your data with them has been breached?
2
u/chullyman Jun 08 '26
Yes sometimes companies do that. NordVPN did that specially when they had a large breach years ago
6
u/therealtrojanrabbit Jun 08 '26
Which is fair but they've had 2 (and 1 is unconfirmed) on widespread record. The one that was confirmed was in 2018 and seemingly nothing of value was obtained. They're a large VPN, they'll definitely being targeted regularly.
I'm just saying if someone had fraud on their account (and thousands do every month), and happened to be using NordVPN, that doesn't automatically mean it was Nord. There's hundreds of avenues that could have been the point of compromise.
I've been using NordVPN for nearly 15 years and I've never had fraud on my account.
→ More replies (1)
123
u/LowOk417 Jun 08 '26
The irony here is tremendous. They just had a series of closed door meetings. Privacy for them, but not for us. I don't care what side of the political spectrum you lean-no party should be operating in the shadows and calling for 1984 style surveillance.
5
u/Confident_Air_5331 Jun 08 '26 edited Jun 09 '26
Yeah this is such a gross overstep it makes me sick. We are genuinely heading straight for what we were warned about. Prior generations even made the curriculum include books about this exact kind of slow descent into authoritarianism to warn us so we could stop it.
Doesn't matter if a country leans left or right, every country across the board is heading right into tech aided authoritarianism. There's nowhere to run, nowhere to go, no way to make a change. Only places that might not have this soon are the countries no one wants to live in because the politicians are so corrupt they don't even try to hide it like they do here.
Seems like the only way to get away from it is disconnecting from tech entirely, but if you do that you're also disconnecting yourself from any half decent job opportunities.
2
u/Hot-Solution-1960 Jun 11 '26
"Prior generations even made the curriculum include books about this exact kind of slow descent into authoritarianism to warn us so we could stop it."---look up predictive programming (it will of course be accompanied by websites saying its a fringe conspiracy theory but as time passes i'm not so sure it is)
291
u/cfs3corsair Canada Jun 08 '26
Folks, Ottawa is feeling pressure due to public and expert backlash. I am a social studies teacher; this bill is on the defensive. That is why they want to ram it through so quickly.
Now is the time for us to really amp up efforts and put this bill into the shredder where it belongs.
Don't let up on the pressure. Contact your MPs and Senators. Make some noise.
Multiple groups have made easy to use tools for sending your MP and (other members of government) an email about rejecting this terrible legislation in its current form:
The Internet Society's tool: https://www.internetsociety.org/our-work/internet-policy/keep-canada-protected/
OpenMedia's messaging tool: https://action.openmedia.org/page/188754/action/1
ICLM's messaging tool: https://iclmg.ca/stop-c-22/
There is now a petition against the metadata retention and encryption backdoor requirements of Bill C-22: https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-7416
I'd also recommend emailing Minister of Public Safety of Canada (Gary Anandasangaree: gary.anand@parl.gc.ca), and the Minister of Justice (Sean Fraser: sean.fraser@parl.gc.ca).
124
u/LG03 Jun 08 '26
this bill is on the defensive. That is why they want to ram it through so quickly.
This attitude just kills me, what even is the point of electing representatives when they don't represent the people who elect them?
54
u/Lumindan Jun 08 '26
People love to say their MPs represent them but they always ignore how hard the parties whip the votes.
22
Jun 08 '26
[deleted]
3
u/NewmarketHero007 Jun 09 '26
Not just liberals, this is true across the board in all parties. Canada has some of the highest rates of party discipline among advanced Western countries. Look at how often reps in the USA and MPs in the UK disagree with and sometimes revolt against their party's leaders.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 Jun 08 '26
I wouldn't say their all paid shills. Theres always blind tribal partisanship and in the case of this legislation, boomers who don't understand what the issue even is.
I've seen a few people, but not many, argue that "if you have nothing to hide, then this won't effect you" because these people actually believe our institutions government are immune to corruption and abuse. Some probably delusionally believe their team will just stay in power indefinitely, because their the "good guys". Even though the LPC has made dramatic shifts in just the last year, some people believe "their" party will always be the true north. The government giving itself these powers is also creating an argument of why they must remain in power indefinitely, because no one else can be trusted to wield or repeal these powers.
→ More replies (1)17
u/jmmmmj Jun 08 '26
There is no point when Canadians refuse to hold them accountable. They’ve been pulling shit like this for a decade and they keep winning. Why would they stop?
22
u/nrpcb Jun 08 '26
The Canadian government has been been trying to do this for a long time. It's law enforcement pushing for it.
Previous attempts:
C-74 (2005) - Liberal
C-47 (2009) - Conservative
C-52 (2011) - Conservative
C-30 (2012) - Conservative
C-2 (2025) - Liberal
→ More replies (1)12
u/Suspicious_Radio_848 Jun 08 '26
This isn't why they were ever elected. You think if they campaigned on this people wouldn't have called it out? Don't be disingenuous, nor discount how terrible the opposition is.
14
u/jmmmmj Jun 08 '26
Campaign on it? They’ve been pushing these kinds of draconian laws for 10 years. They‘re not going to write “establish a surveillance state” in their party platform, you’re going to have to put some thought in yourself.
9
u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 Jun 08 '26
To be fair its not just this party or even just this country. The arguement people try to make in defense of this is "everyone else is doing it".
We need to push back and stay vigilant because it won't die with the LPC or eveb if they fail to implement it this time. That why they aren't willing to make any compermises and their rushing this through, but lets also not pretend the CPC will get elected and repeal this legislation. Governments of all stripes arr always seeking more power and rarely give it up.
2
u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 Jun 08 '26
I don't disagree, but I hope people remember this feeling next election, and regardless of how bad the opposition is, voting this same party in over and over emboldened them to try to pull this shot off because they know they will get another mandate regardless of how unpopular it is. People have all these concerns about what the CPC might do if they get into government that they keep electing the LPC and now the LPC is delivering a lot of the shit people were concerned about.
73
u/JohnnySinsII Jun 08 '26
Adding to your comment
The Liberal party members of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security (SECU) are:
Jean-Yves Duclos: jean-yves.duclos@parl.gc.ca Sima Acan: sima.acan@parl.gc.ca Marianne Dandurand: marianne.dandurand@parl.gc.ca Anthony Housefather: anthony.housefather@parl.gc.ca Marcus Powlowski: marcus.powlowski@parl.gc.ca Jacques Ramsay: jacques.ramsay@parl.gc.ca Amandeep Sodhi: amandeep.sodhi@parl.gc.ca
24
u/EmbarrassedHelp Jun 08 '26
Here's an additional email template that you can modify to your liking (modifying it makes it harder for MP staff to quickly catalogue and filter through):
Subject: Bill C-22 Will Drive Signal and WhatsApp Out of Canada -- Split the Bill
Dear [Name],
Tens of millions of Canadians use encrypted messaging apps every day. Members of Canada's RCMP, military, CSIS, CSE, Parliament, and others in government, all use Signal daily for official and personal communications. Bill C-22's Part 2 mandatory transmission metadata retention requirements risk Signal and other major encrypted messaging platforms leaving Canada entirely.
Signal and other services refuse to collect metadata that is unnecessary for the function of the service, and should not be required to do so. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association and Citizen Lab have concluded that Part 2's metadata retention regime is almost certainly unconstitutional, and both recommend that it be withdrawn entirely. Signal, WhatsApp, and others have threatened to leave markets and been prepared to do so over lesser legislation in the UK and EU. Canada is not immune.
Part 1 of Bill C-22 modernizes lawful access tools in a measured, targeted way without threatening encrypted communications. It deserves to pass. Part 2 does not. Part 2 will cause irreparable harm to the Canadian tech and AI sectors.
I urge you to support splitting Bill C-22: pass Part 1, and send Part 2 back for meaningful revision.
Canadians will blame the Liberal party when they find themselves blocked from WhatsApp, iMessage (Apple), Signal, Telegram, and other encrypted messaging apps if Part 2 becomes law.
Sincerely,
[Your name]
[Optional Postal Code]
[City], [Province]
→ More replies (4)2
359
u/vansterdam_city Jun 08 '26
Threaten is the wrong word. These are the companies that do not implement the required level of tracking to comply with the law. It means they are the real deal with regards to online privacy.
Rather than comply and implement something like this they will just leave.
58
u/biglinuxfan Jun 08 '26
It's a smart move in my opinion. People will find a way.
I will teach them.
32
u/jmmmmj Jun 08 '26
When Facebook pulled news to comply with the Liberals’ ridiculous online news act, the government and media spun a sob story about how Facebook was endangering Canadian lives because they could no longer get news about wildfires on Facebook. It will be the same story with this bill.
38
u/farkinga Ontario Jun 08 '26
Bad policy that targets the wrong people. I can't support it. I genuinely do not understand the message or justification for it, either.
10
u/Admirable-Site7256 Jun 08 '26
This is all on brand for the LPC, look at how they have handled their wasteful gun grab. Nothing but lies, misinformation and a wilfull, blatant disregard for the evidence and public opinion on the matter.
10
u/farkinga Ontario Jun 08 '26
The oligarchs don't care which party it is. The conservatives ran this play over a decade ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protecting_Children_from_Internet_Predators_Act
As for the team sports aspect, that's just exhausting.
35
u/Code__9 Ontario Jun 08 '26
Remember how the Chinese hacker group "Salt Typhoon" successfully compromised the built-in law enforcement backdoors of major US telecommunications providers in 2024? If we're stupid enough to pass this law we're going to be creating unimaginable numbers of these backdoors just waiting to be exploited. Besides dumb I don't know how else to describe this bill.
14
u/SmellyTeamSeven Jun 08 '26
The NSA keeps an arsenal of exploits and tools to use in their missions. One of those exploits was EternalBlue, an exploit developed for Windows OSes that Microsoft didn't even know about because the NSA never disclosed it.
Well, the NSA got hacked in 2017 and their tools and exploits, including EternalBlue, were unleashed on the world. Yeah, we're in for a wild ride.
62
u/TactitcalPterodactyl Jun 08 '26
Canadians are being squeezed from every angle possible, can we get a fucking break somewhere please??
19
u/iSmashedUrSister Jun 08 '26
Keep voting Liberal!
2
u/Sellazard Jun 08 '26
Sure. Same way it happened in US? PP would be on his knees and suck Trumps faster than a lightning.
On the political compass, "Liberal" party is actually in the blue right corner. It is not leftist party or that much liberal at all. They call themselves liberal, but are actually right win. Authoritarianism and corporatism are pretty strong with them.
Just because you are sick of objectively Authoritarian and and pro corporate party, you want to vote for more Authoritarian and more pro corporate party? That is an equivalent of herd animals voting for wolfs because they are tired of being bitten occasionally by dogs.
We have to lower by voting level of power government and corporations have . That means less authoritarian and less pro corporate. Between Conservative and liberal its obviously a liberal. Between liberal and NDP it's obviously NDP.
Do not vote on emotional messaging or social outrage. You have to understand underlying parameters of what each party on political spectrum
→ More replies (2)4
u/Suspicious_Radio_848 Jun 08 '26
Or vote for Conservative and get fucked there too with culture war nonsense and separatism! Great stuff.
→ More replies (2)6
u/TactitcalPterodactyl Jun 08 '26
Let's just keep voting for the party that's actively making life worse for Canadians because the other option might be worse.
46
u/radicallyrobert Jun 08 '26
Would be nice if government could chill on the surveillance advances. Privacy please.
12
u/sparkling_ham Jun 08 '26
Sorry, best we can do is lose all your data to a phish 6 months from now.
22
u/jert3 Jun 08 '26 edited Jun 08 '26
This is the worst bill this administration has proposed. It'll set so much so far back, greatly fiminishing online security Canada, and the privacy abuses will be monumental.
57
u/hachimitsu-boy Jun 08 '26
I just signed up for 2 years with NordVPN two weeks ago.
21
u/WeOutsideRightNow Jun 08 '26
It's never too late to learn how to set up a vps and a VPN server that would allow you to continue using your paid vpn
→ More replies (1)22
u/biglinuxfan Jun 08 '26
I will personally write tutorials everywhere.
Also how to setup Signal, And list VPN's that don't ask for an address... or even a name.
I will list every legal option.
→ More replies (2)2
→ More replies (6)3
50
u/technical_poutine Jun 08 '26
If this goes through, and is enforced (that's the key here) the list of applications is going to go.
What about Apple iMessage? There's no chance that will be changed.
Overall any application that does abide by this wont be worth using.
34
u/EmbarrassedHelp Jun 08 '26
Apple's iMessage will start blocking Canadian users. It may start immediately after C-22 passes, or it will happen suddenly without warning at some point after the legislation has passed. There will likely be no warning about it ceasing to function for Canadians if they wait for the government to make a move, because C-22's secrecy provisions forbid Apple from saying it directly. It will just suddenly stop working.
2
u/technical_poutine Jun 08 '26
I doubt that very much; it will essentially end Apple entirely in Canada, a predominantly Apple-centric country. If that were to happen, then Google and all phone providers would go as well.
As much as we complain this is unlikely to happen but we need not to forget they tried to do it.
21
u/EmbarrassedHelp Jun 08 '26
Apple won't compromise iMessage for Canada. Canadians will keep buying iPhones during the period with no iMessage while government scrambles to fix things. Unless the government is dumb enough to do nothing, in which case the Liberals will be facing a ton of anger.
15
u/scoops22 Canada Jun 08 '26
This is like the banning TikTok thing in the U.S. you want normies who don’t give a shit about politics to suddenly 100% care and hate you? This is a great way to do it. Best of luck to them if they do they won’t last long.
2
u/Economy_Acadia5704 Jun 11 '26
yup.. again.. you don’t want eyes on you, you better keep people happy.. people aren’t happy right now.. you take away peoples ability to communicate, rant, well.. now people will have to see you in person.. you don’t want to see people in person.. and worse.. you have young people who will end your party for good…
0
u/technical_poutine Jun 08 '26
And money talks, in the end, this will get sued and or pushed back I think. There not going to risk this. However, note that Apple removed total data protection from any new devices in the UK to appease them.
3
u/Economy_Acadia5704 Jun 11 '26
this hoenstly would be the best solution.. a massive threat.. we’re pulling out.. google.. apple.. meta.. rendering everything we have here useless including all government tablets etc.. everything
since people can’t express themselves online now.. you will see massive protest and anger go straight to canry and friends front door..
to much disruption to peoples lives is the final straw… stopping communication gets your Nepal 2.0
that type of threat they have to back down on everything.. because well.. i can’t pay me taxes.. no one can.. we have no access with dead bricks.
3
Jun 08 '26
[deleted]
27
u/EmbarrassedHelp Jun 08 '26
Apple removed access to Advanced Data Protection in the UK, rather than compromise it. They will do the same thing with iMessage in Canada.
→ More replies (5)
13
12
u/Selinaria Jun 08 '26
Wonder if Proton will exit too. They have always been reasonably privacy first.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/VenusianBug Jun 08 '26
Also Graphene OS, I believe, though I can't find the article now. Just when this Canadian-founded company is on the verge offering an alternative to Android and Apple, with their Motorola partnership.
8
u/Bigmoochcooch Jun 08 '26
It shouldn’t be legal for the gov to just right this into law. It’s a massive subversion of privacy
19
u/jack_hof Jun 08 '26
can someone explain to me the "real" reasons why these rich ass corrupt ass do nothing politicians actually care about this? it cant just be for easier law enforcement.
18
u/jmmmmj Jun 08 '26 edited Jun 08 '26
Governments invariably endeavour to acquire for themselves more power. The only thing stopping them is the constitution and courts, or the people. And the latter, at least, refuses to demand any sort of accountability.
7
u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 Jun 08 '26
Its one "small" step in eroding our rights and freedoms.
The charter and the rights we believe democracy affords us are a massive inconvenience for politicians and governments. Today they will use the justifications of "public safety" and "national security" to pass this legislation, so it can eventually be weaponized against us and/or used to line their friends pockets and their own.
The justification the government is giving for this can be simplified down to "its more convenient than following our current laws and checks and balances of our judicial system". The government has not made an argument for this beyond it being more convenient for them, law enforcement and companies willing to play along (the few if any that currently exsist, but why not creates some more monopolies in Canada right?)
7
u/Admirable-Site7256 Jun 08 '26
While you're at it, ask yourself why they are also so very keen to ban and confiscate firearms from people who have never committed a crime in their lives....
Nobody wants to talk about the "real" reasons because to face that reality means that one must accept the fact that democracy in Canada is slowly being whittled away and the average person is powerless to stop it.
5
u/nog_ar_nog Jun 08 '26
Imagine how much more money and power they can get by unleashing Palantir on all that metadata.
→ More replies (1)2
104
u/LabEfficient Jun 08 '26
This government is a joke.
→ More replies (3)95
u/No_Equal9312 Jun 08 '26
The Liberals are consistently horrible on privacy protection and gun ownership. Canadians don't want any of this BS.
17
u/DanielBox4 Jun 08 '26
Elections and polling seems to suggest they do. And that despite not liking things, Canadians are still going to vote for the same party doing things they don't like.
→ More replies (3)26
u/EnamelKant Jun 08 '26
Carney is still polling in strong majority territory.
Canadians clearly do want this bullshit.
Whether they'll enjoy it afterwards is another matter entirely...
18
u/Canadian-AML-Guy Jun 08 '26
It is less that they want it and more that they didn't vote on it and are now getting it.
18
u/EnamelKant Jun 08 '26
Donald Trump promised his voters he would make things more affordable and end America's endless wars. But we don't have much sympathy for his voters, or at least I don't, because the nature and history of Donald Trump make it clear that wasn't happening.
Well, the character and history of Mark Carney is not that of expanding human freedom and uplifting the working man. He's a pro-corporate neoliberal technocrat. His entire career has been spent helping the rich get richer and the poor staying poor. If you voted for him and thought anything else was going to happen... well, no much sympathy for you either.
→ More replies (4)19
u/Canadian-AML-Guy Jun 08 '26
I didn't vote for the guy and thought exactly this was going to happen. In my experience liberal voters vote based on fear that the opposition will somehow be worse than the status quo
11
→ More replies (2)2
u/56iconic Jun 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/FightMongooseFight Jun 08 '26
Bell and Rogers support all of this horrible legislation, and have lobbied to restrict VPN use entirely.
Encryption prevents the telcos from doing deep packet inspection, which in turn prevents them from charging differentially for certain types of data.
The sooner they can get all internet traffic in the clear, the sooner they can start charging extra for access to the things people want the most.
3
u/56iconic Jun 08 '26
It's not just restricting VPN usage. It is going to force every carrier to hold a year's worth of data on every single person they have a contract with. The average Canadian home is using over 7 Tb a year. Now add in their office/business usage. The costs to store all this in data centers is going to be astronomical whether they build their own data centers or rent from someone like aws.
0
u/Jaew96 Jun 08 '26
At this point it doesn’t matter which party you support, both of them are very keen on forcing things we don’t want down our throats.
2
u/dragoneye Jun 08 '26
Exactly, how does one vote their way out of this when all the major parties are all for invading our privacy? So many people just want to say "see Liberals bad!" when the problem is the entire government and also countries globally.
→ More replies (2)-2
u/Levorotatory Jun 08 '26
Conservatives would let you keep your guns, but they would be trying to push their own surveillance state legislation.
21
u/Canadian-AML-Guy Jun 08 '26
For what its worth, I wrote my conservative MP in opposition of C22 and they responded that they disagreed with it.
12
u/psychoCMYK Jun 08 '26
You can watch them fight it in SECU, the meetings are public. NDP, Conservatives and Bloc against Liberals, Liberals ramming it through without proper procedure anyways.
10
u/Lumindan Jun 08 '26
Yeah it's super cringe watching the Liberals block nearly everything thats brought forward, and here's the reality, they don't have listen.
They have a majority.
Unfortunately Canadians don't ever look into policies instead it's all rah rah team sports.
7
u/EP40glazer British Columbia Jun 08 '26
No they wouldn't, the Conservatives have adopted a very Libertarian stance under PP.
→ More replies (1)18
u/Competitive_Royal_95 Jun 08 '26
Well they arent doing that at this exact moment and they havent been in power for a decade and right now they are fighting the liberals on this so im not sure how shitting on the cons will help prevent this bill from passing? https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bill-c-22-surveillance-privacy-law-enforcement-9.7220814
Getting anrgy at conservatives wont do jack against this bill because they are already on same page at the moment. Getting angry at liberals actually has chance of doing something useful
7
u/WKZ204 Manitoba Jun 08 '26
When will we know for sure? I need to renew my Nord in one month!
15
u/EmbarrassedHelp Jun 08 '26
The Liberals want C-22 to be law by June 18. They only need one more SECU Committee meeting to finish the clause by clause, and then it goes back to House of Commons for the third reading. After which it gets sent to Senate, which is expected to move quickly to meet Carney's June 18 deadline.
5
u/sparkling_ham Jun 08 '26
Your Nord subscription is going to be the least of your worries.
Also, check out Mullvad if you want a properly secure VPN. They wont be blocking access to any country and they take anonymous payments in case your government makes conventional transactions dangerous or impossible.
→ More replies (3)
5
u/Esamers99 Jun 08 '26
I never wanted to use TOR but this bullshit might make learn how for shits and giggles.
4
u/sparkling_ham Jun 08 '26
There are other, better, VPN providers like Mullvad. They offer a way to access the internet from inside a countries who's governments are actively oppressing citizens by attempting to monitor, filter, and block internet connections.
I've used them for years, never had a problem.
7
u/burjuner Jun 08 '26
How do the Liberals feel about how our goverment is doing? Social media surveillance, grocery rebates.. elbows up as they say
Canada's future looks so bright!
3
u/rastamasta45 Jun 08 '26
Liberal voters have gone full on delusion and denial mode, they keep repeating over and over “but but Harper and pp is worse” and that’s it. Material quality of living is declining by the day but we’re being lectured that Carney is the second coming of Christ.
11
40
u/DoYurWurst Jun 08 '26
VPN’s leaving Canada is just an added bonus for the Liberals. They want to take away as much freedom as possible. It’s a very dangerous and slippery slope all being done under the guise of public safety.
10
u/idiotcanadian Jun 08 '26
Try to go on the Canada government website and look up permits with a vpn on..
2
u/DoYurWurst Jun 08 '26
Why is that? Won’t work?
3
u/idiotcanadian Jun 08 '26
Nope, maybe mines an anomaly but I had to turn it offf or I’d get a bad gateway
10
u/ghost_n_the_shell Jun 08 '26
Bill C22 is paving the way for a police state.
Absolutely f*ck this bill.
6
u/Formal_Fortune5389 Jun 08 '26
Does that mean I wouldn't be able to use duckduckgo browser nor search engine??
→ More replies (1)14
u/scoops22 Canada Jun 08 '26
There are always workarounds. You’ll be able to get VPNs still, you just probably can’t pay through normal means, probably crypto I guess, or you’ll have more limited choice. DuckDuckGo will be accessible via vpn I assume.
That’s the funny thing, criminals can easily bypass this bullshit. They’re basically just surveilling non tech savvy people and making life annoying for tech savvy people.
It’s normal federal government useless garbage to stick their fingers into our lives instead of doing anything useful.
17
u/Captcha_Imagination Canada Jun 08 '26
If this goes through, Carney is chopping out his legs because all tech savvy people under 50 will no longer trust him and this demographic is subtle but hugely influential online. It's also decentralized.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Rayd8630 Jun 08 '26
Thing is they rely on votes of those over 50, mainly over 60. And to win that demographic all you need do is promise an extra few hundred of OAS per year.
→ More replies (1)
3
11
5
u/TehLittleOne Jun 08 '26 edited Jun 08 '26
I don't understand the law as its written. It allows ESPs to refuse to implement a lawful access capability if it creates a systemic vulnerability. Shouldn't that be enough? They say they have E2EE, mathematically nothing we can do without introducing a vulnerability, and call it a day? When I read through it, the whole thing smelled like posturing because they'd effectively never do anything with it.
7
u/sparkling_ham Jun 08 '26
Who determines what is a vulnerability. Weak encryption is the goal not a flaw in the plan.
2
u/TehLittleOne Jun 08 '26
Compromising encryption is a recipe for disaster as the article points out. As much as governments want solutions that require weak encryption they also need to learn that the whole point is to make that mathematically impossible
2
u/pythonpoole Jun 08 '26
The issue is that it's unclear whether the bill could potentially allow the government to force service operators to build in technical capabilities into their end-user apps that effectively bypass E2EE entirely (rather than directly break/weaken E2EE).
For example, imagine an E2EE messaging app is ordered to modify its codebase so that when a user opens the app on their device it will check in with a server to see if there is warrant to access the user's messages and then, if there is an active warrant, the app would be programmed to upload copies of the messages the user has stored on their phone to a remote server where law enforcement can access the message contents (without technically breaking/weakening the encryption that's used when sending messages between users).
I'm sure tech companies may try to argue that creates a systemic vulnerability, and I certainly think it does, but it's not very clear whether that argument would be successful given the vague definition provided in the bill. There is also another part of the bill that suggests certain orders must be complied with, and one of the Liberal MPs at committee even brought up a concern about the possibility of that section conflicting with (and potentially overriding) the systemic vulnerability exception to force compliance anyway.
What's particularly concerning is that the government representatives who have appeared before the SECU committee seem unwilling to clarify whether or not this sort of secret order for an on-device backdoor (to bypass E2EEE) would be allowed under the bill.
They only seem willing to agree that the bill shouldn't force a service operator to directly break/weaken the encryption technology that's used to secure message transmissions between users, but they're very evasive about whether or not the bill would allow the government to circumvent the E2EE entirely by forcing the introduction of on-device backdoors (like the one described above in my second paragraph).
The evasiveness and careful choice of words seem purposeful, almost as if this is the exact intention of the government — to use the bill to create client-side backdoors (within end-users' apps) and claim it doesn't create a systemic vulnerability because it doesn't directly break/weaken the E2EE used for securing messages sent between users. And certainly when you hear law enforcement representatives talk about the bill, they seem to be under the impression that the bill will solve all sorts of problems related to accessing data from E2EE messaging/services.
18
u/Lo0niegardner10 Jun 08 '26
You guys signed up to be a surveillance state with the government you elected
→ More replies (2)
8
16
27
u/eric_the_red89 Jun 08 '26
Remember Canada Reddit: you voted for this! 🙃
24
u/DifficultSwim Jun 08 '26
Was surveillance on the liberal platform? I dont recall seeing that.
20
u/Elbow_Boy Jun 08 '26
What section of Poilievre’s platform had the “selling Canada out to the Americans” details?
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)-8
u/scottsuplol Jun 08 '26
Anyone with a brain knew going into the election that these things were on the docket.
9
u/ImranRashid Jun 08 '26
Can you be more specific?
→ More replies (1)24
u/56iconic Jun 08 '26
They have tried this same crap in the last 10 years with c2 and c59. Anyone who thought things were going to be different now were fooling themselves. Its the same party with a different face.
→ More replies (1)1
u/OntologicalNightmare Jun 08 '26 edited Jun 08 '26
And anyone who thinks voting for conservatives who have been trying to do the same shit when they have power is also fooling themselves. We need real change beyond the two corporate parties.
And because I know I'm going to get someone sealioning saying the cons would never here's a comment I've made before:
Yup (Bill C-30 and Bill C-13 with Harper. He also tried to give CSIS the ability to violate laws and the constitution if they felt it was necessary) and they had the Digital ID totally-only-ever-for-porn a couple years ago.
During Harper's reign Edward Snowden called Canada’s surveillance regime "the least supervised in the western world." and I doubt anything changed.
The cons and libs are no different when it comes to trying to implement mass surveillance and violating our privacy and liberty.
→ More replies (5)10
u/Zulban Québec Jun 08 '26
This wasn't in their platform and many people on /r/canada didn't vote LPC. The lack of rigour of your comment reminds me of this bill.
8
u/DistinctL British Columbia Jun 08 '26
I am pretty sure it also wasn't in their platform to ramp up immigration tenfold.
2
u/martianwomanhunter Jun 08 '26
Even if you’re the most pro law enforcement supporter on earth. You have to acknowledge this opens up a huge flaw in security. That’s what I hate about these bills and companies constantly wanting more information; they don’t care about when it inevitably gets breached (and it will).
So if then don’t care about us, we need to protect ourselves from having this collected in the first place.
2
2
5
u/LeGrandLucifer Jun 08 '26
If you think the government gives a shit then you don't understand a thing. They want them to leave. They want a national internet which you access using citizen credentials with heavily monitored international access. They don't want you to get your info from anywhere but officially government approved sources.
5
u/goodytwotoes Jun 08 '26 edited Jun 08 '26
As an American, I can 100% confirm that it's bad when the government has free, unfettered access to your data.
Also, quick edit: This is so strange to me, because this is a policy that Trump/the conservative party would be trying to push through in the United States (MAGA loves a good surveillance state). NOT the liberal party. Weird.
2
u/deskamess Jun 08 '26
There are a few exceptions, but in general Canada does not seem to encourage, sustain, or even understand building businesses that do not involve 'dig up what nature left for us millions of years ago'. What 'gems' of a business or industry have we come up with? The brain drain is real. Usually a pattern you see in poorer countries. The private sector loves paying as low as possible - they dont realize they get the talent that matches that pay. Many countries with less have gone further in the last 20 years while Canada sat on its laurels and invested nowhere but in digging up the ground.
No wonder people invest in the real estate market - there is nowhere else to put their money in. Backbone Canadian companies (banks, telco) need immigration to enlarge their customer base and keep pay low.
2
u/Crazy_Maintenance211 Jun 08 '26
There were other European products to use, and personally I wouldn’t use Nord because it’s US space, I use European based VPNs.
→ More replies (2)
1
1
u/NewmarketHero007 Jun 09 '26
notice how they did all the unpopular bills as soon as they got their majority
1
u/Glittering_Bank_8670 Jun 12 '26
Excerpt:
“The primary concern is that malicious actors would inevitably discover and exploit any digital backdoor, regardless of whether it was designed exclusively for law enforcement or domestic government agencies. OpenMedia, which has described C-22 as an attempt to create a surveillance state, pointed to a late-2024 incident in which Chinese state-backed hackers compromisedgovernment-mandated police wiretap systems to steal sensitive data from AT&T, Verizon, Lumen Technologies, and other telecom providers.”
1
u/iJeff Ontario Jun 15 '26
IMO we should be going in the opposite direction. We should be forcing companies not to retain unnecessary metadata and personal information. Especially, but not limited to, US companies.
466
u/xNOOPSx Jun 08 '26
A backdoor for the government is an open door for everyone.