Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

EU Secretly Plans To Put a Back Door In Every Car By 2020

timothy posted about 3 months ago | from the don't-worry-we'll-only-track-you dept.

Transportation 364

An anonymous reader writes "A secretive EU body has agreed to develop a device to be fitted to all cars allowing police to cut off any engine at will, it emerged today. The device, which could be imposed within a decade, would also allow police to track a vehicle's movements as well as immobilise it. According to The Daily Telegraph a group of senior EU officials, including several Home Office mandarins, have signed off the proposal at a secret meeting in Brussels."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


Secret meetings: (5, Insightful)

fredrated (639554) | about 3 months ago | (#46114353)

it's what democracy is about!

Re:Secret meetings: (5, Funny)

cstec (521534) | about 3 months ago | (#46114371)

Democrazy. You spelled it wrong.

Re:Secret meetings: (5, Informative)

xaxa (988988) | about 3 months ago | (#46114565)

Considering the two sources given are the Daily Mail and the Telegraph, it's safest to assume this is lies until someone finds a reliable source.

(Two newspapers that make their profitis by getting "middle Englanders" angry. )

Re:Secret meetings: (2)

gweihir (88907) | about 3 months ago | (#46114649)

This has been referenced in other places as well, although, the "secret" part is news to me.

Re:Secret meetings: (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114801)

Given that Fox, CNN, MSNBC, BBC, ABC, etc... have become nothing but propaganda tools, your statement is simply asinine. Quality "News" has become almost non existent. Maybe you missed the Whistle Blowers from NYP and Washington Post that told you how they only release what the Government has scrubbed.

Should you ask for sources? Absolutely. Should you claim that someone can't be true because of a name? Not today you can't.

Re:Secret meetings: (4, Insightful)

amiga3D (567632) | about 3 months ago | (#46114863)

I think we can consider it pretty much inevitable. In fact I'm amazed they haven't already started installing them. Hell, maybe they have. It is such a wonderful tool I'd be shocked if they could possibly resist the temptation. Imagine never needing to chase a car ever again? Always knowing where someone is and where they've been? It almost has to happen.

Re:Secret meetings: (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 3 months ago | (#46114385)

it's what democracy is about!

For those with the votes which trump our puny votes.

Yay freedom :-\

Re:Secret meetings: (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114405)

Fuck the secretive EU body, and fuck their daconioan police state imperatives.

Re:Secret meetings: (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114601)

I wouldn't believe the Daily Mail if they told me I had a hole in my arse

Re:Secret meetings: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114639)

I wish to know how having a hole in my arse may affect house prices.

Re:Secret meetings: (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114773)

EU is ruled not by democrats, but by communist agents exported to Europe in the 80s and early 90s. Their mission is simple: control, weaken, destroy.

Great idea (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114361)

Because criminals won't immediately disable this shit, right?

Re:Great idea (4, Insightful)

djdanlib (732853) | about 3 months ago | (#46114403)

Or learn how to access it...

Remember, if "They" can do it, for any value of They, so can someone else.

Re:Great idea (4, Insightful)

gweihir (88907) | about 3 months ago | (#46114677)

Not necessarily, but given this is a government proposal (well, sort-of), it will have all the characteristics these people typically manage to achieve, namely, insecure, unreliable, too expensive and generally a failure. I predict that this thing If it gets implemented...) will not work reliably for the police, but will work reliably for criminals.

Re:Great idea (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 3 months ago | (#46114831)

Or learn how to access it...

Remember, if "They" can do it, for any value of They, so can someone else.

If it uses any of the same interfaces as the Event Data Recorder ("black box"), you can get the equipment to access it here, [cdr-system.com] for anywhere between $1,500 to $10,000.

Re:Great idea (4, Funny)

Minwee (522556) | about 3 months ago | (#46114841)

Or learn how to access it...

Remember, if "They" can do it, for any value of They, so can someone else.

To do that they would have to either defeat a highly sophisticated military grade encryption system, or somehow be able to answer secret recovery questions that only the maker of the car would know.

"What year was this car's engine block assembled?"

"What was the name of the first dealership that this car was sent to?"

"If I tell you the last four digits of the credit card number used to purchase this car, can you tell me the two that come before them in under 100 guesses?"

I'm telling you, there is _no_ way that anybody could break through this kind of security.

Re: Great idea (-1, Troll)

karo_80 (3519131) | about 3 months ago | (#46114427)

Lol hacked by criminals who ever thought they do that.

Re: Great idea (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114517)

1) "Lol".
2) No punctuation where it should be.
3) Incorrect punctuation
4) Twitter account.

Yeah... a waste of a Slashdot account.

Re:Great idea (5, Funny)

ackthpt (218170) | about 3 months ago | (#46114429)

Because criminals won't immediately disable this shit, right?

Criminals will be targeted by drones. You'll know they are criminals because the drones shot at them.

Move along, citizen, nothing to see here.

Re:Great idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114501)

Only criminals have cars.

Re:Great idea (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114547)

I'm sure the definition of "criminal" will quickly expand once they get this power. Have an unpaid parking ticket? Your car is now disabled. Behind on child support payments? Your car is now disabled....etc,etc, etc

Re:Great idea (5, Insightful)

Tokolosh (1256448) | about 3 months ago | (#46114567)

No, disabling it will make you a criminal. Cover a surveillance camera, you are a criminal.

It will be fun when a mother and her children are crushed by a bus when a static discharge immobilises her car in an intersection.

Re:Great idea (1)

gmuslera (3436) | about 3 months ago | (#46114619)

Because criminals (either working for them, or getting access, or just being outside frontiers, like NSA and people that have access directly or indirectly to their secrets) will not be ever be able to trigger it on normal people cars too.

Is already bad for your health (and the ones surrounding you) to drive, is one of the main death causes in the world. Adding the extra spice of carrying a backdoorl on them that you won't know when it will trigger and cause an accident will make driving very popular. And if ever someone important in a way or another dies in something related with a car normal people won't know if was a normal accident or something caused by the devices they put into.

Hacker Extortion Target (5, Insightful)

RichMan (8097) | about 3 months ago | (#46114367)

$10 million, (finger twist), or every other car on the autobahn comes to a halt at 1pm.

Re:Hacker Extortion Target (5, Insightful)

robinsonne (952701) | about 3 months ago | (#46114413)

We can hope, because that's the only way that the general public will finally see how dangerous having this capability is.

Re:Hacker Extortion Target (3, Interesting)

icebike (68054) | about 3 months ago | (#46114635)

It only takes a FEW cars disabled in key intersections to plug city streets.
Police could do this, or criminals could do it keep police away from the bank heist (or what ever).
Or the mythical terrorists, I suppose.

Its bad enough when Obama visits any town in the US and shuts the the airport and motorcade route down
for nothing but a political fundraiser. Can you imagine this technology loose in wild?

I guarantee if this gets passed in the EU it will arrive in the US in short order. Every time there is
a police chase anywhere, there will be a hue and cry from the usual useful idiots lobbying for this on
all cars.

DOS traffic jam, anyone? (2)

kimgkimg (957949) | about 3 months ago | (#46114387)

First hack will put a end to that pretty quickly I suspect.

Re:DOS traffic jam, anyone? (1)

Megane (129182) | about 3 months ago | (#46114657)

Except for the little problem that the first hack probably won't happen until it's already been installed into a few hundred thousand of cars. Kind of hard to "put an end to that" when you basically have to bring in an enormous number of cars one-by-one to have it disabled. And I can be sure there will be a first hack, because the kind of people who come up with crap don't understand computer security (or cryptography), which means it will become as wide open as DVD CSS.

Re:DOS traffic jam, anyone? (1)

gweihir (88907) | about 3 months ago | (#46114691)

The problem is that these will be in a lot of cars when the first hack occurs.

I've a hatchback! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114391)

I've already got a back door!

terrible idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114399)

i bet this technology will probably not be secure and will pose security risks, and this will be brought up only after its on all of our cars

The EU (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114401)

Where all member states are gathered *as equals* to do what Germany wants.

Re:The EU (4, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | about 3 months ago | (#46114693)

Where all member states are gathered *as equals* to do what Germany wants.

While that's often true, I'm sure I remember the British government suggesting this some years ago.

What usually seems to happen is that EU governments who want to impose draconian rules but can't get them past their own voters go to the EU, get it passed there, and then say 'sorry, we can't stop it, it's the EU, got to to what they tell us, boy, we're so totally upset about this'.

Soon to bring Los Angeles traffic everywhere (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 3 months ago | (#46114407)

As soon as this is hacked and becomes the plaything of miscreants.

What could possibly go wrong? (4, Informative)

onkelonkel (560274) | about 3 months ago | (#46114409)

About 5 minutes after this is implemented, the protocols will be cracked. About 5 minutes later some prankster will be broadcasting the "kill" signal to every car in Paris from a lunchbox portable radio from the top of the Eiffel tower.

Re:What could possibly go wrong? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114769)

Oh. That would be so wrong. Just sit in front of the Parliament with a weaker signal.

This will never be hacked by carjackers (-1, Flamebait)

bazmail (764941) | about 3 months ago | (#46114419)

Good to know that the security will be impervious to attack. and that police will never make a mistake when using it.

Seriously though Germany (which runs the EU) is reverting back to its Nazi roots with every piece of privacy busting legislation.

Re:This will never be hacked by carjackers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114723)

Unlike the shining beacon of freedom that is the UK.
Mandatory internet filtering.
Forgot your Truecrypt password? Go to jail.
"avoiding CCTV field of vision" is probable cause for a search.

Re:This will never be hacked by carjackers (2)

rvw (755107) | about 3 months ago | (#46114783)

Good to know that the security will be impervious to attack. and that police will never make a mistake when using it.
  Seriously though Germany (which runs the EU) is reverting back to its Nazi roots with every piece of privacy busting legislation.

No offense mate, but the Germans are the only ones to be trusted in this regard. They - the people - are the only ones who take all this shit seriously and who are willing to protest, and they make a difference. I'm Dutch, which is supposed to be liberal and we always pretend to stand up against injustice, but in reality most people here don't care.

My car already has 2 back doors (5, Funny)

Gothmolly (148874) | about 3 months ago | (#46114421)

And a hatchback door, so I guess you could say there are 3 back doors.

Way to write a headline, editors. How about something a little better like "EU Secretly Plans To Put a Back Door in Every Car ECU by 2020" ?

Re:My car already has 2 back doors (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114561)

But, given you've primed my brain with "EU", it then resolves "ECU" as the original codename for the Euro currency.

Re:My car already has 2 back doors (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about 3 months ago | (#46114643)

Way to write a headline, editors.

Right! Slashdot's target audience are people who hear "back door" and think physical door.
Stupid editors don't have a clue who reads their own website.

So... (4, Funny)

Yaztromo (655250) | about 3 months ago | (#46114431)

Does that mean only hatchbacks will be permitted in the EU going forward?

(Note to eds: bad titles are bad, and will be mocked.)


Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114701)

Nah, hatchbacks will still be permitted to go backwards, you'll just have to install a fold-down windscreen kit first.

Say what? (1)

TangoMargarine (1617195) | about 3 months ago | (#46114433)

According to The Daily Telegraph a group of senior EU officials, including several Home Office mandarins, have

Is 'mandarin' the new 'chinaman' or something?

Re:Say what? (2)

gaudior (113467) | about 3 months ago | (#46114499)

Full Definition of MANDARIN
a : a public official in the Chinese Empire of any of nine superior grades
b (1) : a pedantic official (2) : bureaucrat

Re:Say what? (4, Informative)

compro01 (777531) | about 3 months ago | (#46114509)


(informal, UK) A senior civil servant.

Re:Say what? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114811)

Delicious, multi-sectioned, citrus fruit.

Re:Say what? (1)

ctaylor (160829) | about 3 months ago | (#46114537)

Well, the dictionary definition is:

1. A member of any of the nine ranks of high public officials in the Chinese Empire.
2. A high government official or bureaucrat.
3. A member of an elite group, especially a person having influence or high status in intellectual or cultural circles.

It's sometimes used in a negative manner, especially with definitions 2 & 3.

Re:Say what? (1)

RenderSeven (938535) | about 3 months ago | (#46114741)

4. A small orange that comes in a can.

Ive long suspected that my traitorous canned oranges were plotting against me, skulking about the pantry in their RF shielded little can-bunkers, using their knowledge of citrus-based automotive control technology.

I worry about the script kiddies (2)

arbiterxero (952505) | about 3 months ago | (#46114445)

...suddenly a vulnerability is found and a kid rips off the first DDOT (Distributed Denial of Transportation)

and all of London's cars come to a grinding halt...

Re:I worry about the script kiddies (5, Funny)

Doug Otto (2821601) | about 3 months ago | (#46114637)

and all of London's cars come to a grinding halt...

And this will be different than the M1 or M25 during rush hour how?

Sounds familiar (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114453)


OnStar (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114461)

USA beat you to it.

Re:OnStar (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114543)

Yup. Way back in 1995.

If a satellite, cell tower, and sooner or later a radio can network with your car...you are fucked.

Secret back door? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114467)

My car already has a back door, I prefer to call it a "trunk" due to some obscure chain of etymology that (sadly) has nothing to do with elephants.

So does this mean the EU is planning to add additional trunks to cars, or simply not tell car owners about the trunks already there and hope they don't notice?

Re:Secret back door? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114575)

My car already has a back door, I prefer to call it a "trunk"

Hey this is a very very funny and highly unexpected piece of comedy. Thanks to you and all the other posters who took the time and creativity to bring this bit of clever punditry to my attention.

"According to The Telegraph..." (4, Informative)

newcastlejon (1483695) | about 3 months ago | (#46114473)

Call me when they release these "classified documents", name the "mandarins" concerned and find someone who can give a more reasoned opinion than Nijel "why does this man deserve equal coverage on the BBC?" Farage, otherwise I'll just assume this is just more of The Telegraph's usual anti-EU ranting.

Oh, look, the Mail's covering it too.
Fancy that.

For heaven's sake, there's more than enough EU bumbling going on as it is without editors concocting more of their own.

Re:"According to The Telegraph..." (1)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about 3 months ago | (#46114673)

More to the point, I'm struggling to get excited about this idea - the document is probably right that high speed car chases are extremely dangerous. The people in the article going "zomg what if it goes off accidentally in traffic" amaze me. What if it goes off accidentally? Er, the car glides to a halt. What if someone is in a high speed car chase? Better not be a pedestrian in the way ....

I'm usually pretty concerned about erosions of civil liberties, but seriously, if you're being chased by the cops and you're a human rights activist - things already went so badly wrong that being able to outdrive the pursuers seems like the least of your problems.

The questions about whether it could be made secure are very real and important, for sure, but again .... if you're worried about hackers stopping cars, well, nothing stops some random asshat from dropping nails on a motorway either.

Re:"According to The Telegraph..." (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114845)

The whole story reeks of "reporter who knows absolutely zilch about science/engineering". A "six year development timeframe" is hysterically reinterpreted as "mandatory by 2020".

I suspect what it's reporting is a genuine R&D programme, which the EU may well be subsidising under one of its myriad technology development programmes, but has no better than a 50/50 chance of even succeeding in its stated goals (to develop a technology that could reliably do this), and its prospects of "being fitted in every new car by 2020" are about as good as my chances of becoming Home Secretary in the same timeframe.

Don't Worry, It Will Never Be Hacked (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114477)

Because no one could possibly want to abuse the ability to turn off any random vehicle they wanted to, like say, in the middle of a busy highway during rush hour. And because no one would ever think of hacking it, the courts wouldn't believe it was anything but the driver being a jackass, just like no one figured out how to bypass immobilizers.

I hate the EU (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114485)

Once I was for it but these days we all the crap of a union and none of the benefits.
I still pay insane taxes but now I also have to deal with social dumping from countries to the east, open borders that invites hordes of criminals and pay corrupt countries "loans" while they still refuse to get their act together.
How fucked up it is to see the politicians try to avoid having the population voting on EU matters when our constitution says we must vote before handing over certain types of power etc.

They need to slow it down and make countries join at different speeds instead of all-in.

~# sh gridl0ck -horns -flashinglights -lockdoors (3, Insightful)

bazmail (764941) | about 3 months ago | (#46114489)

At least the inevitable war-driving hacks for this will put IT security center stage and not the usual 30 second slot in the late evening news.

I thought I read where this was a secret (2)

X-Ray Artist (1784416) | about 3 months ago | (#46114497)

If that is true, than someone leaked it. They should be found and tried for treason. Isn't that what happens to people who let the public know how the government is ......

Grrr (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114503)

Thanks Cameron. :|

Yeah, Right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114507)

The daily fail regurgitating your usual torygraph EU scaremongering with no direct references to the claimed source material.
Let's see how many days until there's a tiny retraction on page 37.

Tin Foil Hats (4, Insightful)

mk1004 (2488060) | about 3 months ago | (#46114523)

Because the Daily Mail is like the Onion, only the jokes are by accident.

Re:Tin Foil Hats (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114683)

That's what your parents said about you too...

UK tabloid "reporting" about EU (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114539)

The Daily Mail, a tabloid the word "sewer press" was invented for. A UK tabloid writing about the EU.

Now that must be an interesting article. I really really want to read it... NOT!

sweet! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114549)

Hatchbacks are very useful... oh wait, what?

Wouldn't (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114557)

locking the transmission into neutral murder far fewer people if the cops ever actually had to hit this thing? I probably wouldn't remember the power brakes were good exactly one time with the five-oh chasing me.

Is it called ATMOS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114563)

My guess is the government will have it installed as a Atmospheric Omission System that filters CO2. Better be careful though, I haven't heard of The Doctor being around.

Typical British story (1)

Teun (17872) | about 3 months ago | (#46114605)

They forget about other EU nations parliaments and only mention their own 'House of Commons'.

More significantly they forget about the EU parliament.

Had The Telegraph serious worries about this EU police group they would have included opinions from other EU member states.

Further these discussions are not 'secret', at best they are confidential, not exactly unusual for police matters and concerning our security.

But this proposal is indeed a move to the unwanted and unnecessary, yet totally along the lines of the present Cameron government, Cameron has already proven he'll support any increase in surveillance 'for the good of our children'.

So for me no surprise what-so-ever the UK police and 'Home Office Mandarins' have signed off on it, as a matter of fact I wouldn't be surprised the forces promoting this idea are mainly British...

Re:Typical British story (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about 3 months ago | (#46114695)

well, I say forget this dangerous, insta-hacked concept... go back to what you think of every time you watch those cop-chase TV shows: police helicopters should be armed with missiles to stop those scumbag car chases. Its the only truly safe way - after all, if you remotely-immobilise a fleeing car carrying criminals, they will just get out and run away!

Note, also works against terrorists. I can only think they didn't go for this simply because the liberal democrats threatened to vote against it. Either that or the Americans have patented the idea already :(

*Every* car? Not on your life. (2)

sehlat (180760) | about 3 months ago | (#46114607)

Five gets you one hundred that, assuming this agreement actually exists, there are exceptions in it for cars being used by high officials and the well-enough-connected-to-pay-sufficient-bribes.

OnStar coming to EU? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114625)

Lots of the above posts go on and on about hackers, yet I don't hear about this happening to all those OnStar equiped vehicles that have the ability to remotely disable your engine.

I can see this being reversed (1)

Chrisq (894406) | about 3 months ago | (#46114667)

I can see this being reversed the first time a Muzzy disables a politicians car in a terror attack.

Re:I can see this being reversed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114847)

I can see disabling a politician's car being considered a terrorist attack.

If it's legitimate, why is it secret? (2)

guanxi (216397) | about 3 months ago | (#46114697)

People like to argue that these kinds of surveillance and control are legitimate and nobody cares about them; if so, then why are they done in secret?

Dailymail story on EU: Guaranteed to be wrong (4, Informative)

Paul Jakma (2677) | about 3 months ago | (#46114759)

Dear Slashdot,

You've posted a story from the Dailymail that has the form "EU wants to do outrageous thing!". The Dailymail has a long track record of:

a) Hating the EU.

b) Printing utter falsehoods about supposed plans "the EU" has, at least in their headlines and leading text.

E.g., a previous instance, which I complained to the PCC about (who turn out to be toothless and/or cowards): http://paul.jakma.org/2011/11/... [jakma.org] .

Please do not feed the Dailymail troll.

Member states aren't blamesless here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46114779)

Key paragraph:

The remote stopping and other surveillance plans have been signed off by the EU's Standing Committee on Operational Cooperation on Internal Security, known as Cosi, meaning that the project has the support of senior British Home Office civil servants and police officers.

The EU doesn't do much law enforcement. They mostly provide a platform for cooperation between national law enforcement agencies through Europol. To commentate more on that story, we really need to know if Enlets works as a "central" agency or if it's mostly a meeting place for representants from national law enforcement agencies. I suspect the latter as law enforcement is a prerogative of the member states.

Mostly nonsense (4, Informative)

Grumbleduke (789126) | about 3 months ago | (#46114817)

This story is mostly nonsense.

There's a thing called ENLETS (or European Network of Law Enforcement Technology Services), which is meant to be "the leading European platform that strengthens police cooperation and bridges the gap between the users and providers of law enforcement technology." From what I can tell it is a sort of advisory committee of law enforcement technology experts, working through Europol, who brainstorm how to use technology to help law enforcement stuff. Currently it gets about €600k in funding, mostly from the EU, some from the UK and the Netherlands. They're asking for that to be increased to €915k. Most of that seems to be in hiring some new full-time advisers; from their personnel costs, they want about 8 people working full time; a leader, a policy officer, and admin person and 5 senior advisers. So if they don't get their budget increase, there's a good chance none of this stuff will happen.

This article is based on a "secret" document (which I think is this one [netzpolitik.org] ), which is a (draft?) work programme for the group for 2014-2020; so what they're supposed to be looking at.

This document stems from a recommendation by the Council of the European Union that ENLETS look into this kind of thing - the instructions etc. can be found here [europa.eu] (or if that doesn't work, search for document 12103/13 on their search page [europa.eu] ). They asked ENLETS to monitor and coordinate the development of new technologies.

The actual "secret" document is listed on the Council's website (do a search for 17365/13) as "Law Enforcement Technology Services (ENLETS) 2014 - 2020 - Work programme", but the document itself isn't accessible. I don't know whether that's because it's such a minor report (and not really an official EU thing) that they haven't bothered uploading it, or if they are claiming it should be withheld; I'm tempted to make a formal request for it to see what they say.

The five short-term goals they have been asked to look at are in some places a bit scary:

  1. Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) - ANPR is well established in many MS. In 2013/14 ENLETS will support those MS who feel the need to enhance their capabilities by sharing best practices. The ANPR systems will be measured by its maturity, capabilities and their deployment.
  2. Open Source Intelligence - Open source intelligence is a prioritized topic due to the evolving internet and wireless communication systems. For law enforcement it is a source of information as well as a method of communication. Open source intelligence relates to frontline policing (events, crowd control) and criminal investigations (search for evidence, monitoring and surveillance). In this project the handling of open sources will be assessed and ranked.
  3. Signal Intelligence - Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) deploy many kinds of sensors, mostly connected to their IT systems. The sensors need to enhance the operational capability of the LEAs, but often the integration of these sensors and IT systems cause technological problems. Frequently sensor data cannot be integrated, stored or displayed due to the design, protocols and construction of IT systems. What kind of signal intelligence is the most operationally effective and open for integrating the sensors in the EU? What kind of concept will be needed as ever more data is forwarded for processing and more information needs to be analysed?
  4. Surveillance - Surveillance uses many types of technology. In this topic focus will be on sharing the best video systems (quality, performance in several scenarios). The purpose of this topic is to match the best standards in video used by the industry to the end user requirements. Privacy enhanced technology and transparency are key issues.
  5. Remote Stopping Vehicles - Cars on the run have proven to be dangerous for citizens. Criminal offenders (from robbery to a simple theft) will take risks to escape after a crime. In most cases the police are unable to chase the criminal due to the lack of efficient means to stop the vehicle safely. This project starts with the knowledge that insufficient technology tools are available to be used as part of a proportionate response. This project will work on a technological solution that can be a “build in standard” for all cars that enter the European market.

To me, 2 looks a bit worrying, but the rest seem to be about finding the most efficient way of doing what is already done, and getting different EU organisations using similar standards. The 5th, which is the one that has caused all this fuss, seems the most theoretical; noting that there is no way of doing this sensibly, so seeing if they can think of a way. Actually coming up with something, and convincing the politicians and parliamentarians to implement it will take quite a while.

So, "EU Secretly Plans to put a back door in every car by 2020" is pretty much nonsense; an advisory committee of a thing that sometimes works for the EU has been asked by a bit of the EU to look into technological solutions for law enforcement issues, and as one of their agenda items, had decided to see if there is a way to achieve this in a proportionate and practical way.

I have a feeling that it is "secret" in the sense that the Telegraph has only just found out about it, and has decided it is a great way of generating outrage at the EU. Like their nonsense story about EU plans to put GPS speed limiters in all cars, or the Daily Mails story about the EU planning a "soviet-style brainwashing" education campaign for children.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account