Author: HAX

Henrik “HAX” Alexandersson is a Swedish writer, thinker and political evangelist. Between 2009 and 2014 he worked in the European Parliament for the Swedish Pirate Party.

When the Internet fights back

Government mass surveillance has vitalised efforts to make the Internet more secure and anonymous.

Today EFF announced “A Certificate Authority to Encrypt the Entire Web”. And Wired reports “Whatsapp Just Switched on End-to-End Encryption for Hundreds of Millions of Users”. At the same time Blockchain technology is being used not only for virtual currency, but also for projects like safe cloud computing.

Every day now, we see “the Internet” fighting back.

At the same time this will raise the stakes. Governments around the world are not amused. Many police-, intelligence- and surveillance authorities demand back doors or a ban on encryption all together.

Needless to say, the latter will not happen. In many cases such a ban would be impossible to enforce. And a large portion of private (and public) business relies on encryption to be able to conduct their business.

Some countries have tried. In a piece in The Register way back at 1999  we can read the following report from France…

“Until 1996 anyone wishing to encrypt any document had to first receive an official sanction or risk fines from F6000 to F500,000 ($1000 to $89,300) and a 2-6 month jail term. Right now, apart from a handful of exemptions, any unauthorised use of encryption software is illegal. Encryption software can be used by anyone, but only if it’s very easy to break. Many French users and businesses have complained that this is not only an infringement of privacy but makes it impossible to provide e-commerce transactions that can be trusted to be safe and secure.”

We might laugh–but the mindset of the authorities seems to be the same, even if they have to stand down in the face of reality.

In the news this week, we have the ongoing fight between Apple, Google and the FBI…

Huffington Post: FBI Director Calls On Congress To ‘Fix’ Phone Encryption By Apple, Google

Time: FBI Director Implies Action Against Apple and Google Over Encryption

Wired: The FBI Is Dead Wrong: Apple’s Encryption Is Clearly in the Public Interest

In this case, Apple and Google acts from the purest of motives: money.

They have realised that mass surveillance is bad for business, especially for overseas business. The same is true for Microsoft, Amazon, Dropbox and others.

What NSA and their international counterparts have managed to do is to (more or less) unite business and internet activists against a common enemy.

There might be reason for cautious optimism.

/ HAX

2015: Entire Web to be encrypted

Good news…

“Today EFF is pleased to announce Let’s Encrypt, a new certificate authority (CA) initiative that we have put together with Mozilla, Cisco, Akamai, Identrust, and researchers at the University of Michigan that aims to clear the remaining roadblocks to transition the Web from HTTP to HTTPS.”

More information at EFF: Launching in 2015 – A Certificate Authority to Encrypt the Entire Web »

A global “right to be forgotten”?

Worrying reports…

“Google has so far been removing links only from its European sites, for example google.fr in France and google.co.uk in the UK. However, a French court has now ruled that Google is required to remove links globally, and that local subsidiaries can be fined if the company fails to do so.”

Read more:
‘Right to be forgotten’ by Google may extend beyond Europe following court ruling »
Google’s French arm faces daily €1,000 fines over links to defamatory article »

How to fight the dark forces of Government

There is this article in The Boston Globe that has been nagging my mind for a few days now: Vote all you want. The secret government won’t change. »

Despite the dramatic headline, this is not about conspiracy theories. It’s about Tufts University political scientist (and former legal counsel to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a consultant to various congressional committees, as well as to the State Department) Michael J. Glennon and his book National Security and Double Government.

The core issue is the Obama u-turn on national security.

“But six years into his administration, the Obama version of national security looks almost indistinguishable from the one he inherited. Guantanamo Bay remains open. The NSA has, if anything, become more aggressive in monitoring Americans. Drone strikes have escalated. Most recently it was reported that the same president who won a Nobel Prize in part for promoting nuclear disarmament is spending up to $1 trillion modernizing and revitalizing America’s nuclear weapons.”

The thing, according to Glennon, is that politicians are generalists–in the hands of their own administration and its experts. And these experts have many reasons to exaggerate threats.

That sounds like a plausible and reasonable analysis. Even though the word “generalists” might be overly polite.

Now, looking at Europe and the EU we have the same set of experts as in the US–in the Commission, in the Council and to some extent in the European Parliament.

And we have the issue of lobbyism. (Even though public attention is directed towards lobbyists in the Parliament, the real issue ought to be lobbyism directed towards the Commission and its staff.)

Then we have something that few people know about: The European Commission has some 250 different committees with around 7,000 “contributors”. And at least 1,000 (maybe up to 3,000) specialist groups with more than 40,000 “experts”. All of these with an agenda. And this is where EU policy is crafted out.

This is why it is almost impossible to get something done when it comes to e.g. data protection, mass surveillance or copyright reform in the Parliament. The power doesn’t lie with the elected politicians.

So, are we screwed? Is democracy just an illusion? In many cases, the answer seems to be yes. But Glennon gives us a glimmer of hope…

“The ultimate problem is the pervasive political ignorance on the part of the American people. And indifference to the threat that is emerging from these concealed institutions. That is where the energy for reform has to come from: the American people. Not from government. Government is very much the problem here. The people have to take the bull by the horns. And that’s a very difficult thing to do, because the ignorance is in many ways rational. There is very little profit to be had in learning about, and being active about, problems that you can’t affect, policies that you can’t change.”

From an European perspective we know that public opinion did put an end to the ACTA agreement (restricting the openness and freedom of the Internet). We also know that such occurrences are very rare. And that they depend on huge efforts from activists, civil society and the media. But–it can be done.

This is the first lesson in fighting the political apparatus: Know thy enemy.

/ HAX

Big Government and Big Business do not want information to be free

1989 was a year of disruptive change. The Berlin Wall came down, promising hundreds of millions of people an end to oppression, mass surveillance and restrained markets. The same year the World Wide Web (the http protocol) was born, bringing us all new ways of communication, cooperation and creativity.

The irony of it all is that Big Government and Big Business don’t approve of a free and open internet. So they try to regulate, to hinder free flows of information, to spy on people and to suppress the free market.

— o —

When scientists at Cern launched the WWW (http) they decided not to patent it–but to hand it over to all of mankind. This is the reason we have one common, global network today–instead of a compartmented Internet run by different companies.

Suddenly everyone could share information on a global scale. And information is power. This is where trouble begins. Those in power are not interested in letting go.

Big Government gets panic-stricken by the prospect of losing control. And Big Business (especially in the information monopoly industry) dislike change and fear a truly free market.

When these interests meet, it is a perfect marriage. Governments want control (and covert access to information). Big Copyright wants laws to protect them from technical progress, an ever changing market, new competition and–ultimately–from their own customers.

Big Government and Big Business do not want information to be free. The circle is closing.

So we get mass surveillance. We get laws restricting flows of information and free speech. We get governments going after people exposing the truth. We get limitations of competition and free enterprise. We get special interests manoeuvrering around the democratic process. We get regulations replacing free markets and spontaneous order. Back to the future.

This is the crossroad where we stand today. Should we allow Big Government and Big Business to build new walls? Or should we use technology, encryption, disruptive tools like Blockchain, openness and political activism to defend a free and open society?

Because this fight is not just about the Internet.

/ HAX

I have seen Big Brother. I hate him. And it’s personal.

Twenty-five years ago this weekend, the Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain came down. This also lead to the end of the East German state, DDR.

The DDR was a communist dictatorship, an authoritarian state that did not hesitate to imprison or kill dissidents and those trying to flee. The very symbol of this brutal state was the secret police, the Stasi.

Stasi was known for a widespread system of informants, extensive record-keeping and surveillance. Its’ very existence lead to a silent society. Knowing that everything you said could be recorded and turned against you, people held their opinions private.

Several times I saw this system too close for comfort. And it filled me with rage. So I did what little I could to help the peoples of Eastern Europe in their struggle for freedom.

Fast forward to today…

With NSA mass surveillance, data retention and projects like Indect we are building something that goes far beyond what the DDR leadership could ever imagine: A toolbox for almost total surveillance.

While the DDR could wiretap only a small number of telephones at a time, modern mass surveillance grabs data about all our electronic communications. All the time.

While the DDR kept their huge registers in manual filing systems–our authorities can get most information about us on screen with a few simple commands. And they can just as easily cross reference information about us from an ever growing number of databases.

While the DDR was depending on informants and secret agents–the EU is funding projects like Indect. Tracking camera surveillance, drone monitoring, automated face recognition, automated behavioural analysis, supervision of our web-habits, searching databases… you name it. All in one package, sent to one screen, instantly.

Et cetera, et cetera… It might be that our government is elected by the people, that it has no sinister intentions and that it truly respects our human and civil rights. (OK, I’m stretching it.) But that will not last for ever.

And even if it does, the very awareness of total surveillance will lead to a silent society. Knowing that everything you say is being recorded and can be used against you, people will tend to hold their opinions private. Back to the mindset of the DDR.

This is cause for serious concern.

Then, we have the thing that really pisses me off: The good guys turning bad.

I didn’t spend some twenty years of my youth to fight Big Brotherism in the east–just to find our western democracies of today going down that very same road.

We shouldn’t go there. Because we respect the individual, her dignity and her fundamental rights. Because we know better. Because we have seen where that road will lead.

I have seen Big Brother up close. And I hate him. It’s personal.

Frankly, that might be what really makes me keep on fighting.

/ HAX