Blogging for the 5th of July Foundation on Security, Privacy and Liberty
Rick Falkvinge:
As mass surveillance was introduced, we were promised it was only for combating terrorism and violent uprisings. Then, it was used mostly to combat illegal drug trade. As the surveillance is outsourced to private actors, and they’re seeking additional revenue streams, it’s now an option on the table – today – for insurance companies to access mass surveillance data to price a car insurance.
Thanks to the Snowden revelations, it was proven that Canada was conducting mass surveillance activities within the so-called “Five Eyes” arrangement. If brought to court, as the Austrian student Max Schrems did with the EU-US agreement on transfer of personal data (the “Safe Harbor agreement”), the adequacy status given by the EU could be overturned. However, if CETA is ratified, the EU would be prohibited from protecting personal data in this way.
EDRi: CETA puts the protection of our privacy and personal data at risk »
This is exciting. The Web2Web project claims to be able to put web pages on the Internet that cannot be taken down, using torrents and Bitcoin. And it can be run from any modern browser.
The under the hood stuff is explained by TorrentFreak – Web2Web: Serverless Websites Powered by Torrents & Bitcoin »
»To run a Web2Web website neither the server nor the domain is required. All you need is a bootstrap page that loads your website from the torrent network and displays it in the browser« Czech developer Michal Spicka tells TorrentFreak.
If this turns out to be anything like what it’s said to be, it might be a game changer. It builds on the need for resilient, decentralised systems beyond the reach of Big Government and Big Business.
Expect some serious noise from the authorities…
/ HAX
Facebook is a multi-billion dollar company that has one commodity – you!
EDRi – Big Brother Awards Belgium: Facebook is the privacy villain of the year »
When the FBI asked a court to force Apple to help crack the encrypted iPhone 5c of San Bernardino shooter Rizwan Farook in February, Bureau director James Comey assured the public that his agency’s intrusive demand was about one terrorist’s phone, not repeated access to iPhone owners’ secrets. But now eight months have passed, and the FBI has in its hands another locked iPhone that once belonged to another dead terrorist. Which means they may have laid the groundwork for another legal showdown with Apple.
Wired: The FBI wants to get into the locked iPhone of another dead terrorist »
Reuters:
Yahoo Inc last year secretly built a custom software program to search all of its customers’ incoming emails for specific information provided by U.S. intelligence officials, according to people familiar with the matter.
Exclusive: Yahoo secretly scanned customer emails for U.S. intelligence – sources »
Swiss citizens have backed by a large margin a new law that will expand government surveillance powers, following a national referendum held in Switzerland on Sunday.
In total, 65.5 percent were in favour, and 34.5 percent against. Under the new law, Switzerland’s intelligence agency, the Service de renseignement de la Confédération (SRC), will be allowed to break into computers and install malware, spy on phone and Internet communications, and place microphones and video cameras in private locations.
Ars Technica: Switzerland votes for meatier surveillance law by large margin »
The EU has formed an alliance with Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and Microsoft to block Internet content that aims to radicalize people – and hate speech. It is called the Joint Referral Platform.
This is, per definition, about limiting free speech. As such, this taps into democratic core issues.
The plan is to have the social networks and platforms to carry out this censorship, referring to their user terms and conditions – that more or less allows them to censor or ban anyone. They don’t have to explain their actions. There is no possibility to appeal or redress.
Naturally, this is something that civil rights organisations and Internet activists must look into, analyse and keep a close eye on. Here is an apparent possibility for the political system to restrict free speech without getting its own hands dirty, without having to deal with legislation or the judicial system.
But when European Digital Rights, EDRi, asked for information – the European Commission first stalled their request and then refused to share information.
The reason presented by the Commission is notable. It is said that openness could undermine a highly sensitive on-going process. No shit, Sherlock.
The entire point is that this is highly sensitive. It’s about a public-private partnership to limit free speech. That is why transparency is of immense importance.
To make things even worse, the Commission seems to be unwilling to provide information about the legal basis for the Joint Referral Platform.
This is not how to conduct things in a democratic society.
Sadly, this is typical for how the EU apparatus works. Democratic principles and core values are brushed aside. Rule of law is disregarded. Human and civil rights are ignored.
And they usually get away with it.
This time, it’s about free speech online. Regardless of what people think of limiting what can be said on the Internet – everyone ought to agree that limitations of fundamental rights must be handled with extreme care and in an open, democratic process.
We must try to get the European Parliament to look into this. The MEP:s are democratically elected – and are, as such, at least somewhat uncomfortable with ignoring strong and loud public opinion.
This might also be a case for the European Court of Justice as well as the European Court of Human Rights.
You simply cannot stay silent when they take our civil rights away.
/ HAX
EDRi: Joint Referral Platform: no proof of diligent approach to terrorism »
First, since the Joint Referral Platform has not been “launched”, the Commission argued it did not possess some of the information we asked for. It recognised, however, that it holds relevant documents. Yet, the Commission did not publish any documents because this can undermine public security, commercial interests of the internet industry involved, “jeopardise the protection of integrity of their managers” and undermine a “highly sensitive on-going process”. We would tend to agree that privatising criminal enforcement and putting it in the hands of – generally foreign – internet companies would undermine public security, although this may not be what the Commission meant.
Second, when we asked the Commission about the goals and (legal) principles under which this Joint Referral Platform will be launched, the Commission omitted any information about the legal basis for this. It solely restated the wording of the the Communication of 20 April 2016.
EDRi: Joint Referral Platform: no proof of diligent approach to terrorism »