Category: Big Brother

European Parliament in new attempt to introduce web blocking

Tomorrow the Europeans Parliaments civil liberties (LIBE) committee will vote on new EU regulation to combat terrorism.

In the committee, German MEP Monika Hohlmeier (EPP) has introduced an amendment stating that member states “may take all necessary measures to remove or to block access to web pages publicly inciting to commit terrorist offences”.

EP LIBE meeting documents »

In a comment in Ars Technica, EDRi says…

“This leaves the door wide open for private companies to police content and very likely over-block or delete any content they are unsure about,” EDRi (European Digital Rights) head Joe McNamee told Ars. He added that European law requires that any blocking or content restriction measures “must be provided for by law, subject to initial judicial control and periodic review.”

If adopted in the LIBE committee, this proposal will be voted in plenary, probably as soon as 4-7 July.

Jennifer Baker in Ars Technica: Web content blocking squeezed into draft EU anti-terrorism law »

EDRi: Terrorism and internet blocking – is this the most ridiculous amendment ever? »

terrorism_directive_20160620-768x379

/ HAX

Meanwhile, in Poland….

In response to the Polish government’s new counter-terrorism and surveillance laws, which allow authorities to block websites and telecommunications, limit the freedom of assembly, and allow secret surveillance of virtually the whole population, Freedom House issued the following statement:

“Granting open-ended powers to intelligence agencies to counter terrorism at the cost of every citizen’s privacy and freedom marks a clear abuse of power by the government,” said Daniel Calingaert, executive vice president. “The government seems determined to allow police and intelligence agencies to monitor all personal data and all communications without needing to establish the existence of any actual threat, a disturbing step toward removing checks and balances on government action.”

Via Techdirt »

Silicon Valley on mass surveillance: Enough is enough

Washington Post:

Like many Silicon Valley start-ups, Larry Gadea’s company collects heaps of sensitive data from his customers.

Recently, he decided to do something with that data trove that was long considered unthinkable: He is getting rid of it.

The reason? Gadea fears that one day the FBI might do to him what it did to Apple in their recent legal battle: demand that he give the agency access to his encrypted data. Rather than make what he considers a Faustian bargain, he’s building a system that he hopes will avoid the situation entirely.

WP: What’s driving Silicon Valley to become ‘radicalized’ »

Corporatism vs. free speech

Politics should stick to lawmaking. Companies should stick to making business.

When the two mix, the result is usually damaging. Politicians lose their focus on principles, their mandate from the voters and the public good. Companies who lobby for subsidies and (often competition reducing) special laws will find themselves worse of in the long run, as they detach from the realities of the market.

Nevertheless, politicians and businessmen are often involved in mutual back-scratching.

Lately, the political EU-apparatus and big data companies have ganged up to curb free speech. The EU, Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and Microsoft have decided on a mutual approach to keep back hate speech and religious radicalisation on the net.

In other words, the EU encourages private companies to censor statements on the Internet that the politicians do not approve of.

If you are to limit free speech at all — the rules must be clearly set out in law. If there should be any censorship at all — it must be decided in a court of law, in accordance with the laws. And if anyone is being censored — there must be a possibility to appeal the decision.

All these three principles are being thrown out in the EU-Big Data agreement.

And there is nothing you can do about it. Having signed e.g. various social networks terms and conditions, you have essentially given up your rights.

From a political point of view, the EU is acting in a deceptive way. When there are no legal means to censor voices they would like to silence – they turn to private companies to do what they themselves cannot accomplish. (It’s just like when US authorities had PayPal, credit card companies, and the banks to throttle the stream of donations to Wikileaks.)

The EU is short-circuiting the rule of law and democracy itself – in order to curb the people’s civil rights.

This is totally unacceptable.

/ HAX

Does Google rule the world? Really?

https://youtu.be/TSN6LE06J54

“The Search Engine Manipulation Effect (SEME) and Its Unparalleled Power To Influence How We Think”- Robert Epstein of American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology.

This is really interesting, even if it in part might be dangerously close to conspiracy theories.

At least, I think that Search Engine Manipulation might be possible and very effective. But is it really done – intentionally or unintentionally? It is difficult to say, especially as all search results seems to be personalised.

Youtube »

Embarrassed German intelligence official trying to discredit Snowden

German intelligence mandarin Hans-Georg Maassen of the Verfassungsschutz has told the Bundestag’s NSA committee that it is “highly plausible” that whistleblower Edward Snowden is a Russian spy.

Obviously, it is very hard if at all possible to know if anyone is a Russian spy. There are even speculations about Chancellor Merkel (who is of East-German descent). But speculations are just speculations.

And when it comes to Maassen, he has some pretty strong incentives to smear Snowden — as the whistleblower’s revelations have left German intelligence with egg on its face.

One should consider the fact that Edward Snowden did not choose Russia as his refuge. The reason he is stuck there is that US authorities had revoked  his passport, stranding him in Moscow when in transit. And because all relevant western countries (including Germany) have refused him sanctuary / asylum.

If the German government were to let him into the country, Snowden could be in Berlin pretty quickly. But somehow, I presume Mr. Maassen wouldn’t be all too happy about that.

For the rest of us, it would be of great value and importance to have the whistleblower out of Russia and cooperating with western democratic oversight bodies, e.g. the Bundestag’s NSA committee.

/ HAX

Link: Verfassungsschutz­chef hält russische Agententätigkeit Snowdens für plausibel »

Sir Tim Berners-Lee: Let’s Unfuck the Internet!

This is exciting…

The web is a little fucked up right now. Governments are spying on civilians, some block specific websites, and companies like Amazon have a stranglehold on the cloud services business. But what if we could create a decentralized web, with more privacy, less government control, and less corporate influence?

Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, wants to do exactly that. Sir Tim recently gathered some top computer scientists in a San Francisco church at an event called the Decentralized Web Summit, where attendees brainstormed ways to make the internet more broadly distributed. The smartest technologists on the planet showed up to join the discussions including early internet architect Vint Cerf and Brewster Kahle, founder of the Internet Archive.

Gizmodo: The Web’s Creator Now Wants to Unfuck It »

So, why?

“The temptation to grab control of the internet by the government or by a company is always going to be there. They will wait until we’re sleeping, because if you’re a government or a company and you can control something, you’ll want it,” he said.

The Inquirer: Sir Tim Berners-Lee: Internet has become ‘world’s largest surveillance network’ »

UK spies cannot handle all the data

“British spies may have put lives at risk because their surveillance systems were sweeping up more data than could be analyzed, leading them to miss clues to possible security threats” according to documents in the Snowden files, now published by The Intercept.

A common analogy when it comes to mass surveillance is “trying to find a needle in a haystack”. Thus, having a bigger haystack might make it harder to find the needle.

Sure enough. The Intercept writes…

Silkie Carlo, a policy officer at the London-based human rights group Liberty, told The Intercept that the details contained in the secret report highlighted the need for a comprehensive independent review of the proposed new surveillance powers.

“Intelligence whistleblowers have warned that the agencies are drowning in data — and now we have it confirmed from the heart of the U.K. government,” Carlo said. “If our agencies have risked missing ‘life-saving intelligence’ by collecting ‘significantly’ more data than they can analyze, how can they justify casting the net yet wider in the toxic Investigatory Powers Bill?”

The British government’s Home Office, which handles media requests related to MI5, declined to comment for this story.

And this is not just a general opinion. There are figures.

A top-secret 2009 study found that, in one six-month period, the PRESTON program had intercepted more than 5 million communications. Remarkably, 97 percent of the calls, messages, and data it had collected were found to have been “not viewed” by the authorities.

The authors of the study were alarmed because PRESTON was supposedly focused on known suspects, and yet most of the communications it was monitoring appeared to be getting ignored — meaning crucial intelligence could have been missed.

“Only a small proportion of the Preston Traffic is viewed,” they noted. “This is of concern as the collection is all warranted.”

Then, there is mission creep…

Carlo, the policy analyst with Liberty, said the revelations about MILKWHITE suggested members of Parliament had been misled about how so-called bulk data is handled. “While MPs have been told that bulk powers have been used only by the intelligence community, it now appears it has been ‘business as usual’ for the tax man to access mass internet data for years,” she said.

We told you this would happen.

/ HAX

Links:
• The Intercept: Facing data deluge, secret U.K. spying report warned of intelligence failure »
• Supporting document: Digint Narrative »
• Supporting document: Digint Imbalance »
• BoingBoing: MI5 warning: we’re gathering more than we can analyse, and will miss terrorist attacks »

Big Government and Big Data fighting over control of your online activities. Blockchain is the obvious alternative.

For many years, the EU has taken many small steps towards introducing an EU ID card: eIDAS. (Or at least a strict common EU standard for nationally issued ID cards.)

An ID card proving the holders identity is one thing. (However, a mandatory ID card as such is a very controversial concept in some member states.) One interesting point is if there is going to be a common personal EU identification number. Another is what information the cards chip will contain and how it is going to be used. No doubt, an EU ID card can be used as a very effective tool for various forms of Big Brotherism.

It is in the light of the EU slowly trying to introduce a common, mandatory ID card that various EU schemes should be scrutinised.

Last week some sites, e.g. Breitbart London ran this story: The European Commission Wants You To Log Into Social Media Accounts With Govt-Issued ID Cards »

Well, that might be a bit oversimplified. What the EU suggests is that it should be possible to use national (EU harmonised) ID cards to log into various online platforms instead of logging in using e.g. Facebook or Google. Thus giving you the possibility of being controlled by Big Government or Big Data.

Giving people a possibility to choose is a good idea, as such. But I’m not sure that I would like Big Government or Big Data to have the control over my online life.

And you should be very suspicious! The moment there is an established platform for online registration (or signing transactions) with an EU approved ID card – this system can be rolled out all over the place. For example, the EU would love to have a system where you have to use your ID card to be able to log on to the Internet. I have met several people in the EU apparatus promoting that idea.

But how should you go about if you don’t want nor Big Government or Big Data to be in control of your online activities?

Actually, it can be done quite easily – by using Blockchain technology, decentralised solutions, and open source software. Ideal, there should be a couple of different such ID providers, competing with each other over providing competent privacy protection.

(All of this might even be possible to achieve using the already existing Bitnation World Citizen ID.)

This can be one of those forks in the road of history: Do we want our online activities to be controlled by Big Government and Big Brother, by Big Data – or a decentralised system with a high level of security, respecting users right to privacy and controlled by no one?

/ HAX

Links:
• The European Commission Wants You To Log Into Social Media Accounts With Govt-Issued ID Cards »
• EU: Communication on Online Platforms and the Digital Single Market Opportunities and Challenges for Europe »