Archive | Civil liberties

EU tech still used to suppress democracy

In order to prevent dictatorships from abusing European technology to crack down on political opposition, the EU started regulating the export of surveillance technology a few years ago. But that has far from stopped the exports to problematic countries, a cross-border investigation reveals.

A problem is that non-democratic countries use European standard configurated IT-systems – that have mass surveillance functions as a default feature.

Information.dk: Europe’s exports of spy tech to authoritarian countries revealed »

0

Big Brother in Austria

New legislation in Austria:

  • Networked CCTV monitoring
  • Automatic license plate recognition
  • Government spyware
  • Data Retention Directive 2.0
  • Registration of prepaid SIM cards
  • Electronic tags for non-convicted “endangerers”
  • The government wants to establish a criminal offense for the expression of opinions which undermine the authority of the state

EDRi: Proposed surveillance package in Austria sparks resistance »

0

Camera surveillance now more advanced – and scarier

Smile to pay. Customer recognition. Airport screening. These are some of the functionalities that face recognition brings to camera surveillance nowadays.

It will also allow for tracking people, building sociograms, can be integrated with different databases, behavioral analytics, and mass surveillance networks.

BBC: Smile, you’re on camera, and it knows who you are »

1

Told you so

Do criticize and protest against president Trump. He deserves it.

But do not forget that you were warned against mass surveillance and other forms of Bigbrotherism long before Trump.

When people now react to the Trump-administrations ideas of having all who travel to the US to hand over social media information and cell phone contacts…

Miller also noted on Saturday that Trump administration officials are discussing the possibility of asking foreign visitors to disclose all websites and social media sites they visit, and to share the contacts in their cell phones. If the foreign visitor declines to share such information, he or she could be denied entry.

…they should remember that this is the brainchild of the Obama administration. Then it was voluntarily, but none the less.

A bad idea is a bad idea, whoever comes up with it. This should have been stopped in its tracks, from the beginning.

It’s not about liking or trusting a certain politician or a political party. It’s a matter of principle.

You should never give government tools for mass surveillance (or other tools that can be used to oppress the people) that wouldn’t be safe regardless of whose hands it ends up in.

Ignorance and partisanship brought us here.

And yet, we have no idea of how President Trump is going to use or abuse the powers of the CIA and the technical capabilities of the NSA.

/ HAX

0

Trump executive order might freeze all transfer of personal data from the EU to the US

This is interesting. US President Trumps executive order on »public safety« directs all federal agencies to exclude non-US citizens / non-permanent residents from the Privacy Act protection from mass surveillance.

It is very unclear what this will lead to when it comes to transfer of European personal data to the US. Under the so-called EU-US Privacy Shield, such data shall enjoy adequate privacy protection. There is already criticism that the arrangements in this agreement are too weak. And today’s executive order might invalidate them altogether.

If so, there can be no transfer of personal data from the EU to the US. This would have far-reaching consequences for US companies, from e.g. retail business to social networks.

The EU Commission seems to hope for special US legislation related to the Privacy Shield. But the question is if the above executive order doesn’t trump any such schemes.

/ HAX

Update / more input:
• Techcrunch: Trump order strips privacy rights from non-U.S. citizens, could nix EU-US data flows »
• Engadget: Trump signs executive order stripping non-citizens of privacy rights »
• EU Observer: Trump’s anti-privacy order stirs EU angst »
• Techdirt: Already Under Attack In Top EU Court, Privacy Shield Framework For Transatlantic Data Flows Further Undermined By Trump »

0

Amnesty on European Bigbrotherism

The old adage goes ‘if you’ve got nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear’, but a detailed analysis of the human rights cost of the fast-expanding security state in Europe suggests otherwise. (…)

Overly broad definitions of terrorism are a big part of the problem. Because there is no universally agreed definition, states and international bodies have created their own. But in that process, definitions of terrorism have become increasingly vague, so that they can be arbitrarily applied, meaning law-abiding citizens can be subjected to unwarranted surveillance, administrative orders which restrict their liberties, intrusive searches and worse.

Amnesty International » Dangerously disproportionate: The ever-expanding National Security State in Europe »

0

EU proposal: All travel to be registered

I cannot say that I am surprised. I have seen this coming, for a long time:

Jambon’s plan takes this initiative [PNR] and applies it to other means of transport. It will mean that anyone wanting to travel by rail, sea or by bus to another EU country will have to register their information.

Fighting terrorism is just a pretext. Politicians want ever more control and surveillance of the people. They will not be satisfied until there is total control.

• Euractiv: Belgium prepares to present passenger data plans to rest of EU »
• Techdirt: Belgium Wants EU Nations To Collect And Store Personal Data Of Train, Bus And Boat Passengers »

0

Politicians vs. human rights

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has – once again – ruled that data retention (storage of data on everybody’s phone calls, text messages, e-mails, Internet connections, mobile positions etc.) is in breach of fundamental human rights.

Nevertheless, politicians in several EU member states are trying their hardest to ignore the court. For them, Big Brotherism carries more weight than human and civil rights.

Let that sink in.

Politicians are more interested in controlling the people than defending its rights. They are more interested in treating ordinary people as potential criminals than upholding principles that are pivotal to a democratic society. They degrade citizens to subordinates, to be ruled over and supervised.

Never, ever expect politicians to defend civil rights. Their agenda is a very different one.

/ HAX

2