Navigation

Archive | NSA & Snowden

EU & mass surveillance: Business as usual

By on July 15, 2015 in Civil liberties, Data Protection, EU, Intelligence, NSA & Snowden, Privacy, Rule of law, US

I took some time looking trough some of my Youtube-clips on the European Parliaments hearings om mass surveillance during the last legislature (2009-14).

It’s amazing. Everything was laid out in front of the MEP:s. But all the EP could come up with was some half-lame resolution (an opinion, not legislation). And thats it. The new parliament (2014-19) has so far done nothing to follow up on this.

You really should look trough this hearing, with the late Caspar Bowden. He served the MEP:s everything on a silver plate. (If you don’t have the time, give it at least ten minutes.)

Youtube »

Did they read the paper? Nah. Did they act on the information? Not really. Did they care? I don’t think so.

Today it’s business as usual. Nothing of substance has been done when it comes to the EU acting on US mass surveillance. The British and the French (and many others) have — if anything — learned from NSA, now collecting everything. NSA partners (such as the Swedish FRA) carries on as usual. And the European Commission has failed to act on the few recommendations the EP actually gave.

Somehow, I get the impression that our political leaders don’t care. Or don’t want to know. Or maybe… they are not on our side.

We really should elect better politicians.

/ HAX

0

Is the German government on Germanys side?

By on July 4, 2015 in affairs, BND, Democracy, Germany, Intelligence, NSA & Snowden, Rule of law, US

The news that the American spy organisation NSA has targeted the major German magazine Der Spiegel are serious and disturbing. But it is just the tip of the iceberg.

As it turns out the German government knew. But it did nothing to stop it. It didn’t report the issue to relevant democratic oversight bodies. And even worse — it lied about the matter to the German parliament.

To make things even worse it’s still unclear if the NSA obtained it’s information by spying on the newspaper, the Chancellors Office or the entire German political apparatus.

Der Spiegel writes…

“It remains unclear just who US intelligence originally had in its scopes. The question is also unlikely to be answered by the parliamentary investigative committee, because the US appears to have withheld this information from the Chancellery. Theoretically, at least, there are three possibilities: The Chancellery — at least in the person of Hans Josef Vorbeck. SPIEGEL journalists. Or blanket surveillance of Berlin’s entire government quarter. The NSA is capable of any of the three options. And it is important to note that each of these acts would represent a violation of German law.”

In Germany the constitution and the freedom of the press is taken seriously. What has been going on is in direct conflict with principles clearly laid out by the German Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe.

“If it is true that a foreign intelligence agency spied on journalists as they conducted their reporting in Germany and then informed the Chancellery about it, then these actions would place a huge question mark over the notion of a free press in this country. Germany’s highest court ruled in 2007 that press freedom is a “constituent part of a free and democratic order.” The court held that reporting can no longer be considered free if it entails a risk that journalists will be spied on during their reporting and that the federal government will be informed of the people they speak to.”

This affair is now snowballing, putting the Chancellors Office under serious pressure. In a special editors note, Der Spiegel notes…

“The fact that the press no longer has a special protected status and can be spied upon in the same way as corporations, associations or government ministries, lends a new quality to the spying scandal. That the press appears to have been betrayed by its own government is outrageous. For this reason, SPIEGEL decided this week to file a complaint with the Federal Prosecutor’s Office on suspicion of intelligence agency activity.”

It seems that the German intelligence services and the Chancellors Office have neglected both democratic and judicial requirements to keep good working relations with the Americans.

This leading up to a situation where leading German officials appears to have sided with US intelligence services — rather than with the German constitution, German law, the German parliament and the German people.

Read more: An Attack on Press Freedom: SPIEGEL Targeted by US Intelligence »

/ HAX

1

Angry frogs

By on June 25, 2015 in France, Intelligence, NSA & Snowden, US

So, the NSA seems to have bugged the phones of the latest three French presidents.

The French are furious. Rightfully so. This is a serious breach of protocol. It is not a way to treat allies. It might even be in conflict with the Vienna Convention.

But, frankly — it’s a bit amusing.

Two years ago, the French daily Le Monde exposed the french surveillance apparatus. It seems that the French also “collects it all”. And they seem to be rather generous to share this information with all French authorities who ask for it.

And today French representatives adopted a new, draconian surveillance law. The irony.

In other words: It’s totally OK with the French elite to use mass surveillance against the people. But to bug the president, that’s a big non.

/ HAX

0

Bring mass surveillance back on the EU agenda

By on June 22, 2015 in Big Brother, Civil liberties, EU, Human rights, NSA & Snowden, Privacy, Rule of law

At springtime last year the European Parliament was conducting hearings om mass surveillance. In parts, it was rather thrilling and tense. The hearings ended with a resolution, where the MEP:s stated (in a rather vague way) that they are ill at ease with what is going on.

Formally, they could do nothing more — as national security does not fall under EU competence.

But informally, it was important that the peoples elected representatives tried to get to grips with what is going on.

Then came the European elections, a new parliament was elected and mass surveillance was not an issue on the agenda anymore.

It’s about time to bring some new life to this issue, on the EU level.

Even though the European Parliament cannot interfere with national security — it has the authority to make statements when it comes to human rights. (The right to privacy is considered to be a human right, according to binding european statues.)

And the European Commission (the only EU institution that can submit real proposals) is formally the “guardian of the treaties” — including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Also, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights can uphold our civil liberties, as stated in the documents above.

The problems with mass surveillance are still the same as a year ago. As a matter of fact new national laws in some EU member states have made things worse since then.

We need to figure out how to apply renewed pressure on our EU politicians when it comes to mass surveillance. And some judicial activism wouldn’t hurt either.

/ HAX

0

The Snowden spin war

By on June 15, 2015 in Big Brother, Intelligence, NSA & Snowden, UK

The Sunday Times ran an article this weekend about the NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. It claims that Russia and China have cracked the top-secret cache of files stolen by Snowden – and that the MI6 is believed to have pulled out spies because of this.

The whole piece is filled with strange statements, contradictions and obvious disinformation.

Here is some recommended reading, debunking the anti-Snowden spin…

Ryan J Gallagher: Questions About The Sunday Times Snowden Story »

Shami Chakrabarti in The Guardian: Let me be clear – Edward Snowden is a hero »

A comment from The Sunday Times » — (And a slightly longer version »)

Update: The Intercept — The Sunday Times’ Snowden Story is Journalism at its Worst — and Filled with Falsehoods »

Update 2: Techdirt — News Corp. Sends DMCA Notice Over Glenn Greenwald Trashing The Sunday Times’ Ridiculous Snowden Story »

Update 3: Techdirt — Reporter Who Wrote Sunday Times ‘Snowden’ Propaganda Admits That He’s Just Writing What UK Gov’t Told Him »

0

The secret police state: More lies ahead…

By on June 4, 2015 in BND, Democracy, Intelligence, NSA & Snowden, Rule of law, surveillance, War on Terror

So, the German Intelligence Service (BND) lied to Parliament and the democratic oversight body about its cooperation with the NSA. And the NSA has lied to the US Congress about mass surveillance. In Sweden the surveillance institution, the FRA, has lied to Parliament about (possibly illegal) IT-attacks carried out together with the British GCHQ and the NSA. And in the European Parliament hearings on mass surveillance several prominent European surveillance and intelligence bodies declined participating…

Can we trust the Intelligence Community? Seriously. It ought be under some sort of democratic control or oversight.

There is a view that our elected representatives are powerless against the intelligence organisations — simply because the latter knows too much about the former. If that is to be true, we have some serious problems. In that case democracy has been overridden.

But it doesn’t have to be that bad. It could be a matter of sheer political incompetence. (The politicians do not know what questions to ask, as they do not know what they do not know. And there is a thin line between telling lies and not telling the whole truth.)

It can also be the case that some things, politicians do not want to know.

OK, the intelligence community is supposed to keep us all safe, right? And politicians are not known for keeping that kind of secrets. Maybe it’s better not to let the peoples elected representatives in on everything? Who knows, they might be spies? Or some sort of collaborators? Or they might just fuck things up. (Hanlon’s razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.)

Well… No.

In a democracy the power emanate from the people. The intelligence bodies are branches of government, who should defend the democratic system and carry out the tasks presented to them by our democratically elected representatives. Frankly, it’s up to the people. If we elect unreliable, psychotic maniacs — that is what our different branches of government have to work with. Sorry to say. But to countermand general elections would be nothing less than a coup d’état.

However, I’m not sure that is how the intelligence community perceive things.

This is a complete mess, isn’t it? A minefield.

My personal favourite theory is that most western intelligence organisations feel that they have more in common with each other than with their respective governments (and parliaments). Many screw-ups could be explained by this theory. And it’s not that far fetched. They know things. (At least they think they do.) They share sensitive information. They do things together. And sometimes shit happens. (To get a grip of this theory, I would recommend you to turn to John le Carrés all too realistic novel A most wanted man. And it’s very possible that reality outmatches fiction.)

So? I guess we need our intelligence services. Even if they sometimes get out of control and do stupid, silly or outright dangerous stuff. The only way I can think of to handle this is to elect better politicians. That, however, is not as easy as it sounds.

Until then: More lies ahead…

/ HAX

0

Is the NSA to shut down bulk surveillance programs? Maybe not.

By on May 25, 2015 in Big Brother, Data Retention, NSA & Snowden, surveillance, US, War on Terror

The NSA bulk surveillance program is hanging by a thread — as the controversial Patriot Act expires and as US Senate did not manage to adopt a replacement bill (the USA Freedom Act) before its week-long recess.

The Associated Press reports…

“In a chaotic scene during the wee hours of Saturday, Senate Republicans blocked a bill known as the USA Freedom Act, which would have ended the NSA’s bulk collection but preserved its ability to search the records held by the phone companies on a case-by-case basis. The bill was backed by President Barack Obama, House Republicans and the nation’s top law enforcement and intelligence officials.”

There will be an emergency session scheduled for Sunday, May 31st.

This is a cliff hanger. But even if the replacement bill will be adopted, bulk mass surveillance will not end. It will only change form.

The USA Freedom Act obliges telecoms meta data to be kept by the phone companies. This is the same model as in the EU Data Retention Directive. Even though this directive has been invalidated by the European Court of Justice for breaching human rights, it is already implemented in most EU member states.

In many EU countries authorities use data retention on a massive scale and in a rather indiscriminate way. There are even attempts to give the police direct online access to meta data held by the telecoms, in some countries.

So even if the Freedom Act might be adopted it will not be the end of bulk collection of telecoms data in the US. It will not be as bad as the Patriot Act, but still it will be pretty bad.

However, it will be interesting to see what happens if the Freedom Act is not adopted before the Patriot Act expires. In that case the NSA might have to shut down parts of their operation. At least for some time. (For all the public is allowed to know…)

• NSA is getting ready to shut down bulk surveillance programs in response to failed Senate vote »
• NSA winds down once-secret phone-records collection program »

Update: Julian Assange: Despite Congressional Standoff, NSA Has Secret Authority to Continue Spying Unabated »

/ HAX

0

Mixed US messages on cyber security

By on May 20, 2015 in Internet, NSA & Snowden

In South Korea US Secretary of State John Kerry gave a speech on cyber security and international law earlier this week. Some quotes…

“As I’ve mentioned, the basic rules of international law apply in cyberspace. Acts of aggression are not permissible.”

“First, no country should conduct or knowingly support online activity that intentionally damages or impedes the use of another country’s critical infrastructure. Second, no country should seek either to prevent emergency teams from responding to a cybersecurity incident, or allow its own teams to cause harm. Third, no country should conduct or support cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property, trade secrets, or other confidential business information for commercial gain. Fourth, every country should mitigate malicious cyber activity emanating from its soil, and they should do so in a transparent, accountable and cooperative way. And fifth, every country should do what it can to help states that are victimized by a cyberattack.”

The obvious question is: Does that include the NSA?

Is the alleged NSA attack on the SWIFT bank transfer system a “malicious cyber activity”?

What about all the mischief documented in NSA:s own Powerpoint presentations, revealed to the world by Edward Snowden? Does that count as “malicious cyber activity”?

Might the British GCHQ:s attack on Belgacom and the EU institutions be considered as a “malicious cyber activity”?

The Swedish government (Swedens FRA is a very close partner with NSA and GCHQ) has proposed that Swedish military should be allowed to conduct “active” surveillance — i.e. cyber attacks. (The Snowden files have reviled that Swedish FRA already are involved in such activities, in cooperation with GCHQ. So this is just about adjusting the law to what is actually going on.) Would that count as “malicious cyber activity”?

When John Kerry calls for international rules — would they apply to all countries?

Probably not.

/ HAX

Link: Kerry: Internet ‘Needs Rules to Be Able to Flourish and Work Properly’ »

0