Navigation

Archive | Privacy

The real impact of surveillance

By on February 11, 2015 in Big Brother, Democracy, Privacy, surveillance

Job-seekers under surveillance can lose income needed to survive if their online activity fails to match up to job search demands. People interested in campaigning hestiate over getting involved with movements for social justice when the police count activism as akin to domestic terrorism.

It’s clear that surveillance affects a broad group of people, with real painful consequences for their lives. We’ve seen journalists being monitored, lawyers having their client confidentiality broken, victims of police misconduct being spied on and environmental campaigns infiltrated. These people are not criminals, and yet when we have a system of mass surveillance, they become targets for increasingly intrusive powers.

We also know that state surveillance stigmatises certain groups of the population, it targets communities and networks. Innocent people who share similarities with suspects, (similar Skype chat user names, nearby places of worship, physical location) fall under intense scrutiny, like having their private web cam chats examined. Mass surveillance disproportionally affects marginalized groups and fosters mistrust.

Read more at Open Rights Group: The real impact of surveillance »

0

European Parliament still standing up to PNR

By on February 9, 2015 in Data Protection, EU, PNR, Privacy, War on Terror

Thursday and Friday this week there will be another EU summit, where national leaders will adress security issues. A European Passenger Name Registration (PNR) system will to be among the top subjects on the agenda — as this also is to be a priority topic at the Global Security Summit in the US next week.

But the European Parliament will not back down. The majority position seems to be that you should not retain personal data about all air passengers in the EU — only when it comes to “a smaller target list of suspects”.

Liberal MEP Sophie in’t Veld declares that “fundamental issues of trust surrounding data sharing needed to be addressed before provisions for collecting data are centralised”.

Read more: Parliament resists pressure on passenger data ahead of EU summit »

/ HAX

1

In two weeks time, world leaders may decide to undermine encryption

By on February 5, 2015 in Big Brother, Big Government, Cryptography, EU, Privacy, surveillance, Uncategorized, US, War on Terror

There are telltale signs that the US administration will move against encryption. The latest comes from Bob Litt, the General Counsel for the Office of the US Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).

In a speech this week he echoed the demand that government should be allowed access to all our information. Among other things, he touched on the idea of a magical golden key.

I’m not a cryptographer, but I am an optimist: I believe that if our businesses and academics put their mind to it, they will find a solution that does not compromise the integrity of encryption technology but that enables both encryption to protect privacy and decryption under lawful authority to protect national security.

Even if this is not a ban on encryption, it is very serious. Mike Masnick at  Techdirt explains…

I’m not sure how many times in how many different ways this needs to be explained, but what they’re asking for is a fantasy. You cannot put a backdoor in encryption and create a magic rule that says “only the government can use this in lawful situations.” That’s just not how it works. At all. The very idea of decryption by a third party “compromises the integrity of the encryption technology,” almost by definition.

But I’m not sure this will be considered as a valid argument by our ignorant politicians.

It would make little sense for the US to go for a “magical golden key” on its own. Likely other members of the NSA Five Eyes group (UK, Canada, Australia and New Zeeland) will do the same.

And the EU? Europe normally follows the US in these matters. There will be an Global Security Summit in Washington later this month. And there are reasons to believe that also politicians in most EU member states would like to give their authorities the ability to circumvent encryption.

As EU member state ministers for justice and home affairs made their last meeting (in Riga) an informal one, this topic might very well have been up for discussion. (But the public is not allowed to know exactly what went on.) This is exactly what you might expect — and exactly the kind of thing the Council would keep under wraps, to avoid debate and protests until it’s too late. And the timing is just right.

The way the world is right now (Ukraine, IS and potential monetary crises) it should be no problem for world leaders to package the whole thing as “emergency legislation”.

The European Parliament will object, no doubt. But it will be sidestepped. All EU member states have to do is to agree to make this national legislation in all (or most) member states.

As a matter of fact, the EU has no formal competence when it comes to national security matters. So it will have to be a multilateral arrangement.

All the European Parliament can do is to try to protect human and civil rights in a wider sense. But that will probably not go beyond a sharply formulated resolution.

The matter can be sent to the European Court of Justice (for breach of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights) or the European Court of Human Rights (upholding the European Convention on Human Rights). But in both cases a court process may drag out for years.

In this matter, politicians can do almost as they want. And they will not fail to make use of current world events as an excuse. (Never waste a good crisis.) The only thing that might stop them is general outcry — on a massive scale.

Soon we will know. All eyes on the Global Security Summit in the US on February 18.

/ HAX

Techdirt: Intelligence Community’s Top Lawyer Endorses Desire For Unicorns, Leprechauns & Golden Keys That Don’t Undermine Encryption »

2

Obama to make policy decision on encryption

By on February 5, 2015 in Big Brother, Cryptography, Privacy, US

The New York Times reports…

“Decisions remain to be made, for example, on whether the government will accede to the review group’s insistence that the intelligence agencies support stronger encryption of data to protect against hacking — at a moment when the F.B.I. and many intelligence officials are protesting that new encryption technologies used by Apple for its iPhones and other firms are making it all but impossible to decode the communications of suspected criminals or terrorists. Mr. Obama is expected to make decisions on those issues in the coming weeks.”

Read more: President Tweaks the Rules on Data Collection »

2

International Bullshit Day

By on January 28, 2015 in Big Business, Big Government, Data Protection, EU, Privacy, US

Today (January 28) is Data Protection Day (Europe) or Data Privacy Day (US and Canada).

From Wikipedia…

Data Privacy Day’s educational initiative originally focused on raising awareness among businesses as well as users about the importance of protecting the privacy of their personal information online, particularly in the context of social networking. The educational focus has expanded over the past four years to include families, consumers and businesses. In addition to its educational initiative, Data Privacy Day promotes events and activities that stimulate the development of technology tools that promote individual control over personally identifiable information; encourage compliance with privacy laws and regulations; and create dialogues among stakeholders interested in advancing data protection and privacy. The international celebration offers many opportunities for collaboration among governments, industry, academia, nonprofits, privacy professionals and educators.

Splendid! Or..?

Let’s follow the money. Among participating organisations and corporate supporters are: FTC, FCC, FBI, New York State Attorney General Office, UK Information Commissioner, Microsoft and Verizon.

Yeah, right!

The core question when it comes data protection / privacy is: Who is the owner of your personal data? Is it you? Or someone else?

The EU is in the process of hammering-out new data protection laws. In this work US government and corporate lobbyists, as well as most EU member states are working hard to take away your control over your personal data.

They paint one image. But the do the opposite.

So–IMHO–Data Protection Day / Data Privacy Day is mostly astroturf.

If you really want to celebrate January 28 – you should support European Digital Rights (EDRi) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

/ HAX

0

Hacking politics

By on January 27, 2015 in Big Government, Copyright, Data Protection, Democracy, EU, Hacktivism, Intellectual Property, Internet, Privacy, surveillance

A free and open internet, copyright reform, mass surveillance, data protection and civil rights are all issues where the rules are decided in politics. But politics is not always a fair and open democratic process. And change do not always has to be initiated from within the traditional political system.

Former Pirate Party member of the European Parliament (MEP) Amelia Andersdotter this weekend delivered a piece over at TorrentFreak: Pirate Party MEP Fails to Deliver True Copyright Reform »

Here she criticises newly elected German Pirate MEP Julia Reda for her report on EU copyright reform. Andersdotter writes “De facto, Julia Reda is more conservative than the European Commission, and this is a massive problem for representative democracy.”

In defence of Reda, one could say that she has written a report (not legislation) that the European Parliament might be able to accept. This report, written by some other MEP, probably would have been right out damaging. Reda has picked the fights she might be able to win.

But that still leave us with the problem that there might be no real copyright reform in the EU, if left to the EU institutions. Which brings me back to my thesis that you need external pressure in combination with inside political initiatives to change things. To get toothpaste out, you have to apply pressure to both sides of the tube.

I have worked with internet related issues inside the European Parliament. Before that I was an activist outside the EU institutions. Frankly I cannot say when I had the best possibility to influence, to change things. Inside you have resources, not available to activists. But outside you are a voice from reality, of the people–that most politicians will have difficulties to ignore. (Especially if you manage to involve the media.)

Inside the political system you have a choice between different strategies.

You can burry yourself in details. That ought to be a reasonable approach. But in reality you will find yourself in a never ending flood of paper. To do this you need vast resources when it comes to time, manpower and expertise.

The other inside strategy is simply being there. To offer others your perspective, to ask the hard questions, to lead media in the right direction, to be a visionary and a crusader with a cause. For small political organisations, with small resources–this might be the easier way to go.

One, two, twenty or no internet friendly MEP:s or MP:s–most of us will still be outside the parliamentary and political system. But we can make a difference. We are the ones who shape public opinion. We are civil society. We can make politicians jump. To do so, we just have to take action.

/ HAX

Links:
Pirate Party MEP Fails to Deliver True Copyright Reform »
Christian Engström: Political Activism (Pirate Visions) »

1

Riga Council meeting: EU to step up War on Terror

By on January 23, 2015 in Big Brother, EU, Privacy, surveillance, US, War on Terror

UK Prime Minister David Cameron as well as EU Counter-Terrorism Coordinator Gilles de Kerchove have floated the idea that governments should be able to access all our communications–including encrypted information.

This would not only have privacy implications. The practical effects and problems would be monumental.

A ban on encryption is only one of many ideas and suggestions that will be on the agenda at the EU justice and home affairs ministers meeting in Riga next week.

PC World reports…

Next week’s EU ministerial meeting will be an informal one behind closed doors, where no formal decisions will be made. The ministers will discuss broadly how to implement all the counter terrorism measures that have been discussed in the last month, the Commission official said, adding that in addition to De Kerchove’s advice, ministers will also take into account suggestions made by the Commission and EU member states.

The fact that this is an “informal” meeting is cause for vigilance. This way the ministers can initiate projects and proposals under the radar.

Closed doors will also be a perfect opportunity for them to discuss how to “harmonize” EU and U.S. antiterror legislation. (In preparation for the EU and U.S. security summit in February.)

All eyes on Riga, next Thursday.

/ HAX

1

EU to sell out data protection in new trade agreement?

By on December 17, 2014 in Data Protection, EU, Privacy, US

Free Trade is a good thing. But–as I have written earlier–international trade agreements seems to be about everything but free trade.

The latest example is the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA). This agreement is to be signed by the EU, the US and many others. Among other things, it covers E-commerce. So far, so good.

The problem is that TISA (as most other international trade agreements) surpass some pretty important local rules. In this case, it might throw out European data protection rules.

The EU is in the process of setting up a new data protection framework. This rises questions like: Who owns your personal data? Is it you? Or do you have nothing to say about the matter?

In this context it is alarming that the EU is about to enter an international agreement stating that “No Party may prevent a service supplier of another Party from transferring, accessing, processing or storing information, including personal information, within or outside the Party’s territory, where such activity is carried out in connection with the conduct of the service supplier’s business.”

The EU and the US have had an agreement (the Safe Harbour agreement) stating that American companies must handle data about european customers in accordance with European data protection rules. As it has turned out, this agreement has been almost totally ignored by the US.

And now, the TISA agreement seems to sidestep European data protection all together.

While some members of the European Parliament (like German Pirate Party MEP Julia Reda) is trying to ensure a strong European data protection package–the usual suspects (most MEP:s from traditional parties) are prepared to sell out.

/ HAX

0