Navigation

Archive | US

An EU-US Privacy Shield?

By on February 2, 2016 in Big Brother, Big Business, Data Protection, EU, Facebook, NSA, Privacy, surveillance, US

Last October the EU-US “Safe Harbour” agreement was canceled by the European Court of Justice. This agreement was created to ensure that European personal data was to be treated with care when handled by US companies. But the ECJ found that the agreement did not meet the requirements of the Data Protection Directive, because of NSA access.

ArsTechnica then reported…

“The most significant repercussion of this ruling is that American companies, such as Facebook, Google, and Twitter, may not be allowed to send user data from Europe back to the US.”

Link: Europe’s highest court strikes down Safe Harbour data sharing between EU and US »

Today the media has reported that a new agreement has been reached: The EU-US Privacy Shield.

Such an agreement has been a top political priority for the EU as well as the US — as the respective administrations have not wanted data protection to get in the way of business as usual.

But is there a real agreement? Not really. All there is, is a “framework agreement”, basically saying that the EU and the US agree to agree at some point.

Today ArsTechnica writes…

“What that means in practice is that the Commission has negotiated some breathing space to strike a deal with the US.”

“The US has clarified that they do not carry out indiscriminate mass surveillance of European citizens,” EU Commissioner Andrus Ansip has declared. No further details on this, though…

Link: Last gasp Safe Harbour “political deal” struck between Europe and US »

Apparently the EU and the US have no such thing as an actual deal to show. But there is a lot of hot air coming out of Brussels and Washington.

Earlier today, before the news about an “framework agreement” from Brussels, ArsTechnica had an interview with Max Schrems, the Austrian law student who took this case to court to begin with.

“On the subject of any potential new agreement, he argues it would be no better, and that a sector-specific approach to EU-US data transfers would be preferable. “If this case goes back to the ECJ [European Court of Justice]—which it very likely will do, if there is a new safe harbour that does not meet the test of the court—then it will fail again, and nobody wants that,” he says.”

Link: Why Safe Harbor 2.0 will lose again »

Apart from the EU and the US having agreed to agree — everyone seems to be just as much in the dark as before. (There is also the hidden agenda of mass surveillance and intelligence cooperation that led to the end of “safe harbour” in the first place, to be taken into consideration.)

I suppose the new agreement, when it is finalized, will end up in the European Parliament for final approval. Then, if not before, we should know. And it is encouraging that the Parliament has been very vigilant concerning EU-US data protection issues in the past.

/ HAX

0

The normalisation of mass surveillance

By on December 28, 2015 in Big Brother, Big Government, BND, Civil liberties, Data Retention, Democracy, EU, Germany, Human rights, Intelligence, NSA, NSA & Snowden, Privacy, surveillance, Sweden, Uncategorized, US

Once upon a time, there were rumors about a global surveillance network — Echelon. When the European Parliament decided to look into the matter, it turned out it did indeed exist. For years to follow there were rumors about US intelligence organisation NSA and its new capabilities to “collect it all”. And a few years ago, the Snowden documents exposed exactly that.

Then followed a state of resignation.

In 2013/14, it was brought to light that the NSA might have compromised the international clearing system for bank transfers, European run SWIFT. It’s a bit odd, as the US can have as much information about European bank transfers as they want, in accordance with the EU-US TFTP agreement. Newer the less, there were strong indications of something going on. This time the European police agency, Europol, didn’t even bother to look into the matter. In a European Parliament hearing Europol director Bob Wainwright explicitly said so. (The hearing is quite surreal. It’s all on video here. »)

In Germany, politicians softened their tone against the US/NSA when threatened with limited access to US intelligence. It also turned out that under the level of political polemic, the BND had been working very closely with the NSA all the time. And in Sweden, according to the Snowden files, SIGINT organisation FRA has access to NSA superdatabase XKeyscore. Swedish politicians (including the Greens, who are now in government) will not even comment on the legality of this.

The European Court of Justice has invalidated the EU data retention directive, finding it in breach of fundamental human rights. Never the less most EU member states are upholding (and in some cases implementing) data retention, leading national constitutional courts to object. But data retention fits well with US surveillance systems, so it seems to be less important if it is legal or not.

I could go on, but I better get to my point.

Politicians and intelligence bureaucrats are sending some pretty clear signals these days. They do not care about what is legal or not legal. They do not care if being exposed. They do not even comment on issues that ought to be fundamental in a democracy. The message is: This is the way it is. Live with it.

If there was ever need for a broad political movement against mass surveillance, it is now.

/ HAX

1

EU: It’s Snowden-time!

By on December 4, 2015 in EU, Human rights, NSA & Snowden, US

It is getting painfully clear: No single western democracy will stand up against the US to grant NSA-whistleblower Edward Snowden refuge – and refuse to hand him over to Washington.

So it’s time for plan B: Let’s campaign for the EU to provide sanctuary for Snowden.

Snowden is a very hot potato for western politicians. There is a clear public demand to grant him asylum or some other form of protection. On the other hand, the US will apply extreme pressure on any country that does.

In the EU, politicians can do the right thing — and avoid to take the heat directly. Questions from the US could be directed to Brussels and the European Commission can blame the European Parliament. No single country or politician will have to stand up against the US administration.

The initiative (probably) will have to come from the European Commission. That’s the tricky part. When it comes to the European Parliament — it has already stated that it wants the EU to provide refuge for Snowden. On the opposing side, we will find most of the member states in the European Council.

It might also be possible to involve the Council of Europe (this is not an EU institution, as this organization has more member states and is the guardian of the Europan Convention on Human Rights).

Let’s use the EU for something good, for a change.

/ HAX

0

TTIP: The deceitful EU commissioner

By on October 1, 2015 in Democracy, EU, Global Politics, Intellectual Property, Internet, TTIP, US

EU:s commissioner for trade, Cecilia Malmström, claims that the negotiations over the new EU-US trade agreement, TTIP, are the most transparent trade negotiations ever.

Well, this might actually be true — as such negotiations normally are conducted in total secrecy. But transparent? No.

There is nothing like an open, democratic process about TTIP. Negotiations are still being conducted behind closed doors. Not even politicians in EU member states or members of the European Parliament are allowed normal access to the documents.

For instance, nothing is known about the TTIP IP chapter — containing issues related to patents and copyright. This is the part of TTIP where it is believed that we (eventually) will find statues restricting openness and freedom on the Internet.

The plan is obvious: The EU and the US are trying to keep TTIP under wraps until there is an final document, that cannot be changed. They believe that an all or nothing approach will make it harder for elected parliamentarians to reject the agreement.

/ HAX

0

Some links…

By on September 29, 2015 in Big Brother, BND, GCHQ, Germany, NSA & Snowden, Privacy, TPB, UK, US

The Intercept: PROFILED – From Radio to Porn, British Spies Track Web Users’ Online Identities »

Falkvinge: GCHQ Is Building A Stasi Archive On Steroids: Why Are People Still Surprised? »

EU Law Analysis: American Mass Surveillance of EU citizens: Is the End Nigh? »

Netzpolitik: Strategic Initiative Technology: We Unveil the BND Plans to Upgrade its Surveillance Technology for 300 Million Euros »

The Daily Dot: FBI and DEA under review for use of NSA mass surveillance data »

TorrentFreak: Pirate Bay Founder Finally Free After Three Years »

0

EU-US data protection agreement: Good news or bad?

By on September 9, 2015 in Big Brother, Data Protection, EU, PNR, US

The EU and US have reached a data protection “Umbrella agreement”.

The spin in the news is “EU citizens will have the right to sue US in case of privacy breaches”. (Link»)

And on the European Commissions web site eurocrats are trying to white wash the agreement. (Link»)

What is the EU-US data protection “Umbrella Agreement”?

The EU-US data protection “Umbrella Agreement” puts in place a comprehensive high-level data protection framework for EU-US law enforcement cooperation. The Agreement covers all personal data (for example names, addresses, criminal records) exchanged between the EU and the U.S. for the purpose of prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of criminal offences, including terrorism.

The Umbrella Agreement will provide safeguards and guarantees of lawfulness for data transfers, thereby strengthening fundamental rights, facilitating EU-U.S. law enforcement cooperation and restoring trust.

In particular, EU citizens will benefit from equal treatment: they will have the same judicial redress rights as US citizens in case of privacy breaches. This point was outlined by President Juncker in his political guidelines, when he stated: “The United States must […] guarantee that all EU citizens have the right to enforce data protection rights in U.S. courts, whether or not they reside on U.S. soil. Removing such discrimination will be essential for restoring trust in transatlantic relations”

Given the current, rather lawless, situation this is a step in the right direction.

But in a wider perspective, this might be bad news: It will open the flood gates when it comes to EU transferring sensitive personal data (e.g. concerning air traffic passenger information and European bank transfers) to the US. And this will serve as an argument for the European Commission to ignore the European Parliaments call to repeal the much criticized and abused Terrorist Finance Tracking Program.

So, at the end of the day, this will be a carte blanche to transfer sensitive European personal data to the US. I’m not sure that is a good thing.

/ HAX

Update: The agreement has been leaked. Link 1 » | Link 2 »

0

Chelsea Manning punished for reading Nobel Peace Prize winner

By on August 19, 2015 in US, Wikileaks

Whistleblower Chelsea Manning is serving 35 years in prison – for having exposed the truth to the American public.

Manning has just been punished with 21 days of restrictions on her recreational activities, including no access to a gym, a library or the outdoors.

Why? For possessing unapproved reading material and expired tooth paste. The Guardian reports…

“A tube of anti-cavity toothpaste, MKIC, was found in your possession past its expiration date of 9 April 2015. You are involved in violation of ACC Policy Letter 16, using, possessing, handling or storing of medicine, except as authorized by the facility medical staff. Failure to take medication as prescribed by medical staff,” read the charging documents, which were also shared on Manning’s twitter account.

According to Manning other items confiscated from her cell included the memoir I Am Malala by Malala Yousafzai, a novel featuring trans women called A Safe Girl to Love, the LGBT publication Out Magazine, the Caitlyn Jenner issue of Vanity Fair and a copy of Cosmopolitan that included an interview with Manning.

How stupid. How sad. How sinister.

The Guardian: Chelsea Manning found guilty but spared solitary confinement for contraband »

0

Reclaim democracy!

By on August 15, 2015 in Democracy, EU, Intellectual Property, TTIP, US

“If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.”

The phrase is well known and frequently used by politicians who are in favour of mass surveillance.

First of all, all people have something to hide. And in the unlikely event that someone really has nothing to hide – this person almost certainly have been trusted with secrets by others (such as friends and their employer).

Second, the very same politicians are not at all interested in letting the people know what they themselves are up to. They loathe transparency and openness. Because they do have things to hide.

Let’s take the secretly negotiated EU–US trade agreement, TTIP, as an example. Already it is almost derailed because of the controversial dispute settlement instrument, ISDS. That was something the people was not supposed to know about. EU and US officials are not at all happy that this detail has been publicly known and put into question.

Most parts of the TTIP are still secret. E.g. the IP chapter concerning copyright and its’ consequences for an open and free internet. By keeping this text under wraps the European Commission and the US administration hope to minimize scrutiny and opposition until the very last moment. (When nothing can be changed.)

Not even the peoples elected representatives in national parliaments and in the European Parliament — the very people who are supposed to approve or reject TTIP — are allowed free access to the latest texts. (Link»)

This is not the way to behave in a democratic society. Instead you should embrace openness, critical analysis and a free debate.

All this secrecy is a very real problem. But what troubles me even more is the blatant double standards. The people is supposed to silently subject itself to mass surveillance — while our leaders claim the right to conduct their business in secret.

It’s time to reclaim democracy!

/ HAX

Link: Politicians can only view secret trade pact in special viewing room »

0

Framing Julian Assange

By on August 10, 2015 in affairs, Assange, Sweden, UK, US, Wikileaks

Wikileaks editor in chief Julian Assange is still a refugee at the Ecuadorean embassy in London.

Assange is suspected of sexual misconduct in Sweden. He has yet not been charged with anything. His case has already been dismissed by one Swedish prosecutor — but reopened by another, issuing an European Arrest Warrant to have him interrogated in Sweden. British courts allowed extradition to Sweden, despite Assange fearing that the Swedes might hand him over to the US. (Where a grand jury apparently is preparing a case against him.) Then, Assange jumped bail and was granted political asylum at the Ecuadorean embassy.

I will leave the substance of the Swedish case aside in this blog post. But I can tell you, it’s very thin.

Now the statutory time period for charging Assange with the lesser of the alleged crimes in Sweden is running out. (Other parts of the investigation will remain open for another five years.)

For years Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny has refused to conduct an interview with Assange i London. (Even before his escape to the Ecuadorean embassy.) She claimed that it cannot be done, that Swedish prosecutors cannot do that. That was a plain lie. (Hell, even I have been interviewed by a Swedish prosecutor abroad.) Swedish courts and even the British government have urged Ms Ny to have this done and over with.

Finally, Friday June 12:th this summer, Swedish authorities sent a letter to the Ecuadorean embassy in Sweden — asking for an interview with Assange in London only five days later (including the weekend). To no surprise the embassy in Stockholm, the Ecuadorean government and their embassy in London did not manage to coordinate this in just a few days. So there was no interview.

Now the investigation of the suspected crimes of a lesser degree will be closed. Julian Assange will still be suspected of wrongdoing, in the public view. But not able to clear his name (in these parts) anymore. At the same time the investigations of the remaining suspected crimes will stay open, the European Arrest Warrant will still be in force and Assange will still be stuck at the embassy in London.

A perfect way for various governments to keep an inconvenient journalist in limbo, if you ask me.

/ HAX

2