Accusations that Pentagon retaliated against a whistleblower undermine argument that there were options for Snowden other than leaking to the media.
The Guardian: Snowden calls for whistleblower shield after claims by new Pentagon source »
The Guardian: How the Pentagon punished NSA whistleblowers »
“Reading between the lines, it would seem that the United States negotiators are being heavied by their IP industries to push for stronger measures on IPR enforcement. This would be consistent with the industry lobbying on the previous attempt for an EU-US copyright treaty – known as ACTA or Anti-counterfeiting Trade Agreement. It is also consistent with the intensity of the relationship between the lead US negotiating body, the United States Trae Representative (USTR) and representatiives of the US entertainment industries – notably the Motion picture Association of America (MPAA).
A suggestion that is hinted at by the EU negotiators is a new IPR Committee. It is not clear where such a committee would be based, or what its role is, but we can safely assume that it will incorporate the interests of the US corporations who seek to influence EU policy.”
Monica Horten at IPTegrity.com – TTIP leaks: US warned on sensitive IPR issues »
When you first go on duty at CIA headquarters, you raise your hand and swear an oath — not to government, not to the agency, not to secrecy. You swear an oath to the Constitution. So there’s this friction, this emerging contest between the obligations and values that the government asks you to uphold, and the actual activities that you’re asked to participate in. (…)
By preying on the modern necessity to stay connected, governments can reduce our dignity to something like that of tagged animals, the primary difference being that we paid for the tags and they’re in our pockets. It sounds like fantasist paranoia, but on the technical level it’s so trivial to implement that I cannot imagine a future in which it won’t be attempted. It will be limited to the war zones at first, in accordance with our customs, but surveillance technology has a tendency to follow us home.
Edward Snowden in The Intercept: Whistleblowing Is Not Just Leaking — It’s an Act of Political Resistance »
Today a batch of documents concerning the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) has been leaked by Greenpeace.
As suspected there are worrying indications when it comes to the future of a free and open Internet.
• TTIP might result in the EU and US being able to ignore fundamental human rights (such as the right to privacy) when it comes to telecommunications. This is serious, as such issues have been central in previous legislative acts concerning the Internet.
• With the EU-US Privacy Shield still being a pretty open issue, TTIP seems to move the issue of data transfers in favour of Big Data. It is doubtful if there will be any meaningful protection of personal data being transferred from EU to the US.
• When it comes to Intellectual Property (IP), there are signs that TTIP will move to make Internet Service Providers to “voluntary” police the net. In other words, TTIP seems to make another try to re-introduce IP provisions that the European Parliament has already rejected in ACTA.
IP issues in TTIP seems to be open for negotiations and last-minute amendments. EDRi explains…
Concerning so-called “Intellectual Property” (IP), the negotiators seem to take lobbyists’ wish list very seriously. According to the leaked report, “[w]hen confronted with EU warning that bringing sensitive proposals that would require changes in EU law to the table – and doing it at a late stage of the negotiation – may have a negative impact on stakeholders” (which would apparently not include citizens) “and has very limited chances of being accepted”, the US seemed to be prepared to depart from the model of the TPP. Among the proposals the US is thinking of tabling, it includes privatised enforcement measures, that EDRi has been criticising since its inception because they bypass the rule of law and lead to arbitrary corporate decision-making without accountability (cf. “voluntary stakeholder initiatives”). As with ACTA, the US is strongly supportive of “voluntary initiatives” as US-based global giants already impose US copyright law on a global level. The EU (as shown by the recent leak of the Communication on Platforms) supports this approach.
It’s still early days. And there is no lack of warning signals.
So, I guess there will be yet another battle over a free and open Internet. (Frustratingly, in part it seems to be the same battle over IP issues being fought over and over again.)
/ HAX
• Greenpeace: TTIP Leaks »
• EDRi: TTIP leaks confirm dangers for digital rights »
• The Guardian: Leaked TTIP documents cast doubt on EU-US trade deal »
• Europan Commission: EU negotiating texts in TTIP »
• EU Commissioner Cecilia Malmström: Negotiating TTIP »
A newly published study from Oxford’s Jon Penney provides empirical evidence for a key argument long made by privacy advocates: that the mere existence of a surveillance state breeds fear and conformity and stifles free expression. Reporting on the study, the Washington Post this morning described this phenomenon: “If we think that authorities are watching our online actions, we might stop visiting certain websites or not say certain things just to avoid seeming suspicious.”
The Intercept: New Study Shows Mass Surveillance Breeds Meekness, Fear, and Self-Censorship »
Binney said that an analyst today can run one simple query across the NSA’s various databases, only to become immediately overloaded with information. With about four billion people — around two-thirds of the world’s population — under the NSA and partner agencies’ watchful eyes, according to his estimates, there is too much data being collected.
“That’s why they couldn’t stop the Boston bombing, or the Paris shootings, because the data was all there,” said Binney. Because the agency isn’t carefully and methodically setting its tools up for smart data collection, that leaves analysts to search for a needle in a haystack.
ZDNet: NSA is so overwhelmed with data, it’s no longer effective, says whistleblower »
The projected growth maturation and installation of commercially available encryption — what they had forecasted for seven years ahead, three years ago, was accelerated to now, because of the revelation of the leaks.
James Clapper, US Director of National Intelligence.
The Intercept: Spy chief complains that Edward @Snowden sped up spread of encryption by 7 years »
The EU-US Privacy Shield is to replace the so-called safe harbour agreement about the transfer of personal data between EU and the US — after the European Court of Justice (ECJ) invalidated the latter.
As reported earlier, the privacy shield is a principal agreement that yet has to be filled with substance. Even though the European Commission and Washington claim to have struck a deal, it is far from being finalised.
Actually, things are moving the opposite way. Reuters:
Last week, the EU’s 28 data protection authorities – known as the Article 29 Working Party – published a non-binding opinion on the framework which called for more reassurances over U.S. surveillance practices and the independence of a new U.S. privacy ombudsman.
Leaving some of the regulators’ concerns unaddressed could increase the chances of the Privacy Shield being challenged in court by privacy advocates, much as its predecessor was.
This is a mess. Obviously, the EU is not strong enough to stand up to the US on data protection. And the US is not interested in respecting a strong European legal framework in this field.
Some links:
• EU data enforcers demand privacy shield fixes »
• Privacy panel trips up transatlantic data deal »
• US businesses: Start preparing for the EU’s new privacy regulation »
• U.S. reluctant to change data pact after EU watchdogs’ concerns »
Earlier posts:
• “EU-US Privacy Shield must be sent back to negotiators” »
• The EU-US Privacy Shield: EU presents a pointless proposal »
• The EU-US Privacy Shield Illusion »
• An EU-US Privacy Shield? »
/ HAX
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed a Freedom of Information (FOIA) lawsuit today against the Justice Department to shed light on whether the government has ever used secret court orders to force technology companies to decrypt their customers’ private communications, a practice that could undermine the safety and security of devices used by millions of people.
EFF Sues for Secret Court Orders Requiring Tech Companies to Decrypt Users’ Communications »
Last Friday German magazine Focus ran an interview with the country’s two top spies — Gerhard Schindler, of the Bundesnachrichtendienstes (BND) and Hans-Georg Maaßen, of the Bundesamtes für Verfassungsschutz (BfV).
In short, they are annoyed that Edward Snowdens exposure of NSA mass surveillance puts Germany and the UK in an uncomfortable spot. They even implied that Snowden could have been acting under the influence of the Russian government.
“Leaking the secret service files is an attempt to drive a wedge between western Europe and the USA – the biggest since the Second World War,” Hans-Georg Maaßen, head of Germany’s domestic intelligence agency (Verfassungsschutz), told Focus in the double interview.
The translation above from The Local.de. This has gained some attention in the media and Western military circles. So, let’s take a step back and try to look at the wider picture.
Yes, it is a problem that very little is known about mass surveillance carried out by e.g. Russia and China. But you cannot blame Snowden for this. He worked for a contractor to the NSA and leaked what he found to be unacceptable violations of civil rights. Furthermore, the NSA is an intelligence organisation in a democratic country; that should be held responsible under the rule of law. It is not a level playing field. But our western democracies are better than authoritarian and totalitarian states – and our authorities should be held accountable according to a higher standard. Especially when they spy on their own citizens.
Yes, it is a problem that Edward Snowden is stranded in Russia. But that does not make him a Russian spy or mouthpiece. The reason he is in Moscow is: 1) When he arrived there for transit, the US had revoked his passport. 2) No western democracy is willing to grant Snowden asylum. If German authorities are willing to grant him shelter and protection – he can be in Berlin pretty quickly, where a parliamentary inquiry would love to meet with him. (However, I don’t think German intelligence services are all too keen about that prospect.)
And naturally Germany and the UK are being criticized. They deserve to. German intelligence has been spying on companies, businesspeople, and political figures in Germany and allied European nations on behalf of the NSA. And they have lied about it in front of German parliamentarians. In similar ways, the British GHCQ have been acting far beyond its mandate. Both countries are close allies with the US and both countries intelligence authorities have a close cooperation with the American NSA. So, it is not the least strange that German BND has come under scrutiny. But they can blame no one but them selves.
But OK, no one can tell for sure if Snowden is a (knowing or unknowing, willing or unwilling) Russian spy. But that does not alter the fact that his revelations have huge implications for how our democratic societies are run. It is extremely important that this information has come to the public’s knowledge. To defend a free and open society, we must stick to democratic principles, rules, and legal frameworks.
The best, easiest and most decent thing would be to grant Edward Snowden asylum in Germany – and let him testify in front of relevant parliament committees. But I guess that will never happen.
/ HAX
• The Local.de: German spies imply Snowden leaked files for Russia »
• Focus: Doppel-Interview mit Gerhard Schindler und Hans-Georg Maaßen: Kreml versucht den deutschen Bundestag zu infiltrieren – Russen treiben mit Hilfe des Whistleblowers Snowden einen Keil zwischen Westeuropa und den USA »
