archive-org.com » ORG » P » PRIVACYINTERNATIONAL.ORG

Total: 465

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • There is no Safe Harbour from U.S. Authorities | Privacy International
    of Justice finally stated what everyone knew all along this is legally unacceptable and even fails the essence of the rule of law The sky isn t falling upon U S industry because of this court decision If indeed the sky is falling it began fifteen years ago when industry and the Clinton administration conspired to do nothing to protect people and then industry lobbied extensively to ensure they could mine away The Court made clear today that the secret surveillance programmes that were then implemented made this situation even more untenable At the heart of this problem is that U S law discriminates between Americans and non Americans There are legal limits though incredibly weak on what the U S Government can do to U S persons but any non American is fair game There are no clear meaningful legal restrictions and no right of redress for non Americans This legal black hole must come to an end Edward Snowden s revelations show that the U S cannot expect to continue to be the custodian of the world s information unless it strengthens its laws to protect our data Americans deserve stronger protections and so does everyone who transacts with American companies Any modern economy must properly protect people s data There is no surprise therefore that many individual U S states have taken important steps towards essential protections Now it is time for the U S Government to go to work First the U S must now create a comprehensive privacy law That law has to effectively regulate both government and industry That law should protect the data of all people regardless of nationality Second it can ratify the Council of Europe Convention 108 on data protection in accordance with demands from consumer protection groups across the U

    Original URL path: https://privacyinternational.org/node/653 (2016-04-27)
    Open archived version from archive


  • Court of Justice of the European Union Judgement: Mass Surveillance Is Unlawful | Privacy International
    the US under the now defunct Safe Harbour system Consumer organisations have welcomed the judgement as a vindication of the right to individuals for data protection Importantly the Court in annulling Safe Harbour reconfirmed and clarified its jurisprudence on the right to privacy and data protection as enshrined in Articles 7 and 8 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights In doing so the Court s scrutiny focussed in particular on the powers of the surveillance agencies and the laws that underpin them The Court found the Safe Harbour system flawed because it could not protect access of personal data against national security requests by US public authorities In fact the EU Commission decision 2000 520 establishing Safe Harbour does not even consider the issue of protection of privacy under the US surveillance laws Nor does the 2000 Commission decision refer to the existence of effective legal protection against privacy interference originating from the US authorities In reaffirming that under Articles 7 and 8 of the EU Charter any interference with privacy needs to be based on clear and precise rules and apply only in so far as it is strictly necessary the Court found that legislation permitting the public authorities to have access on a generalised basis to the content of electronic communications must be regarded as compromising the essence of the fundamental right to respect for privacy life This is among the most clear and authoritative judicial statements to date that mass surveillance violates the right to privacy Similarly the Court found that legislation that do not give individuals the right to legal remedies in order to have access to their personal data or obtain rectification or erasure of such data is in violation of the fundamental right to effective judicial protection The debate on the scope and

    Original URL path: https://privacyinternational.org/node/654 (2016-04-27)
    Open archived version from archive

  • France seeks new international mass surveillance powers | Privacy International
    order interceptions not on a case by case basis but by designating entire geographic zones companies organisations or groups of people as targets The bill sets no limit for those authorisations an entire country or even an entire continent Africa for instance could be placed under surveillance The authorisations for interception are granted for 4 months a year for metadata interception but can be renewed indefinitely No detail is given as to the types of technologies that will be used to intercept and analyse the data The bill draws a distinction between French communications which will be deleted if intercepted under this bill and foreign ones A French phone number is defined as being tied to the national territory like any number starting with 0033 This distinction is inherently discriminatory on prohibited grounds of nationality It will also lead to a double standard for French citizens those living in France on the one hand and the estimated 2 5 million living abroad on the other hand who will risk being affected by this mass surveillance if they live in a targeted zone All powers to the prime minister again Back in March this year we alerted the French members of parliament about the risks involved in granting the Prime Minister complete power in terms of authorising interceptions with only a weak post facto oversight Once again this bill grants the Prime Minister the power to authorise interceptions based on requests coming from ministers The National Commission for the Control of Intelligence Techniques created this year under the previously passed surveillance law will only be empowered to verify the compliance of the interception measures with the law Its recommendations are not binding to the Prime Minister although the Commission can refer the case to the Council of State if the recommendations

    Original URL path: https://privacyinternational.org/node/652 (2016-04-27)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Human Rights Watch legal challenge to NSA/GCHQ intelligence sharing | Privacy International
    revelations the IPT has already revealed that GCHQ has spied on civil society groups such as Amnesty International Much like Amnesty International Human Rights Watch defends the rights of people worldwide investigating abuses and pressures those with power to respect human rights and secure justice In the course of this work Human Rights Watch maintains contacts with its employees sources journalists lawyers government officials alleged perpetrators and victims around the world The confidentiality of these communications is essential to both protect the persons involved and allow Human Rights Watch to fulfill its mission Joining Human Rights Watch in lodging complaints today with the IPT are three individuals working in security research investigative journalism and in law The claimants have instructed Mark Scott of Bhatt Murphy Solicitors Additionally Privacy International is launching the next stage of its Did GCHQ Illegally Spy On You campaign which now includes a website that allows individuals to generate personal claims that they can then submit directly to the IPT to see if their communications were part of those unlawfully shared Eric King Deputy Director of Privacy International said No one should need to have access to a secret government dictionary in order to understand if their rights have been violated These legal challenges are designed to get to the heart of the surveillance word games that mislead the public about the scope of surveillance going on in their name The public have a right to know if they were illegally spied on and GCHQ must come clean on whose records they hold some of which they should never have had in the first place Dinah PoKempner General Counsel at Human Rights Watch said Surveillance on a massive scale and data swapping without suspicion or independent oversight pose a grave threat to the lives safety and work of human rights defenders researchers journalists lawyers and their sources We are bringing this case because those who work to protect human rights and expose abuses and war crimes depend on confidentiality of communications For media enquiries please call Sara Nelson on 44 0 20 3422 4321 or email press privacyinternational org Did GCHQ Illegally Spy On You website will be live here at 12 00 GMT https gchqspying privacyinternational org Notes for Editors History of the case The Investigatory Powers Tribunal IPT the British court solely responsible for overseeing intelligence agencies on 6 February 2015 declared that intelligence sharing between the NSA and GCHQ was unlawful prior to December 2014 because the rules governing the UK s access to the NSA s PRISM and UPSTREAM programmes were secret The decision was the first time in the Tribunal s history that it had ruled against the actions of the intelligence and security services Ten human rights groups brought the claim including Privacy International Bytes for All Liberty and Amnesty International In June of 2015 the IPT found that GCHQ had unlawfully spied on Amnesty International and the South African Leal Resources Center but did not confirm that the communications

    Original URL path: https://privacyinternational.org/node/651 (2016-04-27)
    Open archived version from archive

  • The pincer movement against encryption | Privacy International
    vital whistleblower revelations was used as cause to arrest him under terrorism legislation Arresting people for protecting their data sends out a very disturbing message that people are guilty until they prove themselves innocent Governments who are the most vociferous proponents of surveillance tend to be those those that treat everyone as a suspect The natural conclusion of their if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear rhetoric is that we will all have to leave our precious data unprotected open insecure That will make us vulnerable not only to Government snoopers but any cyber criminal who wants to steal our data for their personal gain We ve seen repeated statements from leading government officials about wanting so called back doors to our secure communications British Prime Minister David Cameron and US President Barack Obama have been critical of companies for delivering strong encryption to their customers FBI Director James Comey has been pushing for back door access to secure communications repeatedly saying that there must be a way to allow access to law enforcement Encryption is often portrayed as tantamount to hiding criminality In a recent op ed in the New York Times the Manhattan District Attorney The Paris Chief Prosecutor the Commissioner of the City of London Police and the Chief Prosecutor of the High Court of Spain together argue that encryption not only makes law enforcement harder but that it is directly responsible for killers remaining at large Such strident claims do not stand up to scrutiny David Kaye the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression argues that encryption has posed few barriers to law enforcement based on United States Justice Department statistics In fact in the digital age law enforcement officials have all the tools of metadata collection geo location and traditional physical surveillance and police work to do their job well The focus on encryption is often a canard that distracts from police and intelligence failures Trying to control encryption will not stop criminals finding ways of communicating under the radar but it certainly would limit everyone else s ability to protect themselves from even the most rudimentarily skilled cyber criminal Encryption is essential for everything from how we access our bank accounts online to how human rights activists can operate within repressive regimes Using encryption is standard practice for many journalists not to mention lawyers and others who need to work on sensitive issues with security confidentiality and privacy Anyone who uses Apple s iMessage Facetime or Facebook s WhatsApp are using end to end encryption meaning that even those mighty companies cannot monitor our communications even if compelled to do so by any government It is good and it is right that technology exists to empower us all to protect ourselves We need more technology like this not less At Privacy International we regularly communicate with journalists lawyers and others who will often encrypt their communications They have a right to both safeguard their communications and to

    Original URL path: https://privacyinternational.org/node/641 (2016-04-27)
    Open archived version from archive

  • New investigation reveals Colombia's spy equipment suppliers | Privacy International
    against abuse or any public scrutiny Indeed the Colombian public is largely unaware that the Government has given themselves such wide ranging powers Surveillanomics The global commercial surveillance industry is relatively new Historically the private sector played a limited role in providing the surveillance capabilities used by state law enforcement and intelligence agencies States by and large preserved a monopoly on the development and deployment of surveillance technologies as surveillance was a time resource and finance intensive activity The picture has shifted significantly in the past few decades A commercial industry has emerged to service states desire for ever more expansive surveillance capabilities It sells technologies that have put the collection and retention of vast amounts of data within the budgetary reach of more and more governments like Colombia s The global surveillance industry was estimated by one insider to be worth around US 5 billion in 2011 and is growing by 20 per cent annually Companies attract new customers by portraying themselves as part of a legitimate and responsible industry whose primary purpose is to tackle the threat of increasing criminality facilitated by modern communications infrastructures And in Colombia with its well funded military and weak oversight regimes the industry finds ready customers Spoiled for choice Our investigation revealed over a dozen international companies working with Colombian resellers and partners These include smaller targeted products like a credit card recording device by Swiss company Nagra Pointer a hand held device that can be used to determine the direction in which a person using a communications device is travelling while intercepting phone calls with an IMSI catcher by UK company Smith Myers Communications and a video and audio recording device modelled on a baby seat by UK company LMW Electronics But more troubling are the sales of network communications surveillance devices network taps probes and the monitoring centres to which they connect STAR Colombia Inteligencia Tecnologi a a Colombian firm build the Esperanza nationwide fixed line and mobile interception platform Esperanza was the nation s most visible communications interception system managed and administered by the Office of the Attorney General Fiscali a General de la Nacio n Fiscali a and heavily supported by the US Drug Enforcement Agency DEA Esperanza can obtain mobile and fixed line call data NICE Systems in partnership with Colombian partner Eagle Commercial won a number of later contracts to massively expand the PUMA system s interception capacity A surveillance system managed by another branch of the Police the Police intelligence directorate DIPOL also has mass surveillance capacities The Integrated Recording System DIPOL managed collected and stored communications data using technologies from the Israeli company Verint Systems Ltd Both of Verint s projects were maintained by local partner Compañía Comercial Curacao de Colombia The companies that sell surveillance technologies often enable and facilitate state surveillance that violate human rights standards yet the legal and ethical implications of the technologies they sell have never been sufficiently scrutinised Privacy International wrote to the companies featured in its investigation

    Original URL path: https://privacyinternational.org/node/640 (2016-04-27)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Companies from the UK, the US, and Israel provided mass surveillance capabilities to Colombian security services | Privacy International
    the UK and Israel to supply surveillance equipment The US company Pen Link and UK company Komcept were involved in the development of the Colombian Government s communications interception system Esperanza The Esperanza system was allegedly abused by the highly controversial Administrative Security Department DAS which had to be disbanded after it spied on and harassed politicians journalists activists and judges of the Supreme Court opposing the Alvaro Uribe Government From Israel the companies Verint Systems and NICE Systems were involved in providing network surveillance capabilities to Colombia NICE Systems participated in the significant expansion of Colombia s Single Monitoring and Analysis Platform PUMA which was put on hold in 2014 by the Attorney General due to the concerns over potential abuse of the system Verint had contracts with the DAS DIPOL and Directorate of Criminal Investigation DIJIN Verint s contracts with DIPOL and DAS were for the provision of communications surveillance equipment that the agencies had no lawful authority to independently operate Verint s products underpin DIPOL s Integrated Recording System Additionally Verint provided probes to conduct surveillance of communications networks to DAS even after the controversial agency had been outed for its illegal activities Historically both companies have operated and sold to Central Asian governments with significant records of human rights abuses Privacy International has done further investigation on this topic which can be found in the report Private Interests Monitoring Central Asia IMSI Catchers tactical surveillance equipment that intercepts data from mobile phones in particular areas were supplied by the New Zealand company Spectra Group to DIPOL in 2005 As required by a separate contract in 2006 IMSI Catchers were demonstrated by bidding companies in a public shopping mall At that time it is not clear where DIPOL s lawful authority to operate such equipment would come from The report also shows that Hacking Team an Italian company that was recently revealed to have been pursuing contracts with the Colombian government had a presence in Colombia In 2014 Hacking Team had a Colombian based field engineer and an active contract with the Colombian police Edin Omanovic Research Officer Privacy International said Colombia provides yet another example of how easily our privacy and other human rights can be violated by unlawful state surveillance By enabling these practices the surveillance industry has been found to be wholly complicit in these abuses In the case of Verint this includes an intelligence agency that at the time was embroiled in an unlawful spying scandal Plainly the rise of this industry has not been met by the required protections this report highlights the urgent need for more transparency and safeguards It also highlights the gaping holes in government oversight over the industry their assistance to Colombia and Colombia s own surveillance practices Matthew Rice Advocacy Officer Privacy International said This report a companion piece to the first report Shadow State Surveillance Law and Order details the scale of support the Colombian state received from companies around the world to build the diverse

    Original URL path: https://privacyinternational.org/node/639 (2016-04-27)
    Open archived version from archive

  • How Colombia built a shadow state, a new Privacy International investigation reveals | Privacy International
    surveillance in Colombia The key agencies in Colombia that monitor communications compete for resources and capabilities This has resulted in overlapping unchecked systems of surveillance that are vulnerable to abuse Agencies appetite for capturing and analysing more and more communications data coupled with poor regulation and oversight of what they are doing leaves the entire surveillance infrastructure open to serious abuse Systems and scandals Colombia has been fighting various armed insurgencies for over 50 years This has involved a massive amount of spying facilitated by an extensive defence budget bolstered by international aid For nearly two decades the Colombian government has been expanding its capacity to spy on the private communications of its citizens But efforts were not well coordinated The nation s most visible communications interception system is Esperanza Sistema Esperanza The Office of the Attorney General Fiscali a General de la Nacio n Fiscali a manages and administers the system and it is heavily supported by the US Drug Enforcement Agency DEA Esperanza can obtain mobile and fixed line call data The system has always had its limitations it relies on telecommunications operators compliance and is targeted towards specific requests And it has had other technical problems with its software and analysis platforms as outlined in our report The access of agencies like the Police judicial investigation directorate DIJIN to Esperanza s intercepted data was also subjected to firm interception quotas By 2007 the Police had had enough of these restrictions They started to build the Single Monitoring and Analysis Platform PUMA which aimed to capture communications data in a different way Unlike Esperanza PUMA would be an automated interception system placed in the backbone of Colombia s telecoms which had the capacity to collect en masse the data travelling through it Additionally all data that passed through the interception system would be available for analysis at monitoring centres Israeli companies Verint Systems Ltd and later NICE Systems won contracts for this system A surveillance system managed by another branch of the Police the Police intelligence directorate DIPOL also has mass surveillance capacities The Integrated Recording System it managed collected and stored communications data using technologies from Israeli company Verint Systems Ltd Over a dozen international companies primarily from the US the UK and Israel have worked with Colombian partners to build a surveillance infrastructure in Colombia These companies dealings feature in Privacy International investigation Demand Supply Exposing the Surveillance Industry in Colombia which will be released this Wednesday Where there is lack of oversight there is abuse In 2009 it was revealed that the now disbanded Administrative Department of Security Departamento Administrativo de Seguridad DAS had surveilled and harassed over 600 public figures Setting the record straight The scandals have had some positive impacts too The Colombian government has reformed its surveillance laws interrogated its technical capabilities and even disbanded one of its security agencies in light of revelations about the abuse of surveillance systems Yet more work remains to be done to ensure that surveillance in

    Original URL path: https://privacyinternational.org/node/636 (2016-04-27)
    Open archived version from archive



  •