Leak shows EU's plans for large scale surveillance of all communications(edri.org)
edri.org
Leak shows EU's plans for large scale surveillance of all communications
http://www.edri.org/cleanIT
11 comments
> Governments should use the helpfulness of ISPs as a criterion for awarding public contracts
It's almost impressive how even the most innocuous public projects can be turned against us by the governments. Every euro you pay in taxes can and will be used against you, no courts necessary.
It's almost impressive how even the most innocuous public projects can be turned against us by the governments. Every euro you pay in taxes can and will be used against you, no courts necessary.
This is one of the reasons I pay someone to help me avoid paying as much as possible. If I had a say what taxes were used for then, I might think otherwise. Unfortunately it get used to fund oil wars, surveillance and quangos whilst Healthcare, education and infrastructure crumbles. And don't give me that democracy bollocks - it doesn't work when the majority of the voting populous are semi-morons who might as well just tick the first box.
This is ridiculous and misinformed Anti-EU propaganda. If you look at the CleanIT website, you can see that this is just a project by the "Law Enforcement or Counter terrorism departments" of some European Countries. The project explicitly states that it has a "Non-legislative approach" and is seen as a "Public-Private-Partnership".
The only connection to the EU is that it received an EU financing in 2011. Clearly the content of the document is really troubling, but what would you expect from a document exclusively edited by some governments anti-terror departments? This reads more like a wishlist than anything having a remote chance of political survival.
Anyway there will be enough time to start worrying and outrage if these ideas actually appear in a legislative proposal by the EU commission. Even then it would likely take another 3-4 years to become law. Keep in mind that the current EU commission is only in place until the next EU elecions in 2014. It is very unlikely that a huge legislative project would be initiated before that.
The only connection to the EU is that it received an EU financing in 2011. Clearly the content of the document is really troubling, but what would you expect from a document exclusively edited by some governments anti-terror departments? This reads more like a wishlist than anything having a remote chance of political survival.
Anyway there will be enough time to start worrying and outrage if these ideas actually appear in a legislative proposal by the EU commission. Even then it would likely take another 3-4 years to become law. Keep in mind that the current EU commission is only in place until the next EU elecions in 2014. It is very unlikely that a huge legislative project would be initiated before that.
Allowing these things to happen is exactly how they circumvent the existing power structure.
This is not a "let's see what happens" type of situation.
The SPP for North America started the same way..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_and_Prosperity_Partner...
... once these "non-legislative partnerships" gather enough movement from the powers that be, they can be difficult things to stop, especially because they stretch beyond physical borders.
This is not a "let's see what happens" type of situation.
The SPP for North America started the same way..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_and_Prosperity_Partner...
... once these "non-legislative partnerships" gather enough movement from the powers that be, they can be difficult things to stop, especially because they stretch beyond physical borders.
That still does not fix the issue that the EU commission is a non democratic institution that rules by unopposed fiat. Being a european I rather see the whole commission gone asap.
Hyperbole bordering on propaganda again. The 27 EU countries elect their governments democratically. Then the council of these democratically elected governments appoints the EU commission for the specific time frame of 5 years and the appointment has to be confirmed by the democratically elected European Parliament. The commission only has the legislative initiative, but the proposals are voted on by the European Council and the Parliament, requiring at least a qualified majority, in many policy areas even requiring Unanimity...
FTA: "A leaked document from the CleanIT project shows just how far internal discussions in that initiative have drifted away from its publicly stated aims".
They've largely overstepped their initial public aims, so judging CleanIT by their website is useless.
They've largely overstepped their initial public aims, so judging CleanIT by their website is useless.
I'm not judging CleanIT at all, I'm merely pointing out that their connection to the EU or its legislative agenda is practically nonexistent at the moment. The article headline is clearly FUD.
I get it now. So first they start monitoring everyone, illegally. Then they pass new laws to make it legal. And then when more sites and people start using encrypted communications, they start complaining about new technologies making it "hard for them" to monitor everyone. So, kind of like it's already happening in US.
In fact, I'm pretty sure this idea was suggested by US. US already has some one-way deals with EU where they get some EU's data on EU citizens (but not the other way around, of course), and now they probably just want more of it. Why settle for only US data when you can have the world's data? On the other hand, it's possible the EU commission wants this kind of power, too.
In fact, I'm pretty sure this idea was suggested by US. US already has some one-way deals with EU where they get some EU's data on EU citizens (but not the other way around, of course), and now they probably just want more of it. Why settle for only US data when you can have the world's data? On the other hand, it's possible the EU commission wants this kind of power, too.
Although I'm in favor of paranoia generally, I don't think it was suggested by the US.
All you need to know about "plans" for the EU was divulged by Vladimir Bukovsky a few years ago.
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865
All you need to know about "plans" for the EU was divulged by Vladimir Bukovsky a few years ago.
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865
Exactly. Here is a better Youtube link where Vladimir Bukovsky compares the EU with USSR. I was _shocked_ to see all the comparisons!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m41Tdl5mvdg
and Yuri Bezmenov here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gnpCqsXE8g
This is some horrible stuff, and there's very little one can do about it really. Quite saddening.
And if only it was just that... There's a talk about different initiative, WhiteIT which tries to enforce internet censorship in Europe:
http://media.ccc.de/browse/congress/2011/28c3-4700-en-what_i...
And if only it was just that... There's a talk about different initiative, WhiteIT which tries to enforce internet censorship in Europe:
http://media.ccc.de/browse/congress/2011/28c3-4700-en-what_i...
> This is some horrible stuff, and there's very little
> one can do about it really.
Not quite. It still has to become EU law and then the EU member states have to accept it. There are still chances to axe this. See ACTA.
Not quite. It still has to become EU law and then the EU member states have to accept it. There are still chances to axe this. See ACTA.
Fucking control fanatics.
We must stop playing just defense against ACTA and such crap. We need an offensive endless stream of Law suggestions for stronger protections of freedoms.
We must stop playing just defense against ACTA and such crap. We need an offensive endless stream of Law suggestions for stronger protections of freedoms.
The only ways I see to stop this is by either leaving the EU or making the EU parliament more powerful. The EU Commission is hellbent on controlling the people.
It's time to start using Tor.
I don't mean only for browsing the web. I mean it's time to have services in Tor:
- We need a Youtube in Tor that won't censor a video because it's an unauthorized remix of some other music videos.
- We need a Twitter in Tor where users don't get subpoenaed.
- We need a Facebook in Tor where I can use a pseudonym if I want to.
- We need a Gmail in Tor where messages won't be so easily eavesdropped by Governments.
- We need services in Tor that won't need to fear patent trolls.
PG, please unblock Tor for HN.
I don't mean only for browsing the web. I mean it's time to have services in Tor:
- We need a Youtube in Tor that won't censor a video because it's an unauthorized remix of some other music videos.
- We need a Twitter in Tor where users don't get subpoenaed.
- We need a Facebook in Tor where I can use a pseudonym if I want to.
- We need a Gmail in Tor where messages won't be so easily eavesdropped by Governments.
- We need services in Tor that won't need to fear patent trolls.
PG, please unblock Tor for HN.
I didn't realise that access to HN was blocked for Tor users, so I just thought I'd try it out. I can access the site when using Tor. I can log in to the site when using Tor. And if this comment submission works, then I guess I can comment via Tor as well...
I tried long time ago and didn't work for me. I assumed it was still blocked.
Firstly, we'd need a massive expansion of the Tor network. While Tor might be quite well known among the more technically inclined, the network itself is of course largely composed of volunteer systems and is quite small:
http://torstatus.blutmagie.de/
As of writing, the number of Tor routers is in the low thousands and of course only a minority of those are exit nodes. Technically savvy people like the HN readership (who also often have a strong online civil rights interest) make pretty good candidates for helping the network out via running a Tor relay!
As of writing, the number of Tor routers is in the low thousands and of course only a minority of those are exit nodes. Technically savvy people like the HN readership (who also often have a strong online civil rights interest) make pretty good candidates for helping the network out via running a Tor relay!
Looking at the current list, the CCC contributes a substantial slab of resources to the overall network. It's a pretty suboptimal situation that the network performance could be impacted/compromised by one organisation (potentially) pulling its support for whatever reason.
Spammers/scammers use Tor. And they use it in a big way.
One of the issues with total Tor anonymity is that yes, the "bad guys" will almost certainly come. Because they can.
I am not saying that banning Tor outright is the best thing sites like HN would do, but seeing the ratio of regular Tor trafic vs. spammy Tor trafic on much smaller site myself, I can't blame them; almost anything that comes from Tor is spam.
Sad reality.
One of the issues with total Tor anonymity is that yes, the "bad guys" will almost certainly come. Because they can.
I am not saying that banning Tor outright is the best thing sites like HN would do, but seeing the ratio of regular Tor trafic vs. spammy Tor trafic on much smaller site myself, I can't blame them; almost anything that comes from Tor is spam.
Sad reality.
> Spammers/scammers use Tor. And they use it in a big way.
Yes, and they use the rest of the internet, too. Maybe we should ban everything.
Yes, and they use the rest of the internet, too. Maybe we should ban everything.
yes, but, in the language of conditional probability:
P(spammer|non-tor) is quite low (there are not that much spammers), while P(spammer|tor) is almost one (almost everyone coming from Tor is a spammer).
P(spammer|non-tor) is quite low (there are not that much spammers), while P(spammer|tor) is almost one (almost everyone coming from Tor is a spammer).
Email spam is responsive for 85%-95% of all emails. That's almost all. Yet, nobody would seriously suggest to ban email.
[deleted]
I'm pretty sure Marx in Das Kapital talked about having three trading blocs. This isn't a new idea. Get everyone under one system and then, with any law on the books, you can expand that law incrementally (the Fabian way, after Fabius Maximus) in order to slowly wear down your opponent, via attrition.
Ahh consider the Chinese method, pass so many laws that someone is always guilty of something, selectively enforce those laws when and if some individual does something to piss you off and they need to be put in their place.
"Chinese method"? I'm sorry to break it like this to you, but you have just described the West.
Exactly. This describes what's happening right here in the U.S.
See, for example these articles:
Revisiting the Explosive Growth of Federal Crimes
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/06/revisiting-...
The Expanding Federal Police Power
http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb105-17.html
And the U.S. has a much higher percentage of its population in prison than China does:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/world/americas/23iht-23pri...
See, for example these articles:
Revisiting the Explosive Growth of Federal Crimes
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/06/revisiting-...
The Expanding Federal Police Power
http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb105-17.html
And the U.S. has a much higher percentage of its population in prison than China does:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/world/americas/23iht-23pri...
Have you any source for that? I have no reason to suspect that China has more laws than other countries. The legal system of China is mostly based on various European civil law systems. And since their legal system is more recent it should logically have fewer laws.
According to lawinfochina.com there seem to be 307 active laws (484 if we include decisions on the relevant legal issues). No idea though if that is much compared to other countries but it does not sound that much to me.
http://www.lawinfochina.com/search/SearchLaw.aspx
EDIT: After thinking some more on it 307 sounds like incredibly few laws. About the number you would want in a lean government.
According to lawinfochina.com there seem to be 307 active laws (484 if we include decisions on the relevant legal issues). No idea though if that is much compared to other countries but it does not sound that much to me.
http://www.lawinfochina.com/search/SearchLaw.aspx
EDIT: After thinking some more on it 307 sounds like incredibly few laws. About the number you would want in a lean government.
CleanIT's response to it: http://www.cleanitproject.eu/edri-publishes-clean-it-discuss...
Apparently, this falls outside of tptacek's "jurisdiction". He's nowhere to be seen!
Luckily we've got Mr. Atropos taking care of things.
Luckily we've got Mr. Atropos taking care of things.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120921/03581820457/eu-off...
I love those bits
"The use of platforms in languages abuse specialists or abuse systems do not master should be unacceptable and preferably technically impossible."
"Internet companies must allow only real, common names. These must be entered when registering."