×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Plans For Widespread Monitoring of Communication In Europe Revealed

Unknown Lamer posted about a year and a half ago | from the 1984-slowly-becoming-life-manual dept.

EU 166

TrueSatan writes "A leak from the Clean IT project reveals how it has been subverted from its original, much more innocuous, goals into a surveillance horror story with democratic freedoms and personal rights being the victims." The leaked document in question. Gems include member states repealing anti-filtering laws and a mandate that ISPs be held liable for not reporting terrorist use of their networks. The Clean IT Project counters that there's nothing to see here (amazingly, through a series of tweets with a journalist).

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

166 comments

Just use encryption. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445415)

Problem solved.

Re:Just use encryption. (5, Insightful)

Yvanhoe (564877) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445527)

The next step is to ban it. Do not wait until it is too late to show your disagreement.

Re:Just use encryption. (3, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445585)

How could anyone meaningfully ban encryption? First of all, financial security is built on top of encryption algorithms. Second of all, they're algorithms. I would be like trying to ban F=MA.

Re:Just use encryption. (4, Informative)

FoolishOwl (1698506) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445595)

Then they don't "meaningfully" ban encryption. They just use it as an excuse to harass, arrest, and interrogate people they don't like.

Re:Just use encryption. (4, Insightful)

penix1 (722987) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445635)

No, it would be more like you are guilty of whatever they are accusing you of BECAUSE you used encryption. Why would you encrypt it in the first place if you didn't have something to hide?

Re:Just use encryption. (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445777)

Such logic is already in use in the United States where people are arrested for supposed crimes and their unwillingness to hand over the passwords to their encrypted hard drives is used as prime evidence that they have something to hide.

It's a wonderful Catch-22 they have pretty much everyone in. Protect your personal information from the bad guys and then they use the fact that you are using such protection to say that you must be involved in something illegal, otherwise why would you be encrypting your information.

As long as they can keep using this as a tactic to arrest and detain people without real cause other than the encrypting of personal information, they will not make such encryption against the law.

Re:Just use encryption. (4, Insightful)

gizmonic (302697) | about a year and a half ago | (#41446321)

The problem with that here in the USA is that people are completely clueless about their rights. The Fifth Amendment is there to protect the innocent from over zealous prosecution. The second someone on a jury buys the "why use it if you have nothing to hide" argument, they've essentially bought into the defendant being guilty and needing to prove innocence. Unfortunately, most of them can't think a thought deeper than the last 30 second commercial they saw, so good luck getting them to comprehend something with that level of importance.

Re:Just use encryption. (2)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446717)

Too true. I call the it the homo almost-sapiens phenomenon. It's an amazing idea; two species capable of interbreeding, homo sapiens and homo almost-sapiens, but one not quite a thinking man and, unfortunately, these are the ones in the majority.

USAians (0)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447969)

Perfectly content to live their entire lives in government prison - provided they're allowed shitty network TV and guns (that are useless against this type of prison).

Re:Just use encryption. (1)

AHuxley (892839) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445725)

How do you ban VoIP if your telco loves its international rates?
You make the risk of been caught very chilling -
Deep packet inspection of ports used, known data and some nice new equipment in every isp.
You home, dorm, RV, boat, park bench is not a bank doing transactions every night for hours and the telco knows it.....
A skilled user helps a new stranger in a chatroom who is a friend of a friend...
First warning, a payment and invited down for a simple chat, some free IT advice and the app that caused the problem.
Second time a much longer chat in a smaller room with much larger payment needed and a glossy sticker for your computer.
Third time your home is raided and your life turned upside down. All your data is inspected, hardware not returned. Any IT/Telco/Tech work with any security requirements is now out of reach.
Import/export, federal crypto laws start to add up.

Re:F=MA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446281)

You mean: FEMA ?

Re:Just use encryption. (2, Informative)

stanlyb (1839382) | about a year and a half ago | (#41446139)

You mean, just like it is in France? Where using encryption to encode your mail is considered criminal?????

Re:Just use encryption. (4, Informative)

romiz (757548) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447261)

It is legal to encrypt anything in France since 1996 for 128-bit symmetrical keys, and for any key since 2004. While the law was valid for a long time, I do not have knowledge of any prosecution on that basis.

Re:Just use encryption. (5, Informative)

vincefn (705639) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447357)

You mean, just like it is in France? Where using encryption to encode your mail is considered criminal?????

Nice trolling: encryption is perfectly legal in France. The French chapter of the Free Software Foundation even took care of getting an official approval for encryption tools like GnuPG and OpenSSL. See http://fsffrance.org/dcssi/dcssi.fr.html#dossiers [fsffrance.org] (link in French)

And for a governmental source, look at the ssi.gouv.fr website, specifically on:
http://www.ssi.gouv.fr/fr/reglementation-ssi/cryptologie/index.html [ssi.gouv.fr] (link in French)
first paragraph states:"Under article 30 of Law 2004-575 of June 21st, 2004 on confidence in the digital economy, the use of cryptology is free in France."

Re:Just use encryption. (2)

captainpanic (1173915) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447403)

This.
Many people just don't seem to care. It's either too difficult to understand, or they think they can find technological workarounds.

Those who do understand the implications and who don't think workarounds are the solution should make as much noise as possible. I have nothing to hide, but that doesn't mean I want my government to listen to me all the time. It's none of their business.

Re:Just use encryption. (1)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447973)

There is probably not even a need to limit or ban encryption, because in a sense the Internet is already heavily regulated and not what it used to be. Thanks to all kinds of NATs, packet filters, and "intelligent" routers, the times when you could just connect one computer to another one to transmit information are long gone. Nowadays, if you want to be sure that your message reaches the destination without using a central server (which can be surveilled, subpoenaed, put under draconian laws, etc.) you need to dig through miriads of obscure heuristic NAT traversal techniques and use all kinds of hacks like ICMP tunneling or whatever. That in combination with government trojans, traffic analysis, and anti hacking (anti security) laws should suffice to suppress the citizens of Europe.

Re:Just use encryption. (4, Insightful)

ThatsMyNick (2004126) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445655)

They can still track who you talk to, who your friends are, what websites you visit, who you call (assuming your calls encrypted, if not what you talk).
 
Encryption hardly solves the problem.

Re:Just use encryption. (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446091)

You should read about onion routing. Tor is one solution to this problem. It makes it impossible for outside parties to know with whom you communicated. The US Navy thought it would be a cool thing to aid dissenters in oppressive third world countries, not realizing it would also aid dissenters in oppressive first world countries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_(anonymity_network)

Re:Just use encryption. (4, Interesting)

Artifakt (700173) | about a year and a half ago | (#41446293)

Onion routing and similar by the big dogs relies on there being lots of other users of such systems. If only a few Western government sponsored spies were using a Tor-like system in a place such as Iran, then the local authorities would be willing to devote a lot of their resources to trying to catch those few people. Devoting those same sort of resources to catching 10,000 people who turn out to be just trying to get locally illegal porn or pirate music to maybe get one spy OTOH is terribly wasteful. The Iranian government does not want to spend that many resources on prosecuting very minor crimes by the thousands or even millions just to get an occasional real spy, just like the United States would not want to conduct house to house searches of the entirity of New York City to catch one bank robber, or set up constantly relocating roadside stops every five miles all over every interstate highway and stop all commercial truck traffic, just to nab the occasional drunk.
      The problem here is, the Intelligence agencies that developed Onion routing knew there had to be a lot of trivially illegal, semi-legal and fully legal traffic to hide their uses, and in some cases, they actually spread information to aid that civilian development (as in your example of the US Navy). So, either laws against these systems will not pass because the government people proposing them will be called aside to explain why they shouldn't, or the laws will pass, but all the international Intelligence players will know those countries that passed them have switched to something else and hope to make it harder for the lagging countries to continue to use these methods by encouraging international adoption. Put more simply, if a law against onion routing software was actually passed in the US, it would prove the CIA, etc. were no longer relying on onion routing software, and everybody else's intelligence depts. would know this. But frequently proposing such laws only to have them come to nothing, leaves other people's agencies wondering just what the hell they are dealing with.

That's the real problem isn't it (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446659)

Human beings are just a pebbles throw away from greatness. We can get the freedom, and empower people to develop something like the internet but they just fall slightly short when it comes to designing these technologies with the level of care that is needed.

We wouldn't even be having this conversation if the guys who designed the internet built Tor into it from the beginning. If they were clever enough to devise a method for communication digitally over telephone lines, why couldn't they go a step further and make routing encrypted, or even have bit torrent built into the kernel. Have anti root kit, built into every kernel/root. Until we humans start properly, and I mean really properly designing technology (we need to be more conservative), we will always be facing these obstacles.

The Only People Who Benefit From This (4, Insightful)

GeneralTurgidson (2464452) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445425)

Are consultants and hardware manufacturers. The government has no idea what to do with this information, and its going to spend an enormous amount of money for what will end up being a data vault that is locked away because its too big of a failure to admit they were wrong in the first place to attempt this.

Re:The Only People Who Benefit From This (5, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445855)

And then the wrong person gets elected to office and this vault becomes your living nightmare. The problem with this sort of data collection isn't the benevolent intent of the present, it's the malevolent intent of the future.

Eu is appointed not elected (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446001)

The wrong people are already in charge. EU Commission is appointed, not elected, They don't take their direction from EU voters, they take their direction, mostly it seems from non-EU governments and lobbyists. ACTA was the rule not the exception.

I'm amazed they're using terrorism, the copyright lobbyists suggested CP as their primary weapon. Give us copyright filtering or you diddle kiddies:

See this article:
http://boingboing.net/2010/04/28/music-industry-spoke.html

"Child pornography is great," the speaker at the podium declared enthusiastically. "It is great because politicians understand child pornography. By playing that card, we can get them to act, and start blocking sites. And once they have done that, we can get them to start blocking file sharing sites".

The venue was a seminar organized by the American Chamber of Commerce in Stockholm on May 27, 2007, under the title "Sweden -- A Safe Haven for Pirates?". The speaker was Johan Schlüter from the Danish Anti-Piracy Group, a lobby organization for the music and film industry associations, like IFPI and others...

"One day we will have a giant filter that we develop in close cooperation with IFPI and MPA. We continuously monitor the child porn on the net, to show the politicians that filtering works. Child porn is an issue they understand," Johan Schlüter said with a grin, his whole being radiating pride and enthusiasm from the podium.

Re:Eu is appointed not elected (3, Interesting)

Mashiki (184564) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447327)

The wrong people are already in charge. EU Commission is appointed, not elected, They don't take their direction from EU voters, they take their direction, mostly it seems from non-EU governments and lobbyists. ACTA was the rule not the exception.

And the last time I told people on /. that the EU was a defacto dictatorship in the making people called me insane because there was a massive organization over the top that's appointed. Hah. Yeah, sure I'm the crazy one. You know your post just scratches the surface, these are the same ones that pushed through the "monetary fiat" rule that lets them basically turn on the printing presses of every EU member and bankrupt them, without any say-so of the elected government. If I remember right, the amount they're allowed to print is somewhere around 1T per member state. Yeah, so...enjoy that...

Re:Eu is appointed not elected (1, Interesting)

kenorland (2691677) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447433)

When you look at its 20th century history, Europe is barely democratic. Spain and Portugal were military dictatorships, East Germany was communist, as were many of the new states, and West Germany was rebuilt by ex-Nazis. Northern Ireland was a war zone. Large parts of Europe are in bed with one church or another. It's silly to expect a continent with that kind of history to have much of a commitment to liberty or democracy. To be sure, the European desire for peace, liberty, and democracy is strong, but they have always had problems achieving it. By historical standards, the current period of peace in Europe is barely a breather.

Re:Eu is appointed not elected (2)

lordholm (649770) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447553)

Well, not for no reason... in a dictatorship, using the modern meaning of the word as in "not a democracy", most people are afraid of opening their mouths. If they say the wrong thing, they will be dragged away in vans, during the middle of the night and disappear; or in the less murderous dictatorships, simply be tossed into jail or prison for an indefinite time.

This is not about to happen in the EU anytime soon, so yes you need to be insane if you attribute these things to the EU.

Re:Eu is appointed not elected (2)

Teun (17872) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447987)

I'm undoing moderation to refute your silly comment about the democratic status of the EU.
The commission is, like in several EU nation governments, made up of bureaucrats, they are appointed by the democratically controlled governments of the member states.
In many EU nations democracy is by way of an elected parliament controlling a government that in itself is not elected.
And we cherish this principle of Trias Politica, an independent legislature (the parliament), an independent judiciary and an independent executive (the government).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers [wikipedia.org]

As a matter of fact, those of us who subscribe to this system frown on systems where there is collusion between the government and parliament.

Re:Eu is appointed not elected (2)

kenorland (2691677) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447413)

They don't take their direction from EU voters, they take their direction, mostly it seems from non-EU governments and lobbyists. ACTA was the rule not the exception.

Actually, they take a lot of their direction from EU-based lobbyists, and many of those EU-based lobbyists are also messing up US politics. Yes, EU-based corporations are at least as bad as US-based corporations, arguably worse. And Europe also has strong churches and strong unions that want to get their slice of the pie too, and usually succeed.

The US is really the least of Europe's worries, but it serves as a convenient scapegoat for European politicians and European lobbyists: "America made us do it!".

American Chamber of Commerce = GOP (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41447457)

The article quotes the American Chamber of Commerce, which is a Republican industry funded lobby group. Its sound bites were then used by politicians lobbying for EU's version of ACTA.

http://www.techdirt.com/blog/?tag=maxime+verhagen

e.g. Maxime Verhagen accusing opponents of support child porn if they rejected the EU version of ACTA.

So you made the claim American is being used as a scapegoat, but you didn't refute the claim I made.

Re:Eu is appointed not elected (5, Informative)

lordholm (649770) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447531)

The EU commission is not DIRECTLY elected, but neither is any other government in Europe. With the exceptions of a few presidents (most being powerless and appointed) no head of state/government is directly elected in Europe. De-facto, most governments are picked from parliament, though this is not a legal requirement in most states. The commission is in fact elected by parliament, although it is also at the same time appointed by the memberstates' governments. In most states in Europe, the prime minister is appointed (in some cases by the king/queen/president and in other cases by the speaker of parliament who is appointed in some other way), and then elected by parliament. This is actually not that much different. Although, it would clearly be better if the commission is taken from parliament from a democratic standpoint, some states does not seem to like the idea that much. But things are changing for the better.

Following the Lisbon treaty, the Commission president will be selected from the candidates fielded by the European parties starting with the next EP-elections in 2014. In addition to this, the future group (consisting of some of the EU foreign ministers) have also fielded the idea that the commission should be selected by the commission president and subject to the normal parliamentary scrutiny of a memberstate government (and presumably with a requirement to have one commissioner from each memberstate).

EU Commission is NOT elected, not even indirect (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41447919)

If I want to sack Gordon Brown, I can vote for David Cameron, there is a clear choice which causes the change.
If I want to sack Barosso that's not possible. The EU elections are out of sync with national elections, the candidates for the EU job aren't even known at voting time, let alone who would vote for whom. So it's not 'vote for Labour is a vote for Barosso, a vote for Cons is a vote for ....' because you don't know whose standing and no party can tell you at national election time who they will vote for at the next EU opportunity.

So, IN NO WAY, can European voters choose even INDIRECTLY who will run the EU Commission.

2014 change will not fix this, it token change. A non choice choice.

Re:Eu is appointed not elected (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447887)

The wrong people are already in charge. EU Commission is appointed, not elected,

Yes, appointed by our elected governments to serve them. They are civil servants. Of course we do have directly elected Members of the European Parliament too.

They don't take their direction from EU voters, they take their direction, mostly it seems from non-EU governments and lobbyists. ACTA was the rule not the exception.

The EU killed ACTA. It listened to its citizens opposition and made the right decision, despite heavy lobbying and pressure from the US.

Re:The Only People Who Benefit From This (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446795)

That's true and it's not just the information - it's the precedent. Actually, I'd say it mostly about setting the precedent for human beings to bend over and take it. Seems, like we're mostly being led into a dark cul de sac.

Re:The Only People Who Benefit From This (2)

DarkOx (621550) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447569)

Oh somebody understands what to do with it. Identifying the terrorists is a plausible use to sell some bleeding heart politicians and the public on it. In reality there is not algorithm heuristic or otherwise that is:

A) Efficient enough to go through a large enough portion of the data to correlate enough information on today's computing and storage platforms

B) Accurate enough to really spot the difference between a terrorist and teenager having a bad day. They might be good enough to flag 10's of 1000's of people for an army of human intelligence analysts to look at but that is as near as it gets.

C) Has a good enough command of enough languages to start to A or B for the portion of the population that has to this point been the frequent source of terrorist activity.

While the EU intelligence organizations and the NSA likely have some thing slightly better or at least bigger IBM's Watson demonstrations last year were probably fairly representative of "the state of the art" as large natural language unstructured data correlation engines go. I think we can see its not good enough for terror spotting.

No what this is really for is to ensure that when someone does something otherwise legal that causes grief to the wrong parties they will be able to find something on that person. Its been the way of tyrants to solve the problem of civil rights since democracy began, just pass enough laws such that everyone is guilty of something, than you have as much control as under any autocracy. They problem was being able to be sure you had the evidence to paint that individual as guilty when the time came.

Sift thru the data store for any possible illegal action by $person is exactly something that we can do with this technology and that is how its going to get used.

Re:The Only People Who Benefit From This (4, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445947)

They could always use it to source new episodes of CSI. "Zoom in on that packet! Right there, between the 1 and the 0 -- enhance that. We found the killer's digital fingerprint inside this captured packet. Gear up, let's go get this dirtbag!" Kidding aside, you're right but only to a point. There are few people who would deny that the Allied power's interception and decryption of the Axis' communications during WWII was invaluable in helping win the war. What isn't known is that many of those communiques still haven't been read. Even back then, the amount of information intelligence services had to sort through was enormous.

The problem in the intelligence community today is not finding new ways of getting the data -- in fact, the technology to do that has been installed in every telco switch and every internet access point since not long after AT&T started replacing phone operators with banks of programmable relays. The effort required to get the data is trivial. The amount of resources required to store the data is less trivial, but we already have massive data centers sitting in remote parts of the United States doing nothing but storing said information for various law enforcement agencies -- not that they're hard to find, just look for images that have been cut and pasted from other locations on satellite imagery, if they bother to hide them at all.

However, making use of that information has always been problematic -- and most intelligence failures, including 9/11, Pearl Harbor, Oklahoma city, and a very long list of military intelligence SNAFUs in this country can trace their origins to the lack of analysis of the data. Converting raw digital data into actionable intelligence still requires a lot of man power. A substantial portion of the NSA, FBI, and CIA's budget is dedicated towards the very simple task of translating. As in, converting say, islamic into english. A more substantial portion is dedicated to people analyzing those translations, sorting through the massive amount of information, and compiling it into situation reports, which are then either posted internally to wiki-like data stores, or forwarded up the chain of command and assembled into briefings where management decides if its actionable. Only a small portion of their budget is dedicated to capturing and storing data -- and yes, that also includes all the birds they have orbiting.

Analysis of available information has always been the achilles heel of intelligence services. I doubt even 0.1% of the information stored in all those data centers is ever used. The rest just sits there, gathering dust, on the off-chance that someday, an analyst will push a button labelled "Tell me everything about X", and the drive with that information on it will spin up and spit it out into a report.

Re:The Only People Who Benefit From This (4, Informative)

Animats (122034) | about a year and a half ago | (#41446269)

The problem in the intelligence community today is not finding new ways of getting the data -- in fact, the technology to do that has been installed in every telco switch and every internet access point since not long after AT&T started replacing phone operators with banks of programmable relays. The effort required to get the data is trivial.

Big-time wiretapping never went into US electromechanical phone switches. I had to look into this once. Until switches went digital, wiretapping was a huge pain for law enforcement. Court-ordered wiretaps required manual wiring at the distributing frame. New York Telephone billed law enforcement for wiretaps at leased line rates. When Guliani was a prosecutor going after the Mafia, they had serious budget problems paying for wiretaps. On one occasion, the FBI didn't pay their bill, and New York Telephone billed the party being wiretapped. That was one of the motivations for CALEA.

There was a very limited capability to listen in remotely by using the Automatic Line Insulation Test equipment. That equipment normally cycled through lines in the pre-dawn hours, when cables are damp, applying test voltages across the line and between line and ground. (This is the cause of the early morning "bell tap" problem with some low-end phones.) ALIT could be used remotely to test or listen in on a line. But an ALIT unit in the crossbar era was three racks of test gear, and a crossbar central office would typically only have two of them for 50,000 lines. Sometimes telcos would let the FBI use one for a while, but tying it up for any length of time interfered with operations. So dial-up wiretapping was strictly for emergencies.

Now we have wiretapping designed into everything.

Re:The Only People Who Benefit From This (2)

oboeaaron (595536) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447689)

A substantial portion of the NSA, FBI, and CIA's budget is dedicated towards the very simple task of translating. As in, converting say, islamic into english.

I can see the problem. Islamic language scholars are really hard to find. Similarly, during WWII it was difficult for the allies to keep up with the volume of sigintel from Europe, Africa, and other countries due to the shortage of individuals qualified to translate from the Lutheran and Catholic.

-Pedantic Reader

Re:The Only People Who Benefit From This (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446007)

The government has no idea what to do with this information

I keep on hearing this from posters here on Slashdot and elsewhere in the blogosphere or anywhere there is commentary on the subject.

"the data is going to be too big, to do anything useful with it" is a very common meme.

But this is so far from the truth. Just look at what Google has done with the disparate information on the net. In a sea of data it is very easy to find identifiable information of individuals from very little.

I started playing the "who is this guy emailing me, really" game after dealing with a bunch of "Craigslist Flakes". As a simple example: Just looking at X-Originating-IP in an email combined with Google can reveal a great deal of personal information about the sender.

The editors of Slashdot can even try to extrapolate data on me right now. Submissions I've posted, pages I've visited. They can look for my ip somewhere else on the net and try to associate it with a name. It's not an exact science since they are only going by my IP and it sometimes changes. But as with all things, that can be worked out. To Slashdot I am not really an Anonymous Coward.

The data collected by the government will be easily searched/correlated/whatever when they need it to be. It's not going to be too big.

Re:The Only People Who Benefit From This (2)

c0lo (1497653) | about a year and a half ago | (#41446283)

Are consultants and hardware manufacturers.

True. Page 7.

8.Governments must subsidize competent NGOs that substantially contribute to reducing terrorist use of the Internet...
10. Governments should subsidize the initial development of software...

11. Governments should include Internet companies' track record [sic] on reducing terrorist use of Internet as a criterion in purchasing policies...

But...

[PP] The government has no idea what to do with this information,

While true, the above sins by omission... you see, not even they (Clean IT) know what exactly is "the terrorist use of Internet"... and it's highly probable it is not in their interest for somebody to know: as a "private self/un-regulated police" not accountable to anyone, ambiguity helps their bottom line.

[page 9] 3. All kinds of Internet companies LEA and NGOs, but not governments should promote the use of ...
[page 10] g. Internet companies must be sufficiently (quantity and quality) staffed or supported to handle reports. Recognizing illegal, terrorist use of internet requires specialist knowledge on terrorism, (national) legislation and (national) cultural differences
[Page 11] a. No wording of European standard service/business conditions or abuse policy should be recommended...
c. Local law and what is considered as unwanted by local society must be a decisive factor. "Unwanted by local society" may refer to content that is fully legal and which may also be in line with terms and conditions of the relevant service provider

We need COMMUNISM, now! (1, Funny)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445449)

Capitalsme is dying and it is time for the workers to bury it! For the dictatorship of the PROLETARIAT!!!!!!!! underpants

Re:We need COMMUNISM, now! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445805)

Capitalsme is dying and it is time for the workers to bury it! For the dictatorship of the PROLETARIAT!!!!!!!! underpants

USSR style communism or Mao Zedong style communism.

Because they both worked so much better than western style capitalism.

Homelands for native peoples (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445589)

You can learn about other cultures by traveling and free trade.

Mixing different groups together used to be good -- when there was assimilation. Now, not so much. Countries should add a "promise to culturally assimilate" clause before allowing further immigration.

Note: Blasphemy the law in many places. Be careful of the slippery slope that brings that to your town.

I'd have more to say, but I need to make a chicharones run, while it is still legal.

yet another slippery slope (4, Insightful)

kermidge (2221646) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445601)

I made a real try at reading the doc in a dispassionate, scholarly fashion, but couldn't make it past page ten: I kept seeing in mind's eye the substitution of other words for "terrorist," leading to "anybody we don't like" and ending with "everyone except us." Knowing that this and the many similar plans would have been a Stasi wet-dream didn't help.

Re:yet another slippery slope (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445923)

Knowing that this and the many similar plans would have been a Stasi wet-dream didn't help.

Well... something needs to be done!!! It is unacceptable that Europe falls behind Iran [reuters.com] in providing a clear internet for its citizens.

</sarcasm>

aw (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446985)

you missed out on page 11 then. It's wonderful:

"a. No wording of European standard service/business conditions or abuse policy should be recommended. What should be recommended is a best practice how to [_*]handle[*_] abuse, and how to make such policy transparent;"

There, you have it folks. The mob run Europe too, they might even be more set up there who knows. I'm not going back there if I can help it. It's so brazenly thuggish, that it's remarkably easy to decipher. This is their wish list of course though. They don't have a chance of getting most of this imo.

Resist!

Net Neutrality (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445649)

...Because giving governments "oversight" of our communications would never turn into a surveillance horror story.

Re:Net Neutrality (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445873)

Because the ISPs would never voluntarily become surveillance lackeys for governments or other interests. Oh wait...

Just Ban Encryption - Has Already Started (5, Informative)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445677)

An article from March 19, 2012 shows that The Ban On Encryption [copyisright.se] is already a Work In Progress.

Re:Just Ban Encryption - Has Already Started (4, Insightful)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445853)

Don't forget about pumping the omnipresent cameras into facial recognition software, and dumping it all into tracking databases. This on top of character recognition tracking license plates.

Oh, you're gonna get Godwinned. Hitler, Napoleon, Genghis Khan, these all approve.

Re:Just Ban Encryption - Has Already Started (0)

JockTroll (996521) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447031)

Neither Napoleon nor Genghis Khan needed or required internal surveillance. Of course, you know nothing of history. Typical loserboy nerd.

Re:Just Ban Encryption - Has Already Started (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about a year and a half ago | (#41446137)

An article from March 19, 2012 shows that The Ban On Encryption is already a Work In Progress.

Good luck with that. Encryption keeps the cost of doing business on the internet low. Without it, transactions would have to be sent in the clear, which means they would be vulnerable to interception and manipulation. Realtime modification of IP packets (or recording of payload) is a trivial task -- most routers and managed switches have the ability to filter and mirror IP packets. If you make encryption illegal, you're handing even the dullest criminals carte blanche access to our financial accounts. Business online would become a very risky venture.

They'll never ban encryption. They will, however, probably engineer backdoors into encryption algorithms and equipment via things like the TPMs installed in people's computers, and add unique identifiers and such to assist in tracking. The more complex the system, the more likely it is to have a backdoor in it that will survive inspection.

Bill of rights constitudion or whatever (4, Interesting)

EmperorOfCanada (1332175) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445703)

The various groups such as the police, moral majorities, or whomever will keep badgering the politicians for these types of laws to "protect the children" or "protect our rights" but in reality these laws are all of the type: music leads to dancing which leads to the unspeakable. The only thing to finally put a stop to them is to enshrine privacy rights in whatever constitutions, bills of rights or whatever structure has the final common sense say in any modern legal system. A well written code should last for decades as it should not be technology specific just information specific. It should spell out what data the government can gather without a warrant. It should also spell out that corporations can only gather the information required for billing customers who have agreed to be billed. Any other information gathering should be a civil rights violation. So if the police record license plates as you drive by then boom they are busted. Or if we get some cool medical implants that record stuff and the hospital gathers it and passes it on to a drug company or insurance company then busted.

Personally I would even like to see my grocery store stopped from gathering my shopping habits. Basically tally my total charge me and then forget that I was there. I want it so that the police aren't even allowed to ask for data from a company's computer unless they have a warrant. Not even a peek.

If these things aren't stopped now then the new normal will be a government and corporations who will be able to know way too much about you. A grocery store that pulls up your phone IMEI and asks the phone company who you are. Then asks to see what sites you have been surfing to see what they can sell you. What is stopping the phone company and your ISP from selling this data?

I can see a 13 year old boy called into the principal's office and expelled because of the "disgusting" sites they were surfing at home the night before. If the ISP were owned by some bible thumper what law is stopping them from handing this data to anyone? Right now as long as you put it into the terms of service where we all blindly click "I agree" the company should be pretty safe. Also those terms of service almost always blah blah about sharing with 3rd parties.

My guess as to the main reason that this isn't done more is that most people don't have the skills to properly mix and match such different data sets. Plus some companies might be reluctant to really piss of their customers. But when any of these companies are on the ropes financially they will make any deal with any devil that comes along.

Re:Bill of rights constitudion or whatever (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446319)

Personally I would even like to see my grocery store stopped from gathering my shopping habits. Basically tally my total charge me and then forget that I was there.

You can do this today, if you want: Pay with cash. Don't use a store discount card.

Re:Bill of rights constitudion or whatever (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446639)

music leads to dancing which leads to the unspeakable

No. Being lonely and horny leads to the unspeakable. Music and dancing are social activities which create the process of dating, which in turn cures being lonely and horny; temporarily.

Re:Bill of rights constitudion or whatever (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446777)

I can see a 13 year old boy called into the principal's office and

Selective outrage. You won't even blink while the statists inflict [mcclatchydc.com] protein deficiency on your kid.

Re:Bill of rights constitudion or whatever (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41447245)

You're more likely to get in trouble by posting politically incorrect views. Viewing porn would have been an issue in the 50s if the internet was around then.

All paid for by... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445717)

Microsoft and Google fines...

Re:All paid for by... (5, Interesting)

Z34107 (925136) | about a year and a half ago | (#41446015)

I find it ironic that the states who want to fine Google for Street View and recording stray broadcasts are preparing to DPI the entire internet.

Yes, I said "ironic." Come at me, pedants.

Re:All paid for by... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446215)

It's like rain on your wedding day.

it's a "history is written by the vicor" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446919)

kind of thing. The rat bast@rd states (Germany, UK etc. all Royal family ridden) start it, followed by the broken minion states - Greece, Hungary etc. and all the while have the media make it look like the starter states are the good ones, and the freedom-loving ones like France, Finland, Norway, Ireland etc. will be recorded by history as being the bad guys...

Here is the list of the true satan-worshipping states of Europe:

        Netherlands
        Germany
        United Kingdom
        Belgium
        Spain

Move along now slaves :(

Re:All paid for by... (1)

kenorland (2691677) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447459)

That's because the anti-Google propaganda in Europe was driven by European publishers, TV stations, and lobbyists who saw the Internet in general, and Google in particular, cutting into their profits. Add to that the usual dose of European anti-Americanism, and you have the basis for the extreme hostility to Google. European corporations, their lobbyists, and the governments they have in their pockets have no problem with violating the privacy rights of European citizens themselves. Neither do the various "state security services" of the oh-so-democratic European governments.

World Learders are preparing for WW3, no doubt (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445753)

As in before W1, W2, large scale increased survailance happened.

And also note, us govt is buying up large amounts of ammo, stock piling , building fema camps etc..

Stupid govts, if there is a WW3, I hope the aftermath has no more unions, or big countries, but 5x more smaller countries, that none can ever grow too big to rule, or too rich to build massive weapons cache.

Re:The next WW... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446713)

... will be the people vs. the governments around the world.

That's the fruit of globalisation: No more war between nations, yeah right.

Who's stupid enough to go clearnet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445759)

Say I were a terrorist, a drug dealer (Silkroad!), or a pedophile.

I'd be using TOR at the least, maybe even private relays or a darknet exclusive to my (very illegal) purposes. How is this going to solve anything?

Re:Who's stupid enough to go clearnet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445779)

So what I ask, is this just continuing social darwinism and picking off the lowest hanging fruit, or actually finding the really dangerous baddies?

Oh the European Union ! (2)

bigscience (2737985) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445765)

Well the way things are going in the EU it doesn't seem likely it will be around in 10 or 12 years time. They are already breaking up in terms of monetary union. Besides which, every story like this attracts a whole flurry of comments like "OMG the government is gonna be watching us - time to go live on the moon" I dont see what is wrong with trying to stop people accessing information which is clearly only there to either assist in weapons making or to provide resources for people who want to cause widespead terror. What is more frightening is the demands the British government are seeking to put on Wikipedia regarding the monitoring and blocking of certain web pages to british citizens http://www.publictechnology.net/news/wikipedia-boss-wont-support-technologically-incompetent-uk-govt-web-plan/37139 [publictechnology.net] The Home Office has admitted it cannot force foreign companies like Google and Facebook to hand over sensitive personal data and is relying on people like Wales to agree to do so voluntarily. Elsewhere World Wide Web creator Tim Berners-Lee also weighed in against the bill. "In Britain, like in the US, there has been a series of Bills that would give government very strong powers to, for example, collect data. I am worried about that," he told The Times. "If the UK introduces draconian legislation that allows the Government to block websites or to snoop on people, which decreases privacy, in future indexes they may find themselves further down the list."

Grass greener...over there. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445773)

Gosh darn it! There goes my fantasy that Europe is better than the US.

Re:Grass greener...over there. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445911)

You actually ever believed that shit? Europeans have made an art out of fascism, police states and racial genocide.

Re:Grass greener...over there. (2)

0123456 (636235) | about a year and a half ago | (#41446083)

Europeans have made an art out of fascism, police states and racial genocide.

But they get FREE HEALTHCARE!

Re:Grass greener...over there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446313)

I know you're trolling, but Europe is comprised of many states with completely different cultures, languages and histories. Some rednecks like the Germans and English have a nasty history of genocide and hatred (Mau Mau concentration camps in Africa decades after the end of world war 2), to be honest they should be combined with African gene pools until whatever remains is culturally inoffensive, and some with no history of imperialism and slaughter at all. So think before you troll!

Re:Grass greener...over there. (1)

JockTroll (996521) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447073)

The big ones are, however, the worst ones. Except the Scandinavian nations, mostly, but even little Belgium has massive amounts of African blood on its hands. France? It is, and always has been and will be, a wretched hive of racism and inequality. Britain? Imperialistic pieces of shit. Germans? Organized genocide. Spain, Portugal? Colonialist pieces of shit. Italy? Yes, even fun-loving Italians have proved enthusiastic genocide followers, and were the first modern nation to employ weapons of mass destruction on civilians (gas attacks in Ethiopia and Eritrea) and just loved mass executions. The average European is a vicious, rabid dog.

Re:Grass greener...over there. (1)

AHuxley (892839) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447225)

Schwedentrunk (Swedish drink) - when Sweden moved down in 1618–1648 their baggage train had a special way of making the locals hand over anything of interest.

Re:Grass greener...over there. (1)

cffrost (885375) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447373)

The average European is a vicious, rabid dog.

So what? Tell us what's important, JockTroll: Is the average European a loserboy?

Re:Grass greener...over there. (1)

r_a_trip (612314) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447809)

The average European is a vicious, rabid dog.

Oh come on, don't flatter us! We'd almost asume you think we are actually human.

Re:Grass greener...over there. (1)

Hentes (2461350) | about a year and a half ago | (#41447427)

Europe is better because everytime our governments try somehing like this, the people have a chance to vote it down in the EP.

America! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445877)

Get out of Europe. We don't want your "terrorism" here.

The real evilness: mandated "real identities" (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41445879)

Anyone else read that? The part that pushes "internet companies" to REQUIRE and verify what they consider "real" identities, including "real" pictures of users on social-media sites? How can that not lead to, essentially, government-enabled internet stalking and the complete extinguishing of legally-protected anonymous speech?

And who the fuck are they, or anyone, to declare what a "real" identity online means, or should mean?

Whoever is involved in this effort must never work in IT or government ever, ever again.

Hitler and Himmler will be SOOO pleased (0)

freedom_india (780002) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445919)

... that their suggestions are being carried out. Dumbasses should not have fought USSR. Else, we would see an United Europe, no more pesky football hooliganism, or migration for that reason. We should appreciate the Nazis for their foresightedness.

Can anybody help me out? (3, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year and a half ago | (#41445981)

I've just found a 'radicalizing' document, clearly a piece of propaganda designed to convince me that Europe is a surveillance state run by some mixture of terrified ninnies and cynical grifters! But I can't find the reporting button to alert the proper authorities and have it taken down, what do I do?

Big Government (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446011)

Keep growing that government there in the US, and you'll get this too, real soon.

U-S-A! U-S-A! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446441)

U-S-A! U-S-A! Oh, wait... WTF?

Companies have responsibility too (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446485)

It's not all bad. Seems a bit Draconian, but certainly not full 1984:

"Companies providing end-user filtering systems and their customers should be liable for failing to report “illegal” activity identified by the filter "

oops sorry.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41446521)

they don't Bye Europe. I'm stain out!

Also, it appears to be written up / drafted by people with low IQ's:

"The anonymity of individuals reporting (possibly) illegal content must be preserved... yet their IP address must be logged to permit them to be prosecuted if it is suspected that they are reporting legal content deliberately and to permit reliable informants' reports to be processed more quickly "

That's like saying, 'the anonymity of individuals must be preserved yet it won't be'. Also, spies/snitches given priority. It's actually very 1984, and laughably inept.

Pirates and Terrorists (5, Insightful)

fearofcarpet (654438) | about a year and a half ago | (#41446527)

Some day I am going to have to explain to my son how we managed to defeat a genocidal megalomaniac bend on world domination, narrowly avoid nuclear annihilation, and rebuild an entire continent in the 20th Century, but that in the 21st Century somehow pirates and terrorists are the biggest threat to Western Civilization. But my biggest fear is that he is growing up in a world where the bar for personal privacy, security, and liberty has been set alarmingly low.

Those of us who experienced privacy in the pre-WWW, pre-datamining era--the before time, the long-long-ago--still have a viscerally negative reaction when we learn about how Company X is collecting information on us in some new-and-intrusive way. Even when it's to protect us from pirates and terrorists, we at least object to it even though we have, thus far, just rolled over, muttering under our breath as a glorified hall monitor looks at pictures of our naked bodies before we are allowed to board an airplane. And we still get angry when we find out that a government is spying on us and listening in to our conversations--digitally encoded or otherwise.

People born after 2000 will have no memory of a smart-phone-free world by the time they are of voting age. They won't find it unsettling that you have to enter a credit card number before you can log into your iThing or that their toaster needs to know their birth date. Let's just hope that the elderly continue to have a disproportionate influence in electoral politics--at least until I die.

Re:Pirates and Terrorists (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41447025)

It is truly awful. But honestly, your post doesn't even fully characterize the nature of this treachery. From my understanding of these people, all your son has to do is bump into one of these rulers children some day and knock his golden brush out of his hand, and your sons device will suddenly be loaded with kiddy porn and so will yours, and you'll both never be heard from again.

That's the kind of tyranny these people are into I'm afraid - where people are cattle.. *sigh* We need to get out of this grid

And Yet a Pirate party member (3, Interesting)

Aryden (1872756) | about a year and a half ago | (#41446733)

Is onboard with this....

Pirate Party Switzerland (Pascal Gloor, who also posted a blog about the Berlin meeting, in french) Link to his blog post [pascalgloor.ch]

Re:And Yet a Pirate party member (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41447043)

could be a pirate party infiltrator/spy/co-opt minion. Who knows? It's crazy the pirate party would be into it, but maybe it's just to have a good inside man to see what these people are doing.

Any company that participates gets to be in the working group, so all good companies should either join, or derail this thing permanently by other means

Re:And Yet a Pirate party member (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41447805)

Makes me wonder if they really are replacing all elected officials with pod people - if even the Pirate party member gets behind this sort of shit.

now propose the nicer version (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41447221)

Now politicians can introduce the real proposal, the not so far reaching, but pretty much the same, proposal and it stand out as being sensitive to public opinion.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...