Beta
×

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!

France Broadens Surveillance Powers; Wider Scope Than NSA

timothy posted about 10 months ago | from the touch-of-the-old-industrial-espionage dept.

EU 169

krakman writes "With the NSA disclosures, French media was 'outraged'. Yet they appear to be worse than the NSA, with a new law that codifies standard practice and provides for no judicial oversight while allowing electronic surveillance for a broad range of purposes, including 'national security,' the protection of France's 'scientific and economic potential' and prevention of ;terrorism' or 'criminality.' The government argues that the law, passed last week with little debate as part of a routine military spending bill, which takes effect in 2015, does not expand intelligence powers. Rather, officials say, those powers have been in place for years, and the law creates rules where there had been none, notably with regard to real-time location tracking. French intelligence agencies have little experience publicly justifying their practices. Parliamentary oversight did not begin until 2007."

cancel ×

169 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Support Freedom Box! (5, Informative)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 10 months ago | (#45696783)

https://freedomboxfoundation.org [freedomboxfoundation.org]

Re:Support Freedom Box! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45696919)

The Freedom Box Foundation is located in the US.

Re:Support Freedom Box! (2)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 10 months ago | (#45697141)

But the Freedom Box will be located in your home.

Re:Support Freedom Box! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697193)

Doesn't matter if I can't trust it, does it?

Re:Support Freedom Box! (1)

king neckbeard (1801738) | about 10 months ago | (#45697393)

Eben Moglen is playing a pretty big role in this, and I feel like he would be someone who would stand on principle.

Re:Support Freedom Box! (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 10 months ago | (#45697559)

You don't trust GPL-ed code? Wait, did you just use sorcery to magically and securely post your comment, unlike us, puny mortals, who have to use some software?

Use != trust (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697685)

I may use GPL software, but I have now way to verify what it does. Sorry not a programmer here. So in what way could I trust any software.

Using something is in now way inferring that I trust it.

Re:Use != trust (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 10 months ago | (#45698537)

I may use GPL software, but I have no way to verify what it does. Sorry not a programmer here.

Well I am a programmer, and I trust it even less than you do. Knowing how hard it is to figure out a problem in other people's code I am dubious my own inspection would cough up anything placed there by someone determined to obfuscate it.

Re:Use != trust (2)

icebike (68054) | about 10 months ago | (#45698929)

Knowing how hard it is to figure out a problem in other people's code I am dubious my own inspection would cough up anything placed there by someone determined to obfuscate it.

This is true, its very difficult and time consuming to read even a modest amount of code.

But add your eyes to mine, and several hundred others, (maybe thousands), and once verified, all you need do is look at changes. Look very carefully at changes.

Its harder to obfuscate code these days, because its harder to easily turn data blocks into code blocks without attracting attention
to the fact that you did so. DEP [wikipedia.org] has found its way into almost every operating system these days.

Still there are ways to use horribly insecure encryption while making it look secure. The hardest code to verify as being secure is precisely the code designed to provide security.

Not on my watch (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 10 months ago | (#45698517)

But the Freedom Box will be located in your home.

Exactly whatever shadowy security (and/or criminal) forces backing it are counting on...

I wouldn't care where it is from, I'm not putting such an obviously open target to mount internal attacks on my home infrastructure in my house.

Cheese munching surrender-monkeys (-1)

amalcolm (1838434) | about 10 months ago | (#45696803)

Vive la France!

Voltaire (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | about 10 months ago | (#45696997)

As Voltaire so eloquently put it: écrasez l'infâme!

Re:Voltaire (1)

icebike (68054) | about 10 months ago | (#45698943)

Crush any law that provides for no judicial oversight.

I've learned we can't trust our own judges not to knuckle under to government pressure. Still, when you start out by denying judicial oversight, there is no chance or unringing that bell.

Re:Cheese munching surrender-monkeys (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45698791)

Suck it France!! Ha ha

Islam (-1, Flamebait)

benjfowler (239527) | about 10 months ago | (#45696833)

With 5-10% of the population of France being Muslim, that's a massive potential fifth column that potentially needs to be dealt with. I think this sends a message to the Muslims that any subversion will be swiftly detected and dealt with. Not such a bad thing, imho.

I'd rather take the chance of mass surveillance being misused, than having a Muslim jackboot on my neck.

Re:Islam (1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45696853)

That's because you're a stupid racist fuck.

Re:Islam (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45696915)

+1

Re:Islam (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697637)

-2

Islam is not a race, it's a religion.

Re:Islam (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 10 months ago | (#45698657)

So you concur on the 'racist fuck'.

Re:Islam (2, Interesting)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 10 months ago | (#45697049)

Non sequitur much? If a substantial portion (something between 30%-50%) of Muslims in France publicly profess that their loyalty to the Ummah is greater than their loyalty to they country they live in, given that French intelligence agencies probably follow the polls, I wouldn't fault them for profiling them out.

And what about the Catholics. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697695)

If say 30 -50% of them profess their loyalty to the pope before the country then do you profile them?

I am sorry, but you have done nothing to dissuade the notion that you are a racist hick.

Re:And what about the Catholics. (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 10 months ago | (#45697743)

That would depend on what the Pope told them specifically to do, of course, but the most likely answer is 'yes' anyway - we happen to know that the Catholic church is a criminal organization already, and in the area of sex crimes, there's peer pressure to hush everything up. This is more for the vice dept. of French police than for national security, though - a different threat profile.

Re:And what about the Catholics. (4, Insightful)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about 10 months ago | (#45697847)

If say 30 -50% of them profess their loyalty to the pope before the country then do you profile them?

That's not comparable. The "ummah" isn't a person or even an institution, it means "community." What the racist fuck has lost his head over is the equivalent of someone saying he's 'loyal' to his fellow christians no matter what country they live in.

Re:And what about the Catholics. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45698215)

Ah, the one day without mod points. +5 for you, sir.

Re:And what about the Catholics. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45698835)

I would imagine that all Catholics profess their loyalty to the Pope. The difference is if that loyalty is greater than the loyalty to the country they live in. As you can witness for yourself you can know that it is not.

Re:Islam (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 10 months ago | (#45697259)

A religion != a race, you thick fuck.

Re:Islam (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about 10 months ago | (#45697877)

> A religion != a race, you thick fuck.

Right. The real problem here is the use of the word racist instead of bigot. He totally deserved to be called a thick fuck for mixing up two faces of the same coin. The actual bigotry, that's not a problem.

Re:Islam (2)

mc6809e (214243) | about 10 months ago | (#45697505)

Is Islam a race now?

Re:Islam (5, Insightful)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | about 10 months ago | (#45696887)

I'd rather take the chance of mass surveillance being misused

This sort of attitude is why we're rapidly losing freedom and privacy in some areas.

Re:Islam (0)

cold fjord (826450) | about 10 months ago | (#45697327)

Could you list what the freedoms are that have been lost? Skip the privacy issues for now, just the freedoms lost, please?

Re:Islam (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697445)

We could start with the entire process of getting on an airplane. Due to my 4th amendment rights, I should be able to board a plane without being searched by a government agent unless there is reasonable suspicion that I'm committing a crime. If the airport's or airline's private security wishes to search me, that's between me and them as private entities.

There's also the 100 mile zone where the Department of Homeland Security claims they don't need warrants for searches.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/10/aclu-assails-10/

Re:Islam (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45698501)

So, there is no actual freedom being lost then when boarding an airplane since you are still free to travel. The searches for boarding an airplane go back about 40-50 years. They are completely legal and don't infringe on your 4th amendment rights. That has been decided legally long ago. So, you're either wrong or confused.

As to the immigration enforcement actions, from your link:

ACLU Assails 100-Mile Border Zone as ‘Constitution-Free’ – Update [wired.com]

DHS spokesman Jason Ciliberti says the ACLU’s description of the zone as "Constitution-Free" couldn’t be further from the truth and that the check points follow rules set by Supreme Court rulings.

"We don’t have the abilitty to just set up checkpoints willy-nilly," Ciliberti said. "The Supreme Court has determined that brief investigative encontuers do not constitute a serach or seizure."

So, it looks like you're both free to travel, as before, and wrong again. And the interesting thing is that these are both minor impositions on privacy, not freedoms lost.

So it looks like so far nobody is listing any actual freedoms lost. Typical. Much outcry, little outcome.

Re:Islam (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45699073)

So, there is no actual freedom being lost then when boarding an airplane since you are still free to travel.

No, I am actually not. Depending on the outcome of the search or if my name is on some secret list I no longer have the freedom to travel.

Re:Islam (1)

Wrath0fb0b (302444) | about 10 months ago | (#45698605)

You should really start referring to them as "my opinions of how the 4th amendment works". As far as I can tell, not a single practicing or academic legal authority has ever endorsed this construction.

Now, of course, it's a free country -- you can represent your views however you want. But you don't get to pick your facts and you definitely don't get to reinterpret the law just because you don't like it (hellooo segregationists).

Re:Islam (1)

Arker (91948) | about 10 months ago | (#45699037)

A great many have indeed endorsed this strange 'theory' that the fourth amendment means what it says; and Judge Andrew Napolitano comes immediately to mind so here you go. [antiwar.com]

Re:Islam (5, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 10 months ago | (#45696899)

You know, jackboots feel pretty much the same whether they're European or Muslim. Neither 'side' has a particularly defensible history. The harder question to answer is how effective a surveillance society actually is. Does monitoring every phone call, watching every street corner help you much?

My guess, given the lack of examples the NSA / FBI / CIA have trotted out is that the answer is 'no'. I'd rather take the chance that somebody will 'slip through' rather than live in a police society. Even counting up every terrorist action everywhere, one doesn't create a particularly dangerous environment. If you want to be rational about this, you would first ban cars, alcohol, cigarettes, guns, knives, kitchen utensils and cell phones. They are arguably more dangerous than 'terrorists'.

Re:Islam (2, Funny)

motek (179836) | about 10 months ago | (#45696923)

They feel much better when I am the one wearing them. That goes for pretty much all footwear, except perhaps stiletto heels.

Re:Islam (0)

chill (34294) | about 10 months ago | (#45697123)

That rules out a promising career as a stripper.

Re:Islam (2)

phantomfive (622387) | about 10 months ago | (#45697549)

This isn't about terrorists. Sure, that factors into it, but under this law, the police can now get access to surveillance information. No judicial oversight necessary.

They can do it for economic reasons, which means spying on foreign companies. That might be more advantageous to the average French than counterterrorism.

Re:Islam (2)

meerling (1487879) | about 10 months ago | (#45697289)

Christian Jackboot, Canadian Cork boots, Elvis's Blue Suede Shoes, etc, it doesn't really matter what footwear an oppressor wears, it's where he puts it.

Besides that, it's not a chance that 'mass surveillance' will be misused by the government, it's only a matter of when.
If it can be misused for the purposes of furthering political power, it will be, it's always been as simple as that.

Re:Islam (2)

king neckbeard (1801738) | about 10 months ago | (#45697451)

Cops are more likely to kill you than terrorists, and apparently only about 20% of that 5-10% go to mosques regularly. That means it's 1-2% of the population are moderately religious, let alone zealots. It's also probably a safe bet that at least 75% of the zealots within that subpopulation are zealots because bigoted asshats like you want to 'send a message' that feeds the persecution complex that breeds the very zealotry that you cower before.

Thanks (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45696859)

Now everybody wants what the NSA has, and the next time someone brings up human rights, every dictator will brush off the criticism, and will be JUSTIFIED in doing so.

Re:Thanks (2)

lennier1 (264730) | about 10 months ago | (#45697463)

It's already going on on a smaller scale.
After the US, Germany and a few other countries have adopted the concept of "Free Speech Zones" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone [wikipedia.org] ) the Russians are now planning to do the same: http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-protest-zone-at-2014-sochi-olympics-20131210,0,7900728.story#axzz2n6VNDMNf [latimes.com]

Goddamnit (1)

Luke has no name (1423139) | about 10 months ago | (#45696913)

I was hoping that if I ever expatriate, France would have been a good choice.

Re:Goddamnit (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697065)

Haha, just no. People are arrested in France because they wear red hats, or pink t-shirts or badges with political messages. You also can get fined if you utter politically incorrect words. You know it's really bad when the far-right nutcases and their "Socialism = Nazi !" outcries become facts.

Re:Goddamnit (4, Funny)

schnell (163007) | about 10 months ago | (#45697755)

Don't worry. Knowing the French, they will just use these expanded surveillance powers searching for and punishing users of forbidden "franglais" terms [bbc.co.uk] . Violators will be captured by SWAT teams wearing stylish berets and ascots, then locked in solitary confinement to read "The Little Prince" over and over again for as long as it takes until the next time the jailers go on strike.

THE Slippery Slope (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45696921)

I once read that Osama Bin Laden wanted to turn the Western World into the surveillance - no free zone - society - that he knew in the Arab World. Like in our "ally" Saudi Arabia.

Well, he succeeded. He was a genius at political strategy. The politicians of the World and the very very vocal minorities who support them only enable these brilliant genius strategists.

I admire it. Not because of their goals but because of how well they have manipulated people. And to the "security people" monitoring this, your fucking loser overpaid jobs - Google Marketing is BETTER than you - losers.

Everyone - I mean ALL - are profiting one way or another off of this. We are in the age of power grabbing scumbags.

THey are all scumbags.

Everyone.

Religious, political, economic, business .. you name it - it's all a power grab.

Ignore it all people!

European Union flag (4, Insightful)

manu0601 (2221348) | about 10 months ago | (#45696985)

This summary displays the European Union flag

As a french citizen, I am getting more and more upset to see the European flag used instead of France's one for stories about France. 10 years ago I was very fond of the EU, but now I realized EU is not a democracy and I am not a EU citizen. It is quite the contrary, as EU project is to destroy democracy.

I wish Slashdot could add a logo for France, even something full of clichés, it will make me more comfortable.

Re:European Union flag (0)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 10 months ago | (#45697057)

Why? If TFA is anything to go buy you'll be changing the flag soon anyway... right?

Re:European Union flag (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697083)

I wish Slashdot could add a logo for France, even something full of clichés, it will make me more comfortable.

Like a white flag? I kid, I kid, France fought a fair number of wars.

Re:European Union flag (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697087)

Just wait, it's going to be much better once we have teared down all borders and made English the only official language.

Re:European Union flag (1)

prefec2 (875483) | about 10 months ago | (#45697113)

As an EU citizen you could try to change the institution. However, it is easier to whine about it. And honestly, in most cases things coming down from the EU are planted there by the governments of the member state, so the bad things you talk about are actually from your government.

BTW: France is part of the EU as much as Germany or the Netherlands, therefore it is only fair to summarize all these countries with the EU flag, just like US states are all summarized by the US flag. Yes we are not that one country as the US is, but it is very close.

Re:European Union flag (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 10 months ago | (#45697419)

If it makes you feel better: Note the page background. French flag.

Re:European Union flag (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697709)

As french citizen I do not agree with this.
There are legislative elections for MEPs, and while the executive power is not direct democracy (yet they do derive their power from democracy), that should not affect how you feel about the EU citizenship. It's like saying that you don't feel french because you don't agree with the 5th Republic's institutions.

Re:European Union flag (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 10 months ago | (#45698547)

Oh you are an EU "citizen". You just didn't realize the EU definition of citizen differs substantially from your own.

spying != surveillance (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697013)

At least in France you know you are being watched. There is a slight difference.

Re:spying != surveillance (2)

dugancent (2616577) | about 10 months ago | (#45697041)

If you are referring to the USA, we know we are being watched. It's in the news every day.

There are no "good guy" countries here (5, Insightful)

wumbler (3428467) | about 10 months ago | (#45697031)

I think what we have learned is that given the opportunity, no country's intelligence/police/security apparatus is truly more ethical than that of other countries. There's a huge difference between cheap, public words spoken by politicians and what's really going on behind the scenes. If they have the technical option, they will collect and spy and monitor whatever they can.

The NSA gets a bad rap, since (a) it has access to most information and thus is most scary and (b) in the US there is the constitution, which at least in principle should curtail certain government activities, giving critics something to use in their fight. In other countries there often aren't the constitutional documents, which aim to codify personal freedoms and liberties in the same way. Therefore, in the US the surveillance opponents at least have a document in their support that they can point at, while the same people in other countries often have no such thing. In that respect, the surveillance debate in the US could be more forceful with at least some ammunition for the opponents. In this regard, other countries aren't that lucky.

However, in the end it's all academic: Surveillance/intelligence agencies will do whatever they damn well feel like doing. Whatever local laws they have will matter little. These are agencies that have secrecy baked into their DNA. They know - for the most part - to keep their activities away from the public and also the politicians for that matter.

Pass whatever laws you want, it won't matter anymore.

The NSA get a bad rap because they take action (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697199)

They blow up people in other country (yes the NSA and the army goes hand in hand). You have a frigging country having its tentacle everywhere and using shit like drone killing people in a group (and kids) to murder one guy they deem bad enough. France or any other spying country neither have the massive capabilities of spying of the NSA, nor have they massively used drone to assassinate people in other country.

Re:The NSA get a bad rap because they take action (2)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 10 months ago | (#45697319)

Two words, you cheesemonkey: Rainbow Warrior.

Re:The NSA get a bad rap because they take action (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 10 months ago | (#45697441)

I second hognoxious: Well done France.

Re:There are no "good guy" countries here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697399)

I think what we have learned is that given the opportunity, no country's intelligence/police/security apparatus is truly more ethical than that of other countries. There's a huge difference between cheap, public words spoken by politicians and what's really going on behind the scenes. If they have the technical option, they will collect and spy and monitor whatever they can.

Well, time to move to Italy then. It's the old joke: in heaven, the Germans are engineers, the French cooks, the Italians lovers and the British policemen.

In hell, the Germans are lovers, the French policemen, the Italians engineers, and the British cooks.

Re:There are no "good guy" countries here (2)

msobkow (48369) | about 10 months ago | (#45697589)

Other countries do have things like Canada's "Charter of Rights" section of our Constitution. Just because the US is famous for it's Constitution doesn't mean other countries don't have them.

However, unless/until the leaks come out to document that our nations are involved in spying similar to the NSA, it's not like the agencies in question are going to respond to a FOI request as to whether they're spying within a nation's boundaries or not. While I'm comfortable that CSEC isn't spying within Canada, I know all too well that bi-lateral security agreements mean that the various agencies just "outsource" their spying to partners.

We still get spied on.

There is no escape.

Anywhere.

Re:There are no "good guy" countries here (0)

flyingfsck (986395) | about 10 months ago | (#45698011)

Uhmm, the USA is not famous for it's constitution. The USA is famous for being the last country to abolish slavery and requiring a civil war to do so.

Re:There are no "good guy" countries here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45698719)

Canada does indeed have its Charter of Rights. But that Charter does not even list the right to own private property. I was amazed during the original debates how much of Canadian intellectual society was adamantly against the idea that owning property should be a right.
So, while Canada's an admirable country in many ways, formal protection of rights of its citizens is perhaps not one of them. Canada's a nice country by habit, not by obligation.

Re:There are no "good guy" countries here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697803)

I wish USA fascists would stop using this loggical fallacy. It's the same as OJ trying not evade jail time by saying to the judge: I murder, but there are other murderers. So stop prosecuting me, you hypocrites.

So why are you trying to talk right the outrageous behavior of your fascist government of a country which has turned into the most evil country on earth? Are you a n NSA pig? Are you a fascist cunt who right-talks massive spying and a transformation of society into 1984? You are now the enemy. Thank you for showing your feathers, cunt.

Start with the core of this problem, and it's the USA and what it has become. Then talk about smaller countries.

Misleading title? (1)

Murdoc (210079) | about 10 months ago | (#45697059)

So the new law expands their surveillance powers, or doesn't, and just adds more rules for them. Could someone please explain which it is for those of us without access to TFA? I really hope this isn't typical American anti-French bias.

Re:Misleading title? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697163)

This is /.

Anything pro-American will get modded into oblivion, while any wisecracks about "US-ians" will be +5 insightful.

Re:Misleading title? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697861)

Shouldn't you be out smoking meth and racing tractors?

Re:Misleading title? (1)

Aighearach (97333) | about 10 months ago | (#45698341)

Here is the score: they just legalized much more spying than the French people thought was happening. And in their surprised defense they've admitted this is all already being done, and that prior to this French intelligence, and even law enforcement, were believed by the French government to have unlimited powers.

Wider scope (2)

gmuslera (3436) | about 10 months ago | (#45697105)

After the NSA covering the world, whats left? Spying on cows? They must be attacking us farting all the way to global warming.

Outraged? (3, Interesting)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 10 months ago | (#45697109)

Are they really outraged? We know the French can get barricades-and-guillotines outraged, or at least their forebearors could.

Or is this more "I shall say snippy things at parties?"

Re:Outraged? (1)

couchslug (175151) | about 10 months ago | (#45697507)

" We know the French can get barricades-and-guillotines outraged, or at least their forebearors could."

So could ours. Now we are far too comfortable to fight.

Re:Outraged? (2)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 10 months ago | (#45697723)

Now we are far too comfortable to fight.

Speaking of which, Owell vs. Huxley [imgur.com] .

Re:Outraged? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45698783)

" We know the French can get barricades-and-guillotines outraged, or at least their forebearors could."

So could ours. Now we are far too comfortable to fight.

A whole bunch of Americans are also too fat to fight...

Re:Outraged? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45698963)

The French political system traditionally involves street-demostration-cum-riot-level protest a lot more often than most other countries, definitely more often than America's.

Generally, controversial measures get passed into law before most people even know about them. Then, if enough people care, there are street demos with options on violence, which are contained rather than put down by police. Then the law gets changed to something more acceptable.

It's the common French pattern, in contrast to the US system where laws are discussed ad nauseam in public before they get passed.

Jews - as usual... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697133)

Who runs France? Why, it's those whom we cannot criticise... the eternal Jews...

Re:Jews - as usual... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697937)

France DOES have a serious nigger problem. Sand niggers too.

France made it legal (1)

tomhath (637240) | about 10 months ago | (#45697183)

So now people can't complain that the government's intelligence gathering is illegal. Clever.

Re:France made it legal (2)

phayes (202222) | about 10 months ago | (#45698051)

No. Every french governement since the 4th republic has legally spied on the French public with little/no reaction by the press or public. Pompidou asked Kennedy "How can you control the population whe you do not control the radio or the TV as we do?"

The Start (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 10 months ago | (#45698559)

Pompidou asked Kennedy "How can you control the population when you do not control the radio or the TV as we do?"

Thus the Democratic party's relationship to the modern day press. Thanks a ton for the suggestion Pompidou.

At least the press do the jobs they are supposed to do when Republicans are in office, it's ashamed they are asleep at the switch the other half of the time.

Bad Wording (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697201)

Rather, officials say, those powers have been in place for years, and the law creates rules where there had been none, notably with regard to real-time location tracking.

Rather, officials say, those powers have been in place for years, and the law simply legitimizes the whole thing.

There, fixed it for you.

I can has two cellphones! (1)

LordWabbit2 (2440804) | about 10 months ago | (#45697239)

1990
"Lets fit everyone with a radio tracking device so we know where they are at all times"
"What, they would never allow that, it would never work"

2013
I can has two cellphones!

Mission achieved

Damn I thought our news sucked (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 10 months ago | (#45697247)

French media was 'outraged'. Yet they appear to be worse then the NSA

that's some hard core reporting!

Re:Damn I thought our news sucked (1)

lordholm (649770) | about 10 months ago | (#45698237)

European SIGINT is much worse than the US SIGINT in many cases. While they tend to be stronger regulated, the SIGINT in Europe is effectively tapping every fiberoptic cable in the EU. NSA fiberoptic taps are on exit / entry points in the US, european state SIGINT taps the fiberoptic cables on exit / entry points of the country.

Consequently, if I email someone in NY from California, it is likely that the email content will never pass an NSA collection point/tap. If do something similar in Europe, say email from Spain to Sweden, the message is likely to be picked up by Spanish, French, Belgian, Dutch, German, Danish and Swedish intelligence.

Re:Damn I thought our news sucked (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45698377)

and then they will make a point of sharing it between them - just in case someone missed it the first time

Not sure it's any different (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 10 months ago | (#45698579)

With the revelation of the NSA having collection points on an internal network between data centers, it sure seems like there's not a way to send any email within the U.S. without going through a collection point.

Note: 'Then' vs. 'Than' (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697291)

Just a brief note regarding the use of the words 'then' and 'than'.

The word 'then' is a reference to a point in time.
Examples:

'I was the same then as now...'
'I will see you then.'

The word 'than' is a comparison of two objects.
Examples:

'A bowling ball is larger than a tennis ball.'
'I would like these rather than those.'

The number of times we all read these words used in the wrong context cannot
possibly be attributed to typographical error.

Sorry if this seems fussy. I keep feeling that I need to suspend my disbelief each time
I see obviously bad grammar in posts.

Re:Note: 'Then' vs. 'Than' (1)

lennier (44736) | about 10 months ago | (#45697749)

Sorry if this seems fussy. I keep feeling that I need to suspend my disbelief each time
I see obviously bad grammar in posts.

Hey lighten up, it's not like programming is a field where you need to be able to understand syntax and type keywords exactly, right?

grammar fail, back to school. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697307)

worse then the NSA

Worse THAN the... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697401)

To quote The Wire:
"...you’re confusing then and than. T-h-e-n is an adverb used to divide and measure time. 'Detective McNulty makes a mess, and then he has to clean it up.' (...) Not to be confused with t-h-a-n, which is most commonly used after a comparative adjective or adverb, as in: 'Rhonda is smarter than Jimmy.'"

Dear USA... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45697527)

"With the NSA disclosures, French media was 'outraged'. Yet they appear to be worse then the NSA

Dear USA,
You wrote these new rules, now we (and everybody else who used to be your friends and allies) will play by them. Please stop complaining, you asked for it.

Sincerely,
The French

Boundaries: real vs. legal? (1)

Walter White (1573805) | about 10 months ago | (#45697579)

Are the French legal guidelines broader than the US legal guidelines. Broader than what the NSA and CIA are known to do? Narrower than what the French are known to do?

Thanks to Snowden we know the US agencies have exceeded their legal boundaries (or at the very least operated in secret to avoid any legal or constitutional challenge.) What is the situation in France WRT their intelligence agencies and their laws.

I commend the French govt ! (1)

macpacheco (1764378) | about 10 months ago | (#45697661)

I don't like this practice.
But if at least they have the balls to admit it, put in the law, and let everybody know that in France you're being watched, then I'm kind of ok with it.
Not happy, grinning, but ok.
At least they have the balls to be transparent.
I wish the USA did the same, aka: "Complain all you want, but the NSA will continue to do it, if you don't want to be tracked at all, don't use the internet, don't use a cell phone, live a early 20th century live.

The french cannot be worse than muricans (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45698299)

They won't spy on 90% of the world, even if their laws allow it, they are incapable of it.

"then the NSA" ... did what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45698347)

Then what?

Say again? (1)

JockTroll (996521) | about 10 months ago | (#45698355)

Protection of France's "scientific and economic potential"? Does this mean they're making all those efforts to protect nothing at all?

We're not the USSR Really! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45698945)

Maybe if you keep telling yourself that America it won't be true!
Papers?!

"Yet they appear to be worse then the NSA" (1)

fufufang (2603203) | about 10 months ago | (#45699047)

Does the editor not understand grammar? Seriously...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?