6 ms·

This is a weird take (I’m not familiar with nextcloud, perhaps a bit sensationalist?). To suggest the state of surveillance is much different here in the EU is

by jjcon 6y ago

This is a weird take (I’m not familiar with nextcloud, perhaps a bit sensationalist?). To suggest the state of surveillance is much different here in the EU is odd to me. The US and many EU countries have highly integrated and open sharing of intelligence systems and have for decades. As of late EU countries are becoming more integrated (not less) with each other and the US when it comes to the intelligence front. Nearly all countries have complex surveillance programs, they are arguably necessary to maintain national security. The hope of democratic countries is to have ample checks and balances so that information is used appropriately and only in the scope of national security.

AmericanChopper 6y ago
EU countries have equivalent surveillance programs (and equivalently poor protections for citizens), as well as having intelligence sharing arrangements with the US (and a number of other countries). This is simply an indisputable fact. For an EU citizen it makes exactly 0 difference whether it’s a US agency spying on them, or a French one. The same people end up with access to the data. If you’re looking at this from a privacy protection standpoint, it makes very little sense. However if you look at it for what it actually is, economic protectionism, it makes perfect sense. The purpose of all EU privacy regulation is to tariff foreign companies, apply pressure on foreign companies to move more operations to the EU, and to provide a competitive advantage to EU companies. The US has a very significant trade surplus with the EU when it comes to services (which is what these regulations target, rather than goods). These regulations simply exist as a barrier to that trade, with the added benefit of not having to implement tariffs (which can be very unpopular).
- hedora 6y ago
  I thought you generally needed a warrant to obtain private information in Europe. The US CLOUD act says that any government official (even outside law enforcement) from any partner country can obtain data stored (inside or outside the US) without further justification. Under EU law, can the French government grant their agricultural inspectors access to Angela Merkel’s private Swiss email account? Under US law, they could, assuming they signed on to the CLOUD act, and the account was provided by a US or French firm.
  - AmericanChopper 6y ago
    > I thought you generally needed a warrant to obtain private information in Europe. Sadly you thought wrong. Using France as just one example, they allow warrantless wiretaps, require ISPs to forward intercepted traffic (again without a warrant), and whole bunch of other completely unsavoury stuff. https://www.vox.com/2015/11/14/11620670/france-has-a-powerful-and-controversial-new-surveillance-law https://www.vox.com/2015/11/14/11620670/france-has-a-powerfu... Anything an EU government collects will also be shared freely with all of its SIGINT allies (including the US). https://theintercept.com/2018/03/01/nsa-global-surveillance-sigint-seniors/ https://theintercept.com/2018/03/01/nsa-global-surveillance-... If this was an issue the EU was actually trying to address, you’d quickly find that many member states intelligence collection practices are incompatible with EU privacy laws, along with their intelligence sharing arrangements.
    - number6 6y ago
      EU agencies have exceptions under GDPR but otherwise their doing would also be incompatible with GDPR
    - JAlexoid 6y ago
      LEt's just ignore the little fact that NSA was caught on spying on EU officials during FTA negotiations... not to mention industrial espionage. Intelligence sharing has nothing to do with this.
      - jjcon 6y ago
        > caught on spying on EU officials There were reports of possible spying on Merkel but considering Germany then sought entrance into the five eyes (a process currently underway) it seems there is likely a lot more than meets the eye there
      - AmericanChopper 6y ago
        > Intelligence sharing has nothing to do with this. If the issue in contention is US companies being unable to protect against privacy intrusions from the US government, then EU companies being equally unable to protect against privacy intrusions from the US government sounds entirely relevant to me...
- JAlexoid 6y ago
  That's typical american ignorant nationalist BS. These laws and regulations predate most of the service sector. And they give no priority for EU companies - placing the servers in a compliant country(as big companies already do) completely satisfies these rules. There's the French digital tax, that definitely targets American giants(for tax base shifting mostly)... but this has really no practical impact on any American service giant.
  - AmericanChopper 6y ago
    > These laws and regulations predate most of the service sector I'm not sure why you would think this is true at all. The EU has had a trade in services deficit with the US for a very long time (especially in financial and ICT services). The GDPR has only adopted 4 years ago. Even if it was enforced equally across all companies, it would still be a protectionist policy. However, it most certainly is not, having dished out about €12 million in fines to EU companies (not counting UK), about €200 million in fines to UK companies, about €160 million in fines to US companies and a total of €88,000 in fines to companies from all other countries. This recent ruling simply adds another layer of protectionism to the regulations. The risks associated with US companies are prohibited by regulation. Those very same risks when associated with EU companies are perfectly legal. Not because the risks aren't as serious (they are exactly the same in every way), the only difference is where the company/commerce is located.
- magnusmagnusson 6y ago
  "For an EU citizen it makes exactly 0 difference whether it’s a US agency spying on them", > "just let your sensitive information spill everywhere, who cares they got it anyway" This is not even an argument. US is a foreign state and there's zero reason they should default access to our information. There's no guarantee they won't turn up their hostilities and abuse this access. > "The purpose of all EU privacy regulation is to tariff foreign companies, apply pressure on foreign companies to move more operations to the EU, and to provide a competitive advantage to EU companies." Great, as it should be. Imagine that, promoting domestic companies and progress. I've long thought that the Chinese Firewall was a subtle win for the Chinese. They have a flourishing information ecology of their own since they couldn't just use American product like Facebook or Amazon.
soneil 6y ago
Nextcloud are positioning themselves as the appropriate competition in this space, so you're right to query the source. > The hope of democratic countries is to have ample checks and balances so that information is used appropriately This appears to be the fundamental issue. For data stored in the US, US law protects US residents but not foreign residents. So if $service moves both your and my data to the same server in the US, yours is subject to legal checks and balances and mine is not. So far the only way we can retain these and checks and balances is to have some say in where our data is stored. Which is a pretty crap solution, but the US doesn't appear to be willing to afford us any legal protections on data within their jurisdiction, so it's the only option left.
- jjcon 6y ago
  > to have some say in where our data is stored But this is what confuses me. These intelligence systems are so integrated that it doesn’t really matter where the data is. Certain data on US residents is available to intelligence agencies here in the EU (well a few countries at least) and the reverse is true. These shared systems aren’t going anywhere so I’m not sure I understand the sentiments in this article. Edit - I’ll also add that while the US doesn’t explicitly grant constitutional rights to non citizens the agreements between all these countries does govern how this data is used.
  - ptx 6y ago
    If my data leaks to a US server, the checks and balances you mentioned don't apply, because I'm not American. The US authorities are then free to misuse my data however they please, in ways that would be highly illegal if done to Americans.
    - jjcon 6y ago
      > the checks and balances you mentioned don't apply That is not true - you aren’t guaranteed anything by the US constitution but the agreements in place by these partner countries specifically govern how this data is handled. Again though... they are highly integrated systems addressable by agencies both here in the EU and in the US.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
magnusmagnusson 6y ago
It's substantially different, one is a domestic agent and the other is a hostile foreign state to Europe and EU. I hope the EU starts banning Twitter, Pornhub, and other American social mediacompanies. Clearly a threat to wellbeing here.

by jjcon 6y ago

AmericanChopper 6y ago

EU countries have equivalent surveillance programs (and equivalently poor protections for citizens), as well as having intelligence sharing arrangements with the US (and a number of other countries). This is simply an indisputable fact. For an EU citizen it makes exactly 0 difference whether it’s a US agency spying on them, or a French one. The same people end up with access to the data. If you’re looking at this from a privacy protection standpoint, it makes very little sense. However if you look at it for what it actually is, economic protectionism, it makes perfect sense. The purpose of all EU privacy regulation is to tariff foreign companies, apply pressure on foreign companies to move more operations to the EU, and to provide a competitive advantage to EU companies. The US has a very significant trade surplus with the EU when it comes to services (which is what these regulations target, rather than goods). These regulations simply exist as a barrier to that trade, with the added benefit of not having to implement tariffs (which can be very unpopular).

hedora 6y ago
I thought you generally needed a warrant to obtain private information in Europe. The US CLOUD act says that any government official (even outside law enforcement) from any partner country can obtain data stored (inside or outside the US) without further justification. Under EU law, can the French government grant their agricultural inspectors access to Angela Merkel’s private Swiss email account? Under US law, they could, assuming they signed on to the CLOUD act, and the account was provided by a US or French firm.
- AmericanChopper 6y ago
  > I thought you generally needed a warrant to obtain private information in Europe. Sadly you thought wrong. Using France as just one example, they allow warrantless wiretaps, require ISPs to forward intercepted traffic (again without a warrant), and whole bunch of other completely unsavoury stuff. https://www.vox.com/2015/11/14/11620670/france-has-a-powerful-and-controversial-new-surveillance-law https://www.vox.com/2015/11/14/11620670/france-has-a-powerfu... Anything an EU government collects will also be shared freely with all of its SIGINT allies (including the US). https://theintercept.com/2018/03/01/nsa-global-surveillance-sigint-seniors/ https://theintercept.com/2018/03/01/nsa-global-surveillance-... If this was an issue the EU was actually trying to address, you’d quickly find that many member states intelligence collection practices are incompatible with EU privacy laws, along with their intelligence sharing arrangements.
  - number6 6y ago
    EU agencies have exceptions under GDPR but otherwise their doing would also be incompatible with GDPR
  - JAlexoid 6y ago
    LEt's just ignore the little fact that NSA was caught on spying on EU officials during FTA negotiations... not to mention industrial espionage. Intelligence sharing has nothing to do with this.
    - jjcon 6y ago
      > caught on spying on EU officials There were reports of possible spying on Merkel but considering Germany then sought entrance into the five eyes (a process currently underway) it seems there is likely a lot more than meets the eye there
    - AmericanChopper 6y ago
      > Intelligence sharing has nothing to do with this. If the issue in contention is US companies being unable to protect against privacy intrusions from the US government, then EU companies being equally unable to protect against privacy intrusions from the US government sounds entirely relevant to me...
JAlexoid 6y ago
That's typical american ignorant nationalist BS. These laws and regulations predate most of the service sector. And they give no priority for EU companies - placing the servers in a compliant country(as big companies already do) completely satisfies these rules. There's the French digital tax, that definitely targets American giants(for tax base shifting mostly)... but this has really no practical impact on any American service giant.
- AmericanChopper 6y ago
  > These laws and regulations predate most of the service sector I'm not sure why you would think this is true at all. The EU has had a trade in services deficit with the US for a very long time (especially in financial and ICT services). The GDPR has only adopted 4 years ago. Even if it was enforced equally across all companies, it would still be a protectionist policy. However, it most certainly is not, having dished out about €12 million in fines to EU companies (not counting UK), about €200 million in fines to UK companies, about €160 million in fines to US companies and a total of €88,000 in fines to companies from all other countries. This recent ruling simply adds another layer of protectionism to the regulations. The risks associated with US companies are prohibited by regulation. Those very same risks when associated with EU companies are perfectly legal. Not because the risks aren't as serious (they are exactly the same in every way), the only difference is where the company/commerce is located.
magnusmagnusson 6y ago
"For an EU citizen it makes exactly 0 difference whether it’s a US agency spying on them", > "just let your sensitive information spill everywhere, who cares they got it anyway" This is not even an argument. US is a foreign state and there's zero reason they should default access to our information. There's no guarantee they won't turn up their hostilities and abuse this access. > "The purpose of all EU privacy regulation is to tariff foreign companies, apply pressure on foreign companies to move more operations to the EU, and to provide a competitive advantage to EU companies." Great, as it should be. Imagine that, promoting domestic companies and progress. I've long thought that the Chinese Firewall was a subtle win for the Chinese. They have a flourishing information ecology of their own since they couldn't just use American product like Facebook or Amazon.

soneil 6y ago

Nextcloud are positioning themselves as the appropriate competition in this space, so you're right to query the source. > The hope of democratic countries is to have ample checks and balances so that information is used appropriately This appears to be the fundamental issue. For data stored in the US, US law protects US residents but not foreign residents. So if $service moves both your and my data to the same server in the US, yours is subject to legal checks and balances and mine is not. So far the only way we can retain these and checks and balances is to have some say in where our data is stored. Which is a pretty crap solution, but the US doesn't appear to be willing to afford us any legal protections on data within their jurisdiction, so it's the only option left.

jjcon 6y ago
> to have some say in where our data is stored But this is what confuses me. These intelligence systems are so integrated that it doesn’t really matter where the data is. Certain data on US residents is available to intelligence agencies here in the EU (well a few countries at least) and the reverse is true. These shared systems aren’t going anywhere so I’m not sure I understand the sentiments in this article. Edit - I’ll also add that while the US doesn’t explicitly grant constitutional rights to non citizens the agreements between all these countries does govern how this data is used.
- ptx 6y ago
  If my data leaks to a US server, the checks and balances you mentioned don't apply, because I'm not American. The US authorities are then free to misuse my data however they please, in ways that would be highly illegal if done to Americans.
  - jjcon 6y ago
    > the checks and balances you mentioned don't apply That is not true - you aren’t guaranteed anything by the US constitution but the agreements in place by these partner countries specifically govern how this data is handled. Again though... they are highly integrated systems addressable by agencies both here in the EU and in the US.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

magnusmagnusson 6y ago

It's substantially different, one is a domestic agent and the other is a hostile foreign state to Europe and EU. I hope the EU starts banning Twitter, Pornhub, and other American social mediacompanies. Clearly a threat to wellbeing here.