3 ms·

Sadly, so far no company has been sued by EU for complying with american legal requests. I think the motivation is somewhat along the lines that the company di

by yxhuvud 12y ago

Sadly, so far no company has been sued by EU for complying with american legal requests. I think the motivation is somewhat along the lines that the company didn't have a choice in the matter. Personally I wish that didn't matter and that the privacy breaches would have been prosecuted - I can think of nothing that makes legislative changes faster than companies having to choose where to do business because it would not be possible to do business both in USA and EU.

Silhouette 12y ago
Agreed on all counts. There have been some very shady dealings between Europe and the US, in areas as sensitive as financial and travel information, where it seems the US has demanded data and Europe has conveniently overlooked and/or hacked its own privacy and data protection laws so they can provide it. I suspect given the increasingly anti-EU sentiments in many European countries and the outright hostile behaviour of the US toward foreign citizens in recent years, this situation isn't going to last much longer. Someone in politics is just waiting to make their career by telling a weakened EU administration and/or the US where to go, presenting themselves as the people's advocate and defender of basic human rights. This issue provides a convenient and potentially very effective vehicle for anyone with such ambitions. Put another way, the asymmetric legal, economic and diplomatic relationships that have favoured the US for some time are essentially a bet that the US is worth more as a partner than any cost that asking "how high" will incur. Sooner or later, someone is going to call them, and at this point I'm not sure whether they're just bluffing.
- cinquemb 12y ago
  I think I would agree to what you are saying as to the logical conclusion of what is happening now, but I hope no one will conflate such a possible outcome with it's probable effectiveness as long as the technical capabilities allow for governments, corporations, and individuals to subvert such systems. Would citizens of the EU have faith in such a candidate anyway who will basically play the same game as their predecessors? Would anyone with the technical capabilities to develop and use encryption/steganography software for things they deem necessary to encrypt, put any trust in such a candidate over themselves? Seems like a growing market to sell people on privacy as a service, which means there will be a growing market for those who want to subvert such…
  - Silhouette 12y ago
    All valid points, but I would add two more. Firstly, the means to make mass surveillance significantly more difficult and expensive already exist, we just don't use them routinely as a society. This lack of security and privacy awareness is harmful for many reasons, only a few of which are related to potential abuses by government organisations, but part of the reason they haven't been used more is because of the pressures imposed formally and no doubt less formally by governments. There is always going to be a balance here, because obviously there are bad people in the world and governments are expected (reasonably or otherwise) to protect their citizens and organisations against those bad people. I doubt any government is going to willingly give up all possibilities to intercept communication, but I think you could have a situation with much more transparency and oversight than we have today to keep that power in check and directed to its intended purposes. Secondly, one of the most disappointing things about this whole affair is that our own intelligence and security services (I'm in the UK) seem to be more concerned with covering their backsides and keeping tight with their US chums than they are with actually, you know, providing for the security of their own country. In an era when foreign surveillance is a significant threat to everyone and so-called allies are among the prime culprits, the duty of our services is to treat those allies as hostile to the extent that their observed behaviour demonstrates they are hostile, and to respond proportionately. US spying on all our citizens' data? Promote encryption as standard and advise businesses on how to keep their data out of US jurisdiction. If allies have legitimate grounds for wanting sensitive information about British people (and I'm certainly not saying they won't have legitimate grounds for doing so from time to time) then let them request that information through proper channels and in compliance with our laws (and make sure our laws provide for assisting allies appropriately but with appropriate controls and oversight as well). Ultimately, you can't rationally expect governments to protect their people without allowing them to use the technical tools and legal powers necessary to do so, but neither can you rationally protect your society and way of life by destroying it. This debate is all about resolving that inherent conflict in as fair and practical a way as possible, and to that extent, I think some fresh views in politics could improve the current situation considerably.
    - cinquemb 12y ago

by yxhuvud 12y ago

Silhouette 12y ago

Agreed on all counts. There have been some very shady dealings between Europe and the US, in areas as sensitive as financial and travel information, where it seems the US has demanded data and Europe has conveniently overlooked and/or hacked its own privacy and data protection laws so they can provide it. I suspect given the increasingly anti-EU sentiments in many European countries and the outright hostile behaviour of the US toward foreign citizens in recent years, this situation isn't going to last much longer. Someone in politics is just waiting to make their career by telling a weakened EU administration and/or the US where to go, presenting themselves as the people's advocate and defender of basic human rights. This issue provides a convenient and potentially very effective vehicle for anyone with such ambitions. Put another way, the asymmetric legal, economic and diplomatic relationships that have favoured the US for some time are essentially a bet that the US is worth more as a partner than any cost that asking "how high" will incur. Sooner or later, someone is going to call them, and at this point I'm not sure whether they're just bluffing.

cinquemb 12y ago
I think I would agree to what you are saying as to the logical conclusion of what is happening now, but I hope no one will conflate such a possible outcome with it's probable effectiveness as long as the technical capabilities allow for governments, corporations, and individuals to subvert such systems. Would citizens of the EU have faith in such a candidate anyway who will basically play the same game as their predecessors? Would anyone with the technical capabilities to develop and use encryption/steganography software for things they deem necessary to encrypt, put any trust in such a candidate over themselves? Seems like a growing market to sell people on privacy as a service, which means there will be a growing market for those who want to subvert such…
- Silhouette 12y ago
  All valid points, but I would add two more. Firstly, the means to make mass surveillance significantly more difficult and expensive already exist, we just don't use them routinely as a society. This lack of security and privacy awareness is harmful for many reasons, only a few of which are related to potential abuses by government organisations, but part of the reason they haven't been used more is because of the pressures imposed formally and no doubt less formally by governments. There is always going to be a balance here, because obviously there are bad people in the world and governments are expected (reasonably or otherwise) to protect their citizens and organisations against those bad people. I doubt any government is going to willingly give up all possibilities to intercept communication, but I think you could have a situation with much more transparency and oversight than we have today to keep that power in check and directed to its intended purposes. Secondly, one of the most disappointing things about this whole affair is that our own intelligence and security services (I'm in the UK) seem to be more concerned with covering their backsides and keeping tight with their US chums than they are with actually, you know, providing for the security of their own country. In an era when foreign surveillance is a significant threat to everyone and so-called allies are among the prime culprits, the duty of our services is to treat those allies as hostile to the extent that their observed behaviour demonstrates they are hostile, and to respond proportionately. US spying on all our citizens' data? Promote encryption as standard and advise businesses on how to keep their data out of US jurisdiction. If allies have legitimate grounds for wanting sensitive information about British people (and I'm certainly not saying they won't have legitimate grounds for doing so from time to time) then let them request that information through proper channels and in compliance with our laws (and make sure our laws provide for assisting allies appropriately but with appropriate controls and oversight as well). Ultimately, you can't rationally expect governments to protect their people without allowing them to use the technical tools and legal powers necessary to do so, but neither can you rationally protect your society and way of life by destroying it. This debate is all about resolving that inherent conflict in as fair and practical a way as possible, and to that extent, I think some fresh views in politics could improve the current situation considerably.
  - cinquemb 12y ago