All your info - now available to Gov't thru your ISP

I was quite relieved when Australia citizens managed to quash their government's proposal to make all Internet Service Providers spies for the government, ISPs Give Rudd Government Two Finger Salute. It appears that Europeans and Americans have not managed to live up to the Aussies in political fervor to protect citizen privacy rights on the internet.

So I guess we shall get what we deserve. Yes it now is legal for your ISP to keep every stroke of yourkeyboard for a year or longer. And, thanks to Mr. Sarkozy, the new team cheerleader for team USA, all data electronically held on EU citizens can be shared with the National Security Agency of the US, even if you are not a criminal, even if you are not a suspected terrorist, even if you are the re-incarnation of Mother Theresa. EU Privacy Rights to be Taken Away

OK? Well it even gets better. This effectively means that private commercial companies hold all sorts of personal data about every email, SMS or electronic communication make by every EU citizen. And in this day of grand outsourcing, who knows even in which country our data could be held.

• NSA’s Wiretapping of Americans being outsourced to Israeli Companies?!?!
• Australia: Private Intelligence Company Monitors Activists Online for Police

We are not yet sure about the security arrangements on this data to prevent its misuse, but what do we have to worry about if we have nothing to hide? I have blogged on this subject until I am sick inside of the complacency of the general population on the issue. Getting the word out is half the battle: getting people to pay attention to the seriousness of these incremental controls on every aspect of our private lives is the other half of the battle.

We must use word of mouth and tell each other about directives such as the one below if we are to be a democratically responsible citizenry. This goes for all countries...the Aussies did it. So can we. But we must start talking about it and keep on until this issue is addressed to our satisfaction. The writing is on the wall.

EU Data Retention Directive provokes
widespread condemnation

Critics speak out against law forcing ISPs
to record every email and SMS from 15 March

Ian Williams

computing.co.uk
Fri, 13 Mar 2009
Source
UK internet service providers will have to all store communication information from customers for a full year starting on 15 March, as part of the controversial EU Data Retention Directive (PDF).

Under the directive, details of every email, phone call and text message sent or received, including information such as IP address and time of use, will have to be recorded. Police and security experts will be able to request access to the information to help combat terrorism and cyber crime, but only with a court order.

Nonetheless, the move has sparked serious concerns from privacy groups, IT security firms and legal experts. Susan Hall, an ICT and media partner at law firm Cobbetts LLP, maintained that such a database is "the antithesis of what the whole internet is about". "There have been regular and well known cases when the police criminals' record database has illegally been accessed by 'insiders', using it to vet employees and do favours for friends," she said.

The directive has provoked criticism from EU member states over the cost of the operation, which is estimated at £46m over an eight-year period, as well as fears of privacy violation. "Given the numerous data breaches of late, it is hardly surprising that concern has been raised over these proposals," said Jamie Cowper, director of EMEA marketing at security firm PGP Corporation. "With public confidence about data security at an all time low, it is absolutely essential that ISPs take their obligations seriously.

If privacy violation is to be avoided, and the huge cost of this operation is to be justified, the security of the public's data must be watertight. "If the EU plans to roll out similar legislation to other sectors, they are going to have to demonstrate to the public that every step is being taken to defend their data.

If not, it is fair to say that we are just one data breach away from a major public backlash." Hall went on to ask: "The government is trying to impose liabilities on service providers, and for what? The theoretical possibility that it will stop terrorists?

"People applying for access to the database will, on the basis of what we've already seen happen with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, use a slippery slope argument: first arguing for using the information for sex offenders and other serious criminals, but ultimately using it to worry about parking tickets or whether children are entitled to be enrolled in the school they've applied to, as in the recent Poole Council case."

Hall also believes that these measures will have little discernable impact on the fight against terrorism, as the criminals involved will just find ways of bypassing the checks by using other people's unsecured Wi-Fi connections, hotspots or pay-as-you-go 3G modems. "It is also very interesting to note that the European Court of Human Rights ruled in January that a similarly sweeping DNA database, which contained genetic samples from thousands of citizens who had not been convicted of any crime, violated privacy rights," she said.

"Looking at the comments made in this recent case, the ISP database will run the UK government foul of the European Convention on Human Rights, and on this basis alone should be reconsidered. " Thus far, ISPs that have attempted to stop these laws being implemented, such as in Ireland and Slovakia, have been unsuccessful. With the deadline looming, a spokesman for the Internet Service Providers' Association claimed that most firms are prepared for the directive's implementation.

"We have made our members aware of what is required and, as far as we know, they will all be compliant," he said.

Related articles:
Are YOU a terrorist? Better check.
Bloggers: 1 step from censorship?
Cyber Eyes, Net Cops and Pleasure Chips
Internet freedom: Heads up bloggers
Barack Obama's 'Black Widow' : The Super Spy Computer
More Evidence of Pentagon War Against the Internet
Shhhhh - Cyber censorship sleeping

News you WANT to read

DNA database 'breach of rights'

Thousands of DNA samples from

innocent people are currently retained

Source
Two British men should not have had their DNA and fingerprints retained by police, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled.

The men's information was held by South Yorkshire Police, although neither was convicted of any offence.

The judgement could have major implications on how DNA records are stored in the UK's national database.

The judges said keeping the information "could not be regarded as necessary in a democratic society".

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said she was "disappointed" by the European Court of Human Rights' decision.

The database may now have to be scaled back following the unanimous judgement by 17 senior judges from across Europe.

Under present laws, the DNA profiles of everyone arrested for a recordable offence in England, Wales and Northern Ireland are kept on the database, regardless of whether they are charged or convicted.

Discriminatory
The details of about 4.5m people are held and one in five of them does not have a current criminal record.

Both men were awarded £36,400 (42,000 Euros) in costs, less the money already paid in legal aid.

The existing law will remain in place while we carefully consider the judgement
Jacqui Smith, Home Secretary

DNA ruling resonates in UK
The court found that the police's actions were in violation of Article 8 - the right to respect for private and family life - of the European Convention on Human Rights.

It also said it was "struck by the blanket and indiscriminate nature of the power of retention in England and Wales".

The judges ruled the retention of the men's DNA "failed to strike a fair balance between the competing public and private interests," and that the UK government "had overstepped any acceptable margin of appreciation in this regard".

The court also ruled "the retention in question constituted a disproportionate interference with the applicants' right to respect for private life and could not be regarded as necessary in a democratic society".

'Privacy protection'
The home secretary said: "DNA and fingerprinting is vital to the fight against crime, providing the police with more than 3,500 matches a month.

"The government mounted a robust defence before the court and I strongly believe DNA and fingerprints play an invaluable role in fighting crime and bringing people to justice.

"The existing law will remain in place while we carefully consider the judgement."

Solicitor Peter Mahy, who represented the men, said that the decision will have far-reaching implications.

"It will be very interesting to see how the UK government respond.

"The government should now start destroying the DNA records of those people who are currently on the DNA database and who are innocent of any crime."

Human rights group Liberty said it welcomed the court's decision.

Director Shami Chakrabarti said: "This is one of the most strongly worded judgements that Liberty has ever seen from the Court of Human Rights.

"That court has used human rights principles and common sense to deliver the privacy protection of innocent people that the British government has shamefully failed to deliver."

'Invasion of privacy'
Phil Booth, of the NO2ID group, which campaigns against identity cards, said: "'This is a victory for liberty and privacy.

"Though these judgements are always complicated and slow in coming, it is a vindication of what privacy campaigners have said all along.

"The principle that we need to follow is simple - when charges are dropped suspect samples are destroyed. No charge, no DNA."

The Nuffield Council on Bioethics reports on the ethical questions raised by recent advances in biological and medical research.

Its director, Hugh Whittall, said: "We agree wholeheartedly with this ruling. The DNA of innocent people should not be kept by police.

"People feel it is an invasion of their privacy, and there is no evidence that removing from the DNA database people who have not been charged or convicted will lead to serious crimes going undetected.

"The government now has an obligation to bring its own policies into line."

Rights breach claim
One of the men who sought the ruling in Strasbourg, Michael Marper, 45, was arrested in 2001.

He was charged with harassing his partner but the case was later dropped. He had no previous convictions.

The other man - a teenager identified as "S" - was arrested and charged with attempted robbery but later acquitted.

In both cases the police refused to destroy fingerprints and DNA samples taken when the men were taken in to custody.

The men went to the European Court of Human Rights after their cases were thrown out by the House of Lords.

They argued that retaining their DNA profiles is discriminatory and breaches their right to a private life.

The government claims the DNA profile from people who are not convicted may sometimes be linked to later offences, so storing the details on the database is a proportionate response to tackling crime.

Scotland already destroys DNA samples taken during criminal investigations from people who are not charged or who are later acquitted of alleged offences.

The Home Office has already set up a "contingency planning group" to look into the potential implications arising from a ruling in favour of the men.

EU Privacy Rights to be Taken Away

Most Americans are beginning to understand that they have lost all their rights to Homeland Security. While they were busying shopping with their credit cards and refinance mortgage money, the Congress and the Executive managed to deprive them of all their privacy rights and now even their right to free speech.

Now the EU is on the same track. A number of Draconian limitations of our freedoms are being quietly implemented without a whine or a whistle from EU citizens. A case in point is the subrosa deal being made between Mr. Sarkozy and Mr. Bush which allows all electronically stored information on EU citizens to be shared with the Homeland Security Agency in the USA. And there is no system in place to deal with mistakes or abuses of Europeans data. The entire shocking article can be found here.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/30/eu.privacy

Horrified after reading this article, I emailed my MEP concerning this issue (and others) complaining that this cozy data sharing deal was most certainly a violation of my privacy rights. After all, why bother with Data Protection Act enforcement if the most dangerous war criminals on the planet have access to all my details held by government and commercial organisations?

I was even more horrified to find out that very few of my fellow Europeans even knew that their privacy rights were about to go bye bye through a deal by an unelected EU bureaucrat, Sarkozy in this case. Thankfully, my MEP is doing her job and I have just received this amendment for the next EP session concerning this issue:

Joint motion for a resolution
PPE-DE, ALDE, UEN
Commission’s Legislative and Work Programme for 2009
Joint motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68 a (new)

Joint motion for a resolution Amendment
68a. Recognises that sharing data and information is a valuable tool in the international fight against terrorism, but also stresses the importance of safeguarding human rights and fundamental freedoms; regrets, in this context, that current negotiations between the EU and the US on concluding a data protection agreement, within the High-Level Contact Group, have taken place in camera without any transparency or democratic oversight and without any involvement of the European Parliament or of national parliaments and thus of European citizens; therefore insists that the Commission bring these negotiations to a natural close and make an appropriate legislative proposal to the Council and Parliament;

In effect, this is a call from the European Parliament for the Privacy Sharing to be brought before the voters and discussed and calls for the agreement in progress to be ended.
It is very important now for the Irish MEP to have support on the issue from other member state MEPs.

If you care about your privacy rights, I urge you to email your MEP TODAY and demand this item be put on the agenda. The time to do this is now: it will only take a few minutes and will keep the people connected to Brussels and protect you and your family's rights for generations to come.

Let's not go the way of the Americans. The url below lists the various MEPs for different member states.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/members/public.do?language=EN

Thank you for your support.