intelligence-sharing deals could become a way for states to "outsource surveillance".
"Could"? You mean they aren't already? I think someone has fallen down on the job.
There is a "dangerous lack of oversight" of global surveillance networks, Privacy International has said, warning that intelligence-sharing deals could become a way for states to "outsource surveillance". In a report, Secret Global Surveillance Networks: Intelligence Sharing Between Governments and the Need for Safeguards, …
It's not really a surprise, at least for the 5 Eyes members - re-read Australian/Canadian/NZ/UK/US laws and what intelligence agencies can do.
Now re-read them with the understanding that monitoring of a given countries communications is likely done by one of the partners on the "international" side of any phone/data/satellite/etc connection.
Finally, consider the convenience that the Internet has provided with information being stored in "friendly" countries or passing through monitored links. The only inconvenience being the sheer quantity of information now being handled.
This article has to be the biggest "statement of the bleedin' obvious" ever.
We have suspected for years that domestic laws preventing the surveillance of citizens could be by-passed and it appears that this is only too true.
The people drawn to the "intelligence community" seem to be devious manipulators with the attitude of "the end justifies the means", so of course they will collude and find ways to get around any attempts to rein them in.
The real scandal is in the failure of those people we elect to run our countries to hold these agencies to account and control their wilder inclinations. It make me wonder what's in it for the politicians or if, like J. Edgar Hoover, the spies have enough dirt to actually control their theoretical masters.
spy agencies were required by law to provide it access to intelligence sharing arrangements.
Good for Canada - except they let the Americans place equipment in Canada that Ottawa hasn't a clue what it is doing nor does Canadian Communications Security.
In New Zealand the government is banned from knowing what the Echelon mob is doing and ONLY the Prime Minister has an inkling of what they are up to.
Quote: "There is a "dangerous lack of oversight" of global surveillance networks, Privacy International has said...."
No s**t, Sherlock!
And then there's organisations like Palantir. If you thought Cambridge Analytica was bad, this (long) read will make your head spin:
But no one gives a damn....NSA, GCHQ, Palantir.....no one gives a damn!
And while our "public-minded" politicians make themselves look good releasing details of security operations and practices just to screw over the opposition, the real Bad Guys will be laughing as the big-mouthed, small-brained idiots supposedly responsible for our safety reveal almost everything in the interests of 'openness' and 'transparency'.
And whatever secrets the various groups of politicians don't manage to give away, groups like Privacy International will ruthlessly hunt down in their efforts to "safeguard" us from the evilness (for a given value of 'evilness') of the Security services.
Please read through a couple of reports:
....and then perhaps you might realise that "bad guys" are MUCH closer to home than your comment would indicate.
(Hint: Item 1 was designed to allow stuff like item 2.)
This post has been deleted by its author
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021