UN cybercrime treaty risks becoming a 'global surveillance pact' An international treaty on countering cybercrime is in danger of becoming an "expansive global surveillance pact" that will trample data privacy and human rights, activists warned UN delegates as they meet in New York City this week to hammer out an updated proposal. The draft United Nations cybercrime treaty, which has been …
The Digital Services Act: ensuring a safe and accountable online environment
• Better protect consumers and their fundamental rights online
• Establish a powerful transparency and a clear accountability framework for online platforms
• Foster innovation, growth and competitiveness within the single market
"EFF has called for the treaty to include wording that requires judicial authorization prior to surveillance, and to set minimum standards for data protection, such as putting limits on the purpose for collecting data and minimizing the amount of data that can legally be collected [PDF]."
Yes, because no agency or government has ever ignored a "thou shalt not.." provision in an Act or Law
I'm looking at you, FBI...
" wording that requires judicial authorization prior to surveillance"
No need to ignore the letter of the law, in any authoritarian state worth it's salt, it's easy to get a friendly "independent" judge to authorise your surveillance. You could even set it up so that the court approvals, and even the courts themselves, are secret.
How do you say FISA in Russian?
I think they're wasting their breath. This is a government. A very big one. You can guarantee any legislation they come up with won't have the intended effect, will have severe unintended consequences, and is likely to be flat out illegal in several nations that don't agree with surveillance of any kind for any reason.
"....introduced by the Tony Blair Labour government ostensibly to take account of technological change such as the growth of the Internet and strong encryption." It gives warrantless surveillance powers to many government agencies and authorities and was justified based on terror threats and concerns about tech being used for bad.
I recall its first uses were to have a heckler arrested at the Labour Party conference and another man was arrested for carrying satirical magazines with unflattering pics of Tony Blair on the cover. Other uses have included covert surveillance to check that kids lived in a school catchment area and littering offences.
Quote: "..."The draft treaty provides the legal basis for governments to make highly intrusive surveillance mechanisms like interception of content and real time tracking of metadata, available 'to the fullest extent possible' to foreign governments..."
(1) Edward Snowden, 2013
(2) Five Eyes
.....so tell me something new.....the UN negotiation might be new.......but THE BEHAVIOUR has been going on for quite a while!!
MORE MISDIRECTION!
In an internet controlled by crooks, influencers, celebs, politicians, government agencies et etc how is it possible for someone like myself who avoids all the evils of social media to have a voice.
It seems the only way to get even the simplest thing done, like complaining about a faulty product or making comments on policies of governmentts, broadcasters, or any national establishment or objecting to local devleopments in a way that can be heard by others requires the power of social media, or you are completely ignored.
There must be another way, but anything is likely to be taken over and abused in the same way as Twitter, Facebook etc.
Is there a voice somewhere for the silent, honest minority?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2023
