Slashdot Mirror


The Beast of Brussels

'No nickname' Ian writes "If you live in Europe you should definitely read this story about a government supercomputer. It's written by Andy McCue from silicon.com and entitled: IT Myths: Does the 'Beast of Brussels' know everything about us? Basically, in Europe there are rumours of an EU-owned super-computer which stores and process information on every European citizen. The piece debunks the rumour and finds out its roots are actually in a work of fiction - but there is some interesting comment from privacy activists who suggest it may not be too wide of the mark. Simon Davis of Privacy International goes so far as to suggest such computer may have existed - if perhaps not on the same 'three storey-high' magnitude."

11 of 234 comments (clear)

  1. Damn. by Synic · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought it said the *breast* of Brussels... how disappointing...

  2. Working with the EC by Osrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've done a lot of work with the EC over the last 10 years or so... the existence of the "beast of Brussels" would be a surprise for many reasons, not least of which several people would have had to have reached consensus to build the thing.

    Totally impossible.

  3. Well i live in Europe (Belgium)... by Interfacer · · Score: 5, Informative

    and most people - including me - think nothing of it. in Belgium it is mandatory for us to carry an official ID card (no library card or drivers license. a real ID card).

    we need to show that to open a bank account, a library card, a rent-a-video store,... well basically everywhere.

    for health care we have a unique number in a national database, and since a few months everyone who has a mortgage is in another database.

    We don't care. i mean why should't the governement know where you live, or which bank accounts i have.
    the only reason i can come up with is if you are a fraudster.

    for example tracking people with a mortgage on a national level is done so that not-so-bright people do not get a second mortgage if they already are at their financial limit with the first one.

    the most important reason i don't mind is that we have a law that applies to any place where personal information is stored about you.
    basically the law says that you have to get total access to all information about you, and that if it is incorrect the keeper of that information needs to change it.
    i know from several examples that this law is used and that is works ok.

    at least we can review and cghange information about ourselves.

    kind regards,
    Interfacer.

    1. Re:Well i live in Europe (Belgium)... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, I live in Belgium too, and I do care. Belgium is full with people in local and national politics who think they are technocrats who use IT for good purposes, and then turn around and do the worst things without realizing the implications to their constituents, or to the IT market/industry/whatever.

      Banksys/proton (a private company, being the only one that has the full picture of money flowing nation-wide), the new ID-card with your own personal certificate on-a-chip (nevermind that it's done by a private company - sun - and that the keys are pre-generated, so any of the intermediaries can escrow it), the e-voting problems, the e-tax return with the associated delays, the list goes on and on. Fuckups ranging from trivial to monumental, but all fuckups nonetheless.

      I've just got the impression that everyone in this country likes to think they're 'down' with technology, but they're all basically clueless. Half of the things they do are solutions to problems that never existed, the other half, really bad implementations.

      Sad thing is: I think Belgium is at least trying to do the right thing, I've heard stories that leave me far more cynical about other countries.

      To get more to the point (sorry for all the ranting): I agree with you that an ID card is not necessarily a bad thing. But I'd like to avoid having data about me being gathered and correlated unnecessarily. If you have a ton of data on real people, and analyse that data for certain patterns, you're bound to have a statically significant number of false positives, which will have consequences for the same real people.

      And I really hate the remark you've given: "the only reason i can come up with is if you are a fraudster". I don't want to be put in the position where I have to justify my (legal) behaviour, just because otherwise it might seem that I'm hiding something (you're using encryption? you must be a drug dealer, tax evader, child molester, ...)

      Yea, maybe I'm a bit paranoid, but it's far easier to have your rights slowly eroded, than it is to regain them.

    2. Re:Well i live in Europe (Belgium)... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You've rather missed the point, I'm afraid.

      Essentially, you're saying that it's okay for him to trust his government because it's not broken. But what if today he trusts his government, tomorrow he gives away a bunch of rights because he trusts his government, and the next day his government is suddenly broken? What happens the day after that? The answer is he gets fucked in the ass, that's what.

      The point here is that you don't give away your power and your rights to a government just because you trust it or because you're happy or because the economy is good or the economy is bad or because there are terrorists out there and you want your government to protect you. You NEVER give these things away because it may take the blood of your sons and daughters to get them back. So what if you government doesn't fuck you today? Since when has today been a promise of tomorrow?

      I personaly don't mind if you sell your rights and freedoms for a pack of chewing gum. The problem is you want to give up my rights too.

      I will sell my rights and freedoms more dearly (expensively) than you are willing to sell yours. You can sell yours for safety, or health care, or whatever you choose.

      The cost of my rights and freedoms is blood. The only question is whose blood.

  4. Privacy is key to freedom by nuntius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You ask why the government shouldn't have access to this info. I ask why they should.

    When designing a secure system, you try to minimize priviledges - if someone doesn't need access, then it is denied to them.

    Likewise we need to be ever vigilant in protecting our freedom. If someone (e.g. the government) doesn't need knowledge or power, then we shouldn't let them have it.

    In your example, you mention that the government now can decide when someone has exceed their financial limits. Why is that a good thing? Let the lenders sort it out and take the hit if a borrower defaults.

    The more information others have about you, the more subtly they can manipulate you. Detailed information is usually used to take advantage of someone. That's why stalking is illegal in many countries. You'd find it creepy if your neighbor knew this information; why doesn't it bother you that hundreds of government beaurocrats know this for an entire country?

  5. Re:Shortest book I ever read by bdeclerc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh, shut up. You're so full of it... Those little Belgian War Heroes managed to keep the German army (from a country 10 times bigger) from capturing all of Belgium in the first World War, and in the second World War, they managed to resist the German Blitzkrieg for all of 18 days, where the Germans had expected to be at the North-Sea coast in only two or three days...

    In both cases, you 'mericans only showed up a couple of years later...

    By the way, have they found any WMD's yet in Iraq? Didn't think so...

  6. Beastly Conspiracy Theory by JWSmythe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This sounds like great material for every conspiracy theorist to work with..

    It's perfectly possible, and concievable, but the question is, does it really exist?

    I saw a few comments on here. So what if someone sees your license plate? Lets go through an easy path for the feds to follow. I'm basing this off of the US. I'm sure similiar stuff applies in Europe.

    Your car is spotted in a particular area..

    1) Run the plate. Now they have your name, address, SS#, age, height, weight, hair and eye color, and your history of driving.

    2) Check the credit bureau's and Chex Systems. Now they know all your bank accounts, credit cards, etc, etc.. Even if your bank doesn't exactly report that you have an account, you'll show up when they checked your credit (or with Chex).

    3) Have you ever bought groceries or gas with your ATM/Debit card or credit cards? Do you use the grocery store's "discount" cards? Even if you bought your groceries with cash, if you used your discount card it's easy enough to track your purchases.

    So, was the driver of the car you? Sure. You bought gas a few miles away on your credit card.

    *IF* (that's a big if) they have a tracking system put together to keep all this information in the same place, it'd be easy to track any single person. Even if the police were interested in tracking an individual, it wouldn't be very hard.

    Think about what you did today. Using the simple outline I gave today, they know just about everything you did.

    I'm out of town. So, they know when I bought my plane tickets online from what IP, which is tracable back to my home. My home Internet provider would give up my info in a heart beat, including what checking account I pay my bill with. They know when I got on the plane, who I was with, and were I got off. Checking either with the rental car places at the airport or my credit cards, they know what car I'm driving. They know I went to a department store and bought kid toys and party supplies(for a kids birthday), a grocery store and bought a good bit of beer (for myself).

    Based on that, they could easily know where I am. I didn't get a hotel, and I haven't purchased gas yet, I'm probably still in the area, so who do I know in the area (phone records, previous contacts). They could go as far as to ask my cell phone provider what tower is my closest contact. That'll narrow me down to 4 miles.

    Based on that, they probably know what house or apartment I'm in, and it wouldn't take much creativity to figure out what's here (phones, Internet).

    So (oh my goodness), the big brother system knows what house I'm in, that I'm drinking beer and reading/writing on Slashdot. If they're really good, they can see two SSH connections back to one of my servers too.

    4:30am, he's drinking beer, working on servers, and on /.

    But you have to ask yourself, why would they track me? They wouldn't. I'm rather boring. No warrants, not a suspect in anything (right now).

    If the big brother system was this good, it may actually be a good thing. Got someone with a warrant? Wait til they show up anywhere, and voila, send the cops to pick them up. *AND* if say something happens in my home city (where I'm not at right now), it would be obvious that it wasn't me.

    Ybor City, in Tampa Florida, put together a more difficult system. It was facial recognition, where it would check against NCIC and try to guess pedestrians with warrants. From what I've read in the press, it failed miserably. Why hope that someone will walk past a camera and hope to get a cop there before he gets away? You could wait for him to go grocery shopping, and have a patrol car show up while he's still loading the car.

    Would a big brother system be good? Probably not. The detectives now are overworked, underpaid, and don't have the time to make a few phone calls (outlines in the first few steps) to track dow

    --
    Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  7. Actually it does exist . . . by OverlordQ · · Score: 5, Funny

    . . . but it was built by some hyperintelligent pandimensional beings (whose physical manifestation in their own pandimensional universe is not dissimilar to our own). Downside, is it's busy calculating 'The Answer', whatever that is . .

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
  8. Statistics Denmark by Guanix · · Score: 5, Informative

    In Denmark we've had a civil registration system for hundreds of years, and in the 1960's it became centralized. A wide range of information about births, deaths, marriages, divorces, jobs, education, and other information that the government collects is referenced by the CPR number, which is a national ID number for all Danish residents.

    These databases are controlled by a fairly strong Data Protection Act which prohibits cross-referencing different databases using the CPR number, except in special circumstances, and any such special permit is always made public.

    There is, however, one exception: the Statistical Bureau. They have access to most public databases and are allowed to cross-reference them in order to compile statistics. We don't have a census in Denmark because all the information is already available.

    This is a very powerful tool for researchers. They can ask a question like "How many males who graduated from this particular primary school subsequently went on to be convicted of a serious crime?", and have it answered by the Statistical Bureau within a couple of weeks. They simply have to type in an SQL query. It's also much easier to find relationships between schools, workplaces and illnesses like cancer. They can also ask questions such as "How many people whose parents were divorced will go on to have a divorce?" with a simple SQL query, instead of the extensive surveys that are required in other countries.

    The RISKS, on the other hand, are obvious.

  9. Myth and reality by Xenna · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well, with today's technology the government/EU certainly could collect a lot of information about it's citizens.

    I had a funny experience with a Dutch central government agency that is supposed to do all wiretapping for the police. They contacted me because they wanted to tap one of our customer's e-mail domains on tax fraud suspicions.

    It took them two weeks to figure out who was handling the mail for the suspicious company's domain (us). Then they wanted us to forward all mail to a mailbox at a free mail provider. This mailbox almost immediately filled up and started sending 'mailbox full' messages to the original senders.

    Big brother has a lot to learn...

    X.

    (BTW: I changed the sender addresses as a precaution ;-)