Slashdot Mirror


Sweden On Verge of Passing Sweeping Wiretap Plan

An anonymous reader writes "No one seems to have noticed that Sweden is close to passing a far-reaching wiretapping program that would greatly expand the government's spying capabilities by permitting it to monitor all email and telephone traffic coming in and out of the country. If a bill before parliament becomes law, the country's National Defence Radio Establishment (FRA) will monitor all internet traffic that passes in or out of the country. As the article notes, there's a good chance email traveling from, say, the UK to Finland would be fair game, since it's likely to traverse through Sweden before reaching its final destination. So far, there's been nary a peep from Swedish media about the plan."

26 of 234 comments (clear)

  1. Sonera moved their email servers because of this by kaarlov · · Score: 5, Informative

    Finnish telco Sonera, which is nowadays part of Swedish TeliaSonera moved recently their email servers back to Finland from Sweden because of this.
    Apparently their customers were concerned enough.

  2. Re:Hate to say this but... by remahl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This has nothing at all to do with Pirate Bay. This is NSA-style wiretapping. The evidence gathered can (supposedly) not be used in regular criminal investigations for copyright infringement.

  3. Not entirely accurate by j1976 · · Score: 5, Informative

    There has actually been quite a lot of fuss around this law. For example, a seldomly used law paragraph enabled the social democratic minority to delay this proposal for a year, something which gained quite some attention when it happened. If that had not been done, the law would have passed a year ago. An update to what was happening during this period is available at http://www.idg.se/2.1085/1.156736 (swedish only). IDG is the largest swedish news agency for technology-related news. At the national swedish radio homepage http://www.sr.se/cgi-bin/ekot/artikel.asp?Artikel=1242136 you can read about finlands protests against the law. They also published news about the growing criticism of the law at http://www.sr.se/Ekot/artikel.asp?artikel=1240436 (both links in swedish).

  4. Its not a swedish idea. by miffo.swe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This has more to do with being able to help forieign surveilance than any domestic spying. When an ally calls for help sweden will use this to be able to bend over properly and hand over any domestic information about the targets living in sweden. Swedish domestic security has never been self-sustained but rather a help organization for ally interests like the US.

    --
    HTTP/1.1 400
  5. ECHELON? by Indyan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I found this report from the EU parliament very interesting: http://www.fas.org/irp/program/process/rapport_echelon_en.pdf At page 27 there is a list of all countries intercepting private communications, and basically everyone does it? I think some former FRA employee basically admitted they have done this sort of thing for a long time already too. I'm by no means saying this is ok, but it's kinda interesting how Google reacted on this for example. They said they can't put their servers in Sweden, but US/UK etc is fine? What is the differance?

    --
    Free unix shells: Blinkenshell.org
  6. Sweden? wtf? by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 4, Insightful

    *reads article*

    Oh, just another out-of-control power grab, no doubt MAFIAA approved, with a healthy side-dose of "fuck you" to privacy.

  7. Re:Hate to say this but... by miffo.swe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The evidence gathered can (supposedly) not be used in regular criminal investigations for copyright infringement."

    When the US put pressure on Sweden for ThePirateBay Swedish authorities happily broke multiple laws and smiled about it. I have no doubts that any information about petty things like small time copyright infringement will be handed over.

    --
    HTTP/1.1 400
  8. Peep? Not so.. pretty loud buzz more like it. by Henriok · · Score: 5, Informative

    First: As one living in Sweden I don't recognize this description. For one, there is quite a stir in IT related, and mainstream media about this. And this have been going on for several years. The current government suggested this while in opposition a couple of years ago, and it was one of the first new legislations that they announced when they got into power 2006. It's been under debateand scrutiny in media and several governmental instances since then.

    Secondly: FRA is _not_ a military organization. It's a civil autority that can be used for several other governmental organizations such as the police, secret police, military or even state owned corporations. But the name is confusing, I grant you that.

    One interessting thing is that FRA operates the fifth fastest computer on the Top500 list. Most people believe that is was purchased to meet the need of this new surveillance demand.

    It's hardly unknown to the public, even if most are not interessted in such matters. Swedes are pretty used to governmental control and oversight, and we acually enjoy the benefits of it. Our trust in authoroty of this kind is strong since it have served us well in the past.

    --

    - Henrik

    - when the Shadows descend -
    1. Re:Peep? Not so.. pretty loud buzz more like it. by init100 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Swedes are pretty used to governmental control and oversight, and we acually enjoy the benefits of it.

      Such as?

      Our trust in authoroty of this kind is strong since it have served us well in the past.

      You mean your trust. I, for one, do not trust them anymore than any other government. And in what instance did it serve us well in the past?

  9. what seems to absurd to me by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is this attitude on slashdot: shocked, shocked i tell you, that a governmental organization is not going to protect my information for me

    encrypt if you don't want it snooped on. if it goes out on the wire, it is prone to being intercepted and snooped on, by the government or someone else. you realize that, right? so where is all the shock and amazement coming from that a government is doing what governments always do?

    i'm not saying you don't have a right to privacy. i'm saying you are absurd if you rely on a government organization to protect your privacy for you. regardless of the law. YOU need to protect your privacy. you can't expect the government to do that competently, regardless of the law. and then, in a forum populated with a bunch of people supposedly experienced enough with the subject matter, to come from this position of complete naivete on the subject?

    all i am saying is that its just kind of disingenuous for a lot of you, who to start from the default position of healthy distrust of government... to suddenly express shock and amazement at a government trying to snoop on you. this is a new concept to you? you're not jaded and cynical at this point, as you SHOULD be on the subject matter of governments and snooping if you have any awareness of the subject matter? folks: your shock and amazement is only possible if massive trust in government is your default position. you see the absurdity in that, right?

    "omg! my government wants to spy on me? the idea never occured to me!"

    really?

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  10. Re:I thought the UK was on the road to 1984... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This "kind of shit" is about a surveillance society, and neither Brave New World nor Snow Crash is about that. It's true that always hearing about 1984 is getting tiresome, but unfortunately there is not a lot of other (popular) novels that put a strong emphasis on this subject. The sad truth is sci-fi is mostly interested in "cool" technology (even if this pseudo technology is absurd) rather than political ideas.

  11. Re:But will it pass? by nx · · Score: 5, Informative

    This one is almost certain to pass, a majority of parliament have already professed their coming yes-votes.

    Party whips takes care of those who are critical to the law: It was up for a vote last year, but got put on a year-long hold for further debate (which, naturally, never took place). One member of parliament (Fredrick Federley) who was elected on a privacy platform, among other issues, abstained from voting and took so much heat from his party that he'll be voting yes this time around. At least according to his blog.

    --
    L'homme est né libre, et partout il est dans les fers.
  12. More on this from Swedish Pirate Party leader by CrystalFalcon · · Score: 5, Informative
    Read more about this from the Pirate Party leader Rick Falkvinge:

    More on the Ubiquitous Wiretapping Bill

    Swedish NSA to monitor all phones, Internet

    Excerpt from first link:

    The bill's name is en anpassad försvarsunderrättelseverksamhet , translating roughly to a better adapted military intelligence gathering. Key points of the bill:
    • At about 20 points in the national information infrastructure network, all traffic is spliced off and fed into the Försvarets Radioanstalt (FRA) agency. These points are placed as to catch all traffic entering and leaving the Swedish borders, but will catch much - if not most - domestic traffic too, for technical routing reasons. Electronic traffic, in particular, always takes the scenic route.
    • This affects all Internet traffic and all telephony traffic, meaning web surfing, e-mail, phone, and fax are affected, to mention but a few.
    • The FRA will scan all traffic in real time according to about 250,000 search criteria. The traffic that matches will be automatically saved for manual intelligence analysis. This obviously takes a lot of computing power. We don't know the exact extent of FRA's computing power, but we do know that they have the world's fifth most powerful computer, in competition mostly with nuclear physics labs.
    • "Customers" that will be able to place requests for searches include all authorities (all some 500 of them including Department of Transportation, Department of Agriculture, etc., but notably the police, secret service and customs).
    • The political administration may order (not request, but order) a political wiretapping to catch communications they are interested in.
    • Major businesses will also get access to the wiretapping grid, but will have to go through an authority.
    • The bill specifically allows for singling out Swedish people for specific wiretapping, although only under certain qualifiers.
    • The mandate for the agency's own intelligence gathering is broadened from "external military threats" to "external threats", which are exemplified as international crime; trafficking in drugs, weapons, or people; migration movements; religious or cultural conflicts; environmental imbalances and threats; raw materials shortages; and currency speculation. More examples are listed.

  13. Re:Encrypt everything. ALL of it. by mmcuh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From what I've heard the snoops care more about who is talking to who than about what's actually being said. Mapping social networks and all that.

    So in addition to encryption, we would all have to run anonymising proxies, such as Tor or Freenet.

  14. Yes, any evidence can be used by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In sweden there is no such legal concept as "fruit from the bad tree". That is, any evidence (gathered regardless if a search was lawfull or not, will hold in court. Single police officers may loose their jobs, but the evidence found still hold.

    Not that I think these laws will be passed to please the music and movie industries, but they could certainly use any evidence passed to them from this perfect, ever watching organization.

  15. WTF?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is SWEDEN! Since when has IT been a hotbed for terrorists or drug dealers? Middle-eastern terrorists moving to the cold sub-arctic climate of Scandinavia? Drug lords from the Columbian jungles? Not bloody likely.

    It can't be militarily inspired either; Sweden is "non aligned" and has (officially) maintained a neutral stance in all wars for (nearly) the last 200 years, and they are not a party to NATO or a similar organization/treaty. Sweden has, in fact, the longest tenure of neutrality of any country in the world (yes, that includes Switzerland).

    So, they're going to wage war against, and gather enormous amounts of intelligence on, its own citizens, instead? Are they going to raise the already highest tax rates in the world to pay for this needless Britain-esque surveillance?

    This has nothing to do with terrorists or drugs, and everything to do with copyright "enforcement" and having more "legal" ways to gather data on Pirate Bay, their users, and other services that may set up shop there. There's no other plausible explanation.

  16. Re:But will it pass? by SwedishPenguin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One member of parliament (Fredrick Federley) who was elected on a privacy platform, among other issues, abstained from voting and took so much heat from his party that he'll be voting yes this time around. What a f*cking coward..
    The only parites that have had a consitently negative attitude towards this proposal has been the left party and the greens. One of the will get my vote in the next election.
  17. Re:Sonera moved their email servers because of thi by jhol13 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually Finnish law required that.

    According to Finnish law e-mail has very high level of privacy protection.

    So in order not to break Finnish law they were practically forced to move the servers to Finland as they could not guarantee e-mail privacy otherwise.

  18. Tit for tat? by hyades1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The United States has already said that pretty much any private communication it can get hold of is fair game. Does anybody have the feeling that a lot of other countries are responding by taking the view that, "If you read my mail, I"m sure as hell going to read yours."

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  19. Federley's Blog by Dobeln · · Score: 4, Informative

    From his blog: http://federley.blogspot.com/

    "Vad som kommer att ske den 17 juni? Ja vem vet. Kan ju bli pÃ¥kÃrd, sjuk, vara pÃ¥ resande fot, bli gravid eller bara vara dÃr och rÃsta ja. Vem vet. Den dagen den sorgen."

    Translation:

    "What will happen on the 17:th of June? Well, who knows? I might be hit by a car, become ill, spend the day travelling, become pregnant or just be there and vote yes. That day, that sorrow..."

    The sad fact of life is that Swedish MP:s serve almost entirely on the whim of their party leadership. If they make trouble, they get wiped off the list in the next election, and they're gone.

  20. You understand the US Constitution WELL by tjstork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The base is: Citizens are allowed to do anything not forbidden, for the state it is the other way around, anything they do must be allowed by law first.

    My God, if only Americans understood the US Constitution as well as you do, with that statement.

    --
    This is my sig.
  21. The Swedish News in English Story on this by XavidX · · Score: 4, Informative

    A English Source From Sweden

    http://www.thelocal.se/12252/20080605/

  22. Potential For Good by Shihar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I personally think that this law might actually be a good thing. Due to the networked nature of the Internet, Sweden will be opening everyone's mail, not just the mail of their citizens. As a result, you might find that this prompts people to start truly using some decent encryption. If there was a sudden rise in encryption, individuals defending themselves might make this entire argument a moot point. If it takes a few dozen NASA (or Sweden's equivalent) super computers a few weeks to crack an e-mail, that fairly well rules out mass snooping.

    The obvious counter is to make encryption without a back door illegal. With mobile open source projects which can set up home in any nation (or no nation) though, I think that the governments ability to enforce such absurdity would be rendered impotent.

    1. Re:Potential For Good by aurispector · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I get your point about this forcing positive change, but the plan is still bullshit of the worst kind.

      1 - Get enough nations to start monitoring foreign email and phone calls, claiming it's only for serious national security issues. Ban use for domestic spying or criminal investigation to appease opponents.

      2 - Implement international information-sharing agreement for said national-security information. Implement it so well that the various nations are essentially accessing the same system, effectively bypassing the domestic-use ban since another country gathers the information for you.

      3 - Grandstanding politicians running for re-election allow access for domestic issues like kiddie porn while screaming "Think of the children!!!"

      4 - Greedy politicians bribed to allow access for DRM violations citing made up numbers about lost revenue for a dying recording industry.

      5 - ???

      6 - World-wide panopticon-enforced fascist dictatorship. The word "privacy" is removed from dictionaries of all languages. George Orwell's ghost stands slack-jawed from the realization that he vastly underestimated the degree of control governments are now able to enforce.

      At this point in history I'd like to see an open source email client that automatically uses nsa-grade encryption. Make it dead simple & make it default. Basically this will be necessary to ensure freedom since corporate controlled government has no further use for it.

      Welcome to the new milennium!

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
  23. Re:But will it pass? by SwedishPenguin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually it's quite normal for european members of parliament to be forced to go along with their party's stance. Yes but that doesn't make his position right. If he has the principles he said he had when he was elected (he was elected with person-votes, where if a person gets at least x% of party votes he/she is automatically included among the partys MPs (assuming of course the party gets over 4% of the vote).

    Some issues are worth getting thrown out of the party come next election for, this is one of them.
  24. Re:But will it pass? by plover · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This isn't America were you have coherent government. Thanks; if I had been drinking anything, I would have laughed it out of my nose when I read this!

    think "how would a government react if the president were republican, the vice president democratic, the secretary of state republican, ...". But that's not exactly how it works in America. When the powers are split between the parties (executive is one party, senate and/or house is a different party) then they accomplish nothing at all; and I learned long ago that gridlock is how the founding fathers assured we would preserve stability in our laws.

    In other words you get the combined downsides of all parties : massive taxes (democrat), sweeping investigative powers (rep.), no freedom of speech (dem.), direct judicial interference by unions (dem.), ... Ah. Gridlock avoids that particular downside quite well. The only way much change happens is when one party really controls both the legislature and the executive. We kind of saw that here in the US when Bush took office and both houses of Congress were controlled by his party. They did some republican agenda things like passing popular tax cuts, but refused to accept the unpopular responsibility of cutting government spending. (So we've been generating a huge deficit ever since he came into power, essentially financing the Iraq war on the promise that if I ever have grandchildren they will pay it back.)

    So now the US is on the verge of "throwing the bums out" again. I guess it's not 100% hopeless for those of us who are fans of gridlock: the Democrats who are poised to take power have much internal squabbling and no coherent direction other than "away from George Bush", and can barely agree on anything themselves, so I'm not too worried that they'll pass much of their crazy platform either.

    --
    John