Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Canadians, Too, Should Demand Surveillance Answers

Posted by timothy on from the enjoy-the-government-run-fiber-network dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Privacy and surveillance have taken centre stage this week with the revelations that U.S. agencies have been engaged in massive, secret surveillance programs that include years of capturing the meta-data from every cellphone call on the Verizon network (the meta-data includes the number called and the length of the call) as well as gathering information from the largest Internet companies in the world including Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Apple in a program called PRISM. Michael Geist explains how many of the same powers exist under Canadian law and that it is very likely that Canadians have been caught up by these surveillance activities."

49 of 81 comments (clear)

  1. Absolutely by Phrogman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Guaranteed that our country is willingly sharing all of our data with the US. I don't doubt it for a minute. And its likely been doing it since Echelon was first built, now just more efficiently than before. I have zero faith in Steven Harper's credibility or integrity at any rate.

    --
    "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    1. Re:Absolutely by JMJimmy · · Score: 2

      I doubt Canadian law enforcement is going outside the law... they don't need to since the US has no problem spying on foreign countries - we just happen to be in the "lucky" situation that they'll share the intel with us.

    2. Re:Absolutely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Blaming Harper is disingenuous, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews however deserves far more blame. It's not difficult to ascertain his stance with regards to privacy, drugs, gun-related crimes, and other topics related to the prison-industrial complex, and how this relates to American politics.

    3. Re:Absolutely by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I, too, have zero faith in Steven Harper generally and would prefer him and his party out of office, but on this particular issue I'm worried the consensus is quite cross-party, at least between the Conservatives and Liberals. It's not like the practice of shoveling data to the US wholesale started only in 2004: the previous Liberal government under both Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin also maintained strong security & intelligence collaboration with the US.

      Chrétien was more publicly skeptical of US foreign policy than Harper is (e.g. opposing the Iraq war), but I'm not sure his government was in practice different when it came to behind-the-scenes things like how the intelligence services were operated.

      --
      10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
    4. Re:Absolutely by davester666 · · Score: 2

      Yes, it's a tit for tat situation. We can spy on American's and the US can spy on Canadian's.

      It's a win-win.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    5. Re:Absolutely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      People have this disingenuous idea that politicians behave substantially worse than anybody else.

      Politicians aren't any worse than many of the people I've had to work with. People will exploit a situation to their advantage as much as they can get away with. Sometimes the limits are legal. Sometimes they are cultural. Sometimes they are family. Sometimes they are corporate.

      And there are exceptions, more than a few in select organizations. But by and large, that's the scenario. Politicians just happen to be a small identifiable group with varying degrees of much greater power and influence, and therefore their behavior have further reaching effects.

      As Joseph de Maistre put it, "Toute nation a le gouvernement qu’elle mérite." (= "Every nation has the government that it deserves.")

      We live in a democracy, so people get the government the deserve, as it's said. People are responsible for the kinds of politicians in power.

      Stephen Harper is supposed to be a pro-military pro-law conservative economist, and almost 40% of voters went for that. His pre-election fiscal conservativism somehow included a combination of balancing the budget while cutting corporate income tax and spending billions on jets -- his Masters in economics must have convinced him that the key to a balanced budget is to reduce revenues and increase spending. His post-election pro-military stance included cutting services to veterans returning from Afghanistan, as well as cancelling the military jets when he became aware of rising costs that even some of the pro-military conservative politicians in the US took issue with -- this was before the Canadian election. I guess as an economist, he can't be expected to understand such financial things. As for pro-law, he cut resources to the RCMP.

      But you know what, as easy as it is to blame Harper for all of that, he was elected in our voting system. Almost 40% of voters voted for him. And just about nobody cares to see change to the partisan first-past-the-post electoral system that allows less than 40% of voters to elect a majority government.

    6. Re:Absolutely by JustOK · · Score: 1

      It's a scientific fact that Harper is the best PM ever. It's a scientific fact the he is the best person ever.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    7. Re:Absolutely by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's a tit for tat situation. We can spy on American's and the US can spy on Canadian's.

      Several folks that I know or knew(some are dead now from old age/terminal diseases) who worked for various police services across the country said that this is exactly what goes on. Since you can't look at/up people via CPIC legally, among other databases, you can let your neighbors spy on you and reciprocate. All with the nudge-nudge, wink wink.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    8. Re:Absolutely by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Yes, this concept is the basis for Echolon, which has only been happening for decades.

      Hell, the US worked around it's own wiretapping laws by getting the major carriers to route all international calls [at least to Europe] go through the Bahama's, where they would routinely listen in on any call they wanted.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    9. Re:Absolutely by Phrogman · · Score: 1

      Ultimately, yes, we the voters are responsible. While its true the Conservatives engaged in all sorts of illegal shenanigans during the election (transfers of campaign cash, robocalling etc) to ensure they hung on to power, the result was not enough to throw the election. Therefore its our citizenry who are to blame for the fact that Harper is in power and remains there - and now has a majority.
      If the 60% who did not vote showed up in any substantial numbers to cast their ballot it might have made for a very different outcome. Of course a lot of those are students, the unemployed, the homeless etc who have problems with registering to vote, or getting to a polling station etc, which doesn't help. The rich, retired, conservative types can more easily vote I suspect.

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    10. Re:Absolutely by JMJimmy · · Score: 1

      I love the unmarked US helicopters running up and down the out islands in the Bahamas too.

    11. Re:Absolutely by mhotchin · · Score: 1

      "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

        - H. L. Mencken

    12. Re:Absolutely by Steve_Ussler · · Score: 1

      True. Where is the anger? The demonstrations in the streets? We need a US spring...

    13. Re:Absolutely by peawormsworth · · Score: 1

      US carriers route their long distance through Canada and calls from Canada route through the US. I forget the name of this process, but companies say it has to do with bandwidth rates. It seems to me that it is more likely a way to allow domestic only calls to be intercepted by a foreign nation.

    14. Re:Absolutely by alexo · · Score: 1

      People have this disingenuous idea that politicians behave substantially worse than anybody else.

      Politicians aren't any worse than many of the people I've had to work with. People will exploit a situation to their advantage as much as they can get away with. Sometimes the limits are legal. Sometimes they are cultural. Sometimes they are family. Sometimes they are corporate.

      And there are exceptions, more than a few in select organizations. But by and large, that's the scenario. Politicians just happen to be a small identifiable group with varying degrees of much greater power and influence, and therefore their behavior have further reaching effects.

      In order to be a successful politician, and attain and retain said "degrees of much greater power and influence", a person has to be worse than anybody else.

      But that aside, power corrupts. When was the last time you saw a politician actively working to increase personal accountability for his ilk after getting in power?

    15. Re:Absolutely by alexo · · Score: 1

      I, too, have zero faith in Steven Harper generally and would prefer him and his party out of office, but on this particular issue I'm worried the consensus is quite cross-party, at least between the Conservatives and Liberals.

      Then support the NDP (for a party with traction) or Green (for a party that desperately needs to gain some).
      You can also try your luck with Pirate, or even go with an independent (or run as one).

      Personally, I would vote Rhino before I would either LIB or CON.

  2. Where's the Canadian Obama? by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    He'll bring you the "Hope and Change" Americans now enjoy. You certainly deserve it.

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    1. Re:Where's the Canadian Obama? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      He's smoking crack in the Mayor's office in Toronto . . .

      . . . or so they say . . .

      I guess if that video does exist, the NSA will have it. No need to pay $200,000 for it. The CSIS can just ask the NSA to hand it over . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:Where's the Canadian Obama? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Posting anonymously so as not to lose mod points.

      > I didn't hear you ... libertarians complaining then ...

      You weren't listening, then. Period. End of discussion.

      It wasn't just libertarians who complained, either. Right-wing talk radio complained about it endlessly. On our local stations, the afternoon host went ballistic on it for weeks. Even RUSH LIMBAUGH complained about it, and said on 9/12 (the day after the attacks) that the American people had better be VERY careful, or the government would use fear of terrorism to install a surveillance state that would probe everything.

      Pick another bromide, red herring or strawman to pummel. I'm as conservative as they come, and I've been complaining about stuff like this for YEARS.

      -- Stephen

    3. Re:Where's the Canadian Obama? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He died not too long ago

  3. Canadians have a bad habit by Livius · · Score: 2

    ....of copying whatever the Americans do when it's stupid. In those rare moments when Americans get it right, they refuse to imitate because the difference is part of what makes Canadian identity distinctive.

    Curieusement, les Canadien français sourvent font la même chose à l'égard des Canadiens anglais.

    1. Re:Canadians have a bad habit by geogob · · Score: 1

      By "Canadians", I think you mean the conservatives Canadians.

  4. Convenience GT Privacy by beaverdownunder · · Score: 1

    I don't think Canadians who travel to the US or abroad through the US would be happy to trade the 'security' of not having their data shared with the DoHS for the extreme amount of inconvenience that would result.

    I'm a Canadian living in Australia, and when I travel through LAX, US Customs and Immigration doesn't bat an eyelid, but my Australian partner has to typically get fingerprinted, scanned, searched and grunted at for several minutes just to transit.

    I'm not sure too many Canadians would be up for similar treatment given these same officers weren't able to vet them as easily as they do now.

    1. Re:Convenience GT Privacy by blade8086 · · Score: 1

      DURR

      Your whole argument presumes that said fingerprinting, scanning, etc. is justified itself..

      DURR

  5. widespread by stenvar · · Score: 1

    If you read European laws, this kind of spying on citizens by governments has been permitted for a long time, and appears to be widely practiced. Countries like Germany even have state security services spy on parliamentarians regularly and infiltrate political parties.

    1. Re:widespread by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 1

      Well, the Germans have more practice than most.

      --
      "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    2. Re:widespread by Dr.+Tom · · Score: 2

      /scoff

      I visited an East Berlin museum back when there was an East Berlin. There was an exhibit consisting of several rooms worth of intercepted mail. Yeah, they read all the mail, except they didn't really have enough staff to do it all, so most of the letters just sat in crates forever. Basically, they were inept idiots compared to what's being done today.

    3. Re:widespread by stenvar · · Score: 1

      Why is it that nobody seems to care that phone companies and ISPs have been collecting and selling exactly the same information to marketing companies for years?

      Your premise is wrong; phone companies and ISPs cannot and do not sell this information. If they did, you'd know about it because they'd actually be offering it for sale and they couldn't enforce secrecy.

      But even if your ridiculous premise were true, it would be much less harmful: marketing companies don't try to throw you into jail for terrorism, ban you from all flights, or blackmail you to change your political positions. All they do is try to sell stuff to you, which is generally harmless.

      The only thing draconian about this is that the government is too broke to just buy the data like everyone else, so they strong-arm the companies into giving it up for free.

      The US government spending is 40% of GDP (a mind-boggling figure); of course it can buy this stuff, and it does so in large amounts (usually through shell companies): it's called "open source intelligence" (the original meaning of "open source"). They use these sources and tactics for additional information they can't buy on the market. The fact that they go through the trouble of getting this through letters rather than buying tells you they can't get it on the open market.

      (Your world-view is totally out of touch with reality.)

    4. Re:widespread by perceptual.cyclotron · · Score: 1

      Actually, they have much the same problem with what's being done today – only the problem is much much worse. Schneier (as often) had a recent commentary on this.

      Short story: there is simply too much data, and no magical "find the suspicious subgraph" algorithm actually exists. Of course I'm not suggesting this as a justification for the practice – it makes it much more frightening in some ways – but I'm not so sure the modern agencies are that different from the stasi with respect to the information overload problem...

  6. Put your faith in government by Kohath · · Score: 1

    They will protect you from all the usual bogeymen, just like they protect us in the US.

    Plus, free stuff !! (Do you really want upper-class white Georgetown students to have to pay for their own birth control? What is this? Somalia?)

  7. We're Canadian eh! by GrBear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We're no US citizens, we already knew we were under surveillance by the US gov't because we're a foreign country.

    This is the first time smug US citizens find out what the rest of the world feels like.

    Good on ya eh!

    1. Re:We're Canadian eh! by Dzimas · · Score: 1

      It is utterly stupid that the way a person is treated is based upon the location in which their mother pushed them through the birth canal and into the world. We give lip service to freedom, democracy and the right to achieve lofty goals... as long as an individual is "American," "Canadian," "Swiss" and so on. If not, we push ethics aside and condone surveillance, drone attacks, assassinations, invasions and all manner of nastiness -- like a very large pack of wolves.

    2. Re:We're Canadian eh! by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      It is utterly stupid that the way a person is treated is based upon the location in which their mother pushed them through the birth canal and into the world. We give lip service to freedom, democracy and the right to achieve lofty goals... as long as an individual is "American," "Canadian," "Swiss" and so on. If not, we push ethics aside and condone surveillance, drone attacks, assassinations, invasions and all manner of nastiness -- like a very large pack of wolves.

      Well, there's lots of studies on humanity and herd/tribe/pack mentality; it is built right in to us. However, I think you'll find that "American/Not American" is significantly different than "Canadian/Not Canadian" and "Swiss/Not Swiss". But then, there's always "White/Not White" "Rich/Not Rich" "Over 6'/Not Over 6'" "Mandarin Speaking/Not Mandarin Speaking" "Car Owner/Not Car Owner" "Employed/Unemployed" "Educated/Uneducated" ... and the list goes on.

      People are treated differently based on where they're born because Us are different than Them -- socially, mostly; Us have different sets of values bred into us, and our society and culture (social, economic, etc.) reflect these differences.

      It's actually a pretty effective survival mechanism; our ability to differentiate on so many levels all at once is one reason why we're the ones having such a profound effect on our planet. You could say the same for algae, but they're not as entertaining as humans.

  8. 5 Eyes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's the 5 Eyes problem.

    The USA, UK, Aus, NZ and CAN have reciprocal intelligence agreements.

    Canada spies on US citizens, gives the intelligence to the US. And vice-versa.

    It's been going on for years.

  9. Re: Why? It's for our children. by s4ltyd0g · · Score: 2

    Your sarcasm detector is broken.

  10. Computation is a military technology by j-stroy · · Score: 1

    Get the correct perspective: computation combined with signals analysis is a military technology plain and simple. This is a widespread use of military technology in the civilian domain and it has wide reaching effects on society similar to the contact of any other form of weaponized / military technology with civilians. There are various international agreements respecting the separation of the civilian domain from the military domain. The lack of these agreements with respect to computation and surveillance is a huge (and perhaps intentional) oversight.

  11. Legal, shmegal by FuzzNugget · · Score: 1

    The problems with laws that provide "just in case" excessive power to government after a horrific event is that they will always abuse it and that the precedent has been set. New-found power to a government are freedoms lost forever.

  12. Every Country in the World by Etherwalk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Of course Canada is doing it; of course the United States is doing it; Every country that can figure out how is probably doing it. It's like sex. Everyone is doing it or trying to do it.

  13. Echelon by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    Echelon is old, we've progressed to admission and some disclosure - for decades you were a conspiracy nutcase they would dismiss if you even mentioned "Echelon". Then a few nations admitted it's existence on record and how they planned to quit, all while the USA denied the whole thing and still dismissed you as a conspiracy nut.

    Bush did the 1st "non-Echelon" spying, illegally and we somehow ignored all that and passed a law to allow it and then passed one to prevent suing the conspirators (that part during Obama I believe. ATnT gave the Dems a lot of money.)

    The change is that they are not denying it anymore and are welcoming debate; but long after it was legalized. Hope was always just a marketing word, all the way back to when Clinton used it.

    --
    Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
  14. Canadian Government Doesn't Listen by kawabago · · Score: 1

    The Conservative Government in Canada doesn't listen to what Canadians are saying to them directly, why would they listen when they aren't being spoken too?

    1. Re:Canadian Government Doesn't Listen by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      Harper wouldn't be in power if the left-wing parties hadn't joined a bizarre suicide pact to force yet another bloody election that no-one wanted.

      Besides, all governments love spying on people whenever they can get away with it. At least with a center-ish government in power, the left-wing media will oppose them rather than blindly go along.

  15. Re: Why? It's for our children. by davester666 · · Score: 1

    Don't be silly.

    My child attends school via video-conference. Going outside is dangerous!

    --
    Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  16. Re: Why? It's for our children. by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 1

    And yet, if I had a nickel for every "If it makes my family safer I'm for it." and a penny for every "I don't have anything to hide." said non-sarcastically, I'd be able to buy myself some real privacy.

  17. This keeps getting omitted by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    Maybe this doesn't matter to others, for some reason; but -

    The call metadata they're collecting also includes the location the call originated from and the location of the person receiving the call. I think that's a much bigger deal, since it means they are effectively tracking everyone who uses a cell phone.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  18. Noooooo by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

    > "it is very likely that Canadians have been caught up by these surveillance activities."

    RC Secret MP: "Turn it up, what are they saying?"
    (turns up volume)

    Person 1: "MMmmmm. That's some good backbacon, eh?"
    Person 2: "Ya, eh. Put some more maple syrup on it, eh."
    (sound of crunching crash in background)
    Person 2: "What was that, eh?"
    (some footsteps)
    Person 1: "Looks like another beaver cut down a tree and it almost hit the cabin, eh."

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  19. instead of just complaining online by RobbieCrash · · Score: 1

    Write your MP, MPP, city councillor, mayor, the PMO, everyone. Call them. Complain. Make them hear your voice.

    Online complaining and petitions are great for raising public awareness, but until you actually send those messages to those in power, it does nothing.

    --
    Keep on knockin'
    https://robbiecrash.me
  20. Re: Why? It's for our children. by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

    And yet, if I had a nickel for every "If it makes my family safer I'm for it." and a penny for every "I don't have anything to hide." said non-sarcastically, I'd be able to buy myself some real privacy.

    Not in Canada; they just got rid of the penny.

  21. Re:Why bother? by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

    Why bother about surveillance? Canadians have always has this deference to government under the rubric of POGG (peace, order, good government).

    ==//==

    ?

    I'm sure there are a few Canadians who could vouch for this, but most seem to go more for NIMBY. It's one reason Canadians don't mind centralized government; that way everyone knows where they are and generally what they're up to, and can avoid them politely.

  22. Major difference Privacy in Canadian Constitution by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    No matter what illegal laws or treaties that PM Harper signed, Canadians have a specific right of privacy spelled out in the Canadian Constitution.

    Which makes these actions illegal no matter what justifications were given.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --