Slashdot Mirror


MEPs Vote To Suspend Data Sharing With US

New submitter mrspoonsi writes with this news, excerpted from the BBC: "The European Parliament has voted to suspend the sharing of financial data with the U.S., following allegations that citizens' data was spied on....The European Parliament voted to suspend its Terrorist Finance Tracking Program (TFTP) agreement with the US, in response to the alleged tapping of EU citizens' bank data held by the Belgian company SWIFT. The agreement granted the U.S. authorities access to bank data for terror-related investigations but leaked documents made public by whistleblower Edward Snowden allege that the global bank transfer network was the target of wider U.S. surveillance."

180 comments

  1. The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Langalf · · Score: 0, Redundant

    and we are all surprised?

    1. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by some+old+guy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, we're surprised that shills keep posting "we already knew this" and thinking they're clever.

      --
      Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.
    2. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Surprised at how the NSA got so deep into France/EU and was able to take over their domestic telco system for generations.
      For that you would need a Vichy "tech" to actively help and collaborate to hide foreign telco tech within France/EU.
      The UK, Italy, Germany is understandalbe as client or defeated nations. France and other more tech savvy EU nations should have been able to understand their own internal (global) telco networks. How is the NSA getting all the data out?
      Is France and others looping the bulk of its calls via NSA friendly countries to save in domestic telco interconnect fees?
      The US message back is http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57608909-83/intelligence-chief-le-mondes-allegations-against-nsa-false/
      The French and other EU nations are just talking about weapons of mass destruction too much on the phone? Just a list of US/UK keywords and French people chatting on the phone the wrong way?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by jimminy_cricket · · Score: 1

      Yes. Do you suppose the role of an intelligence organization is to spy on its allies? How much of an ally can they really be if we spy on them like we do our enemies? The role of the NSA is not (or should not be) to spy on everyone. Spying is not a friendly activity. Spying is fundamentally a hostile activity and subjecting our allies to hostile activity will quickly result in a loss of allies.

      Would you be friendly with someone who was spying on you?

    4. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Feyshtey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "There's no way our government would do that."
      "There's no way we wouldnt already know if they were doing that."
      And from the last several years,
      "Obama is going to fix all the abuses of the warmongering Republicans. So whatever evils were there they will be going away."

      In the end we have purchased what has befallen us, but not through informed consent. It's simply been done through willful ignorance and denial. It takes minimal awareness to recognize how clueless most Americans are, wholly consumed with the mind-rot like Jersey Shore or Facebook.

      So yes, most are/were surprised.

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    5. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by AHuxley · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In theory we did. The US/UK NATO crypto offers for friendly embassy use was junk from the 1950-90's. It kept the Soviets out but let the NSA and GCHQ in. The UK and US press often hinted at plain text from embassy intercepts over many years. How far back do you want to go:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_and_Mitchell_defection 1960?
      ..."practices the United States uses in gathering intelligence information ... deliberately violating the airspace of other nations ... intercepting and deciphering the secret communications of its own allies ..."
      Thanks to Snowden we have the history needed for the dreamy sock puppets. I saw one offer that the US does not really 'use' the info for finance or domestic political needs.
      A huge change from its not possible, would never work, would be found out, the data sets are too large, the US brands would never help, the political and legal protections ...:)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    6. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Crashmarik · · Score: 2

      Of course you are going to spy on your allies. They can be much more dangerous than your enemies ever could.

    7. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Joining+Yet+Again · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My experience with ISP administration, like my father's experience as a Telefonica engineer, is that you don't have to be a genius to have a very substantial level of technical responsibility - but you do have to be one of the lads.

      And that means you're very chummy and utterly loyal to the environment around you. Your god-like powers give you god-like beliefs, especially over your ability to monitor the behaviour of others. After all, you have so much responsibility and so much control, which means you must know best, right?

    8. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How old are you? When I got on the internet in 1992 as a 9th grader, the NSA didn't even officially exist, but I knew full well that the NSA was monitoring foreign and domestic network traffic.

      The Room 641A story was on the cover of the New York Times 7 years ago.

      I don't think saying "we already knew this" is clever. It's a fact. I knew this. And since I did not have any special access to information, I have to assume that everyone else who paid any attention also knew this.

    9. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by sI4shd0rk · · Score: 1

      I don't think saying "we already knew this" is clever. It's a fact. I knew this. And since I did not have any special access to information, I have to assume that everyone else who paid any attention also knew this.

      Yes, and? Enough with the "Why are you surprised?"-type posts. I agree that it was obvious to anyone with a brain, so there's no point in acting like everyone is surprised (more angry after having seen evidence maybe, but not surprised).

      --
      Ignorance is a choice
    10. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Langalf · · Score: 1

      I remember seeing a recruiting brochure for the NSA when I was in college in the late 70's. They touted something like, "Come work for the NSA, we are 10 to 15 years ahead of what is considered state-of-the-art".

    11. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course you are going to spy on your allies. They can be much more dangerous than your enemies ever could.

      Yes, take America for example.

      America is currently as much of a threat to the rights and freedoms of everyone else in the world as the people they purport to be watching for.

      Why would anybody continue to trust the US when they're acting like a bunch of self entitled assholes who think their rights trump ours?

    12. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by sI4shd0rk · · Score: 2

      Of course you are going to spy on your allies.

      I suppose that's why the US government spies on its own citizens. A cowardly way of thinking, but definitely not an excuse thugs would be above using.

      --
      Ignorance is a choice
    13. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "The French and other EU nations are just talking about weapons of mass destruction too much on the phone?"

      Yes, they prevented all the terrorist acts Angela Merkel was planning too.

    14. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I saw one offer that the US does not really 'use' the info for finance or domestic political needs.

      That most likely would be Cold Fjord... well known pro military drone troll who get more airtime on Slashdot story submissions than he should...

    15. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      Especially since the correct response, if we already knew this, should be directed at the MEPs and it is "I told you so".

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    16. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Yes UK/US magazines and books where hinting at much from public news by the late 1970's
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Puzzle_Palace was ~1982.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    17. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The EU knew in 2001 "on the existence of a global system for the interception of private and commercial communications (ECHELON interception system)" via http://cryptome.org/echelon-ep-fin.htm

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    18. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      When I got on the internet in 1992 as a 9th grader, the NSA didn't even officially exist,

      Even when I got on the Internet in the early 1980's, in college - and probably still.
      Doesn't NSA stand for No Such Agency?

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    19. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Hell, even Gary Seven had an NSA ID.

    20. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Nyder · · Score: 1

      and we are all surprised?

      Just curious, how much does the NSA pay you for these posts? I'm broke, the holidays are coming out, and I don't mind stepping on my morals to help the US fuck over the world.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    21. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Feyshtey · · Score: 1

      The point is that you assumed any significant number of people were paying attention. They werent. They were blissfully ignorant, and a damn notable percentage of them still are.

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    22. Re: The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by yacc143 · · Score: 1

      Get yourself educated, the NSA is a little bit older than the 90s.

      http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency

    23. Re: The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by yacc143 · · Score: 1

      Well, he did fix the illegal activities of the previous administration.

      He's a law professor.

      So now all these stuff has been made as legal as possible.

      See, you should be happy that you've lost your privacy legally, aren't you happy?

    24. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      There was a practice on Usenet by some to put many random but suspicious words in signatures, as a joking attempt to clog up the NSA computers. This goes back to the 80s I think.

      This is still in Emacs, for example I just got this output by asking:
      global ANZUS fundamentalist CipherTAC-2000 assassinate NWO pipeline Ceridian Area 51 Treasury analyzer Marxist Janet Reno embassy CESID

    25. Re: The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Feyshtey · · Score: 1

      If it was unconstitutional at any point passing a law that says it's ok makes it no less unconstitutional. Any law professor worth a god damn could tell you that. But this particular law professor will sometimes pass a law as a token gesture or otherwise pass an executive order, and pretend that everything is on the up and up now because he knows there's no way in hell to pass a constitutional amendent making what is being done actually legal.

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    26. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      Would you be friendly with someone who was spying on you?

      If she's cute, I might even be more friendly.

      Allies are always potential adversaries on any subject. Or do you expect allies to always have the same agendas and always vote and have the same political views on everything?

    27. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      I don't mind stepping on my morals to help the US fuck over the world.

      This is probably fair, as we have a large group of people dedicated to fucking over the US -- we call them politicians, especially US politicians.

    28. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      most Americans are, wholly consumed with the mind-rot like Jersey Shore or Facebook.

      I have yet to see the proof that mindless entertainment has a negative effect on people using their brains. I suspect it's one of those things that simply sounds reasonable and appeals to our ego, but there's absolutely no proof of. Like sex, drugs, and violence in the media causes those things in real life.

      I suspect it's actually that most Americans are consumed with trying to get by, or are too discouraged by the news to try to make a difference. Honestly, where do you start being active? CISPA II, climate change, the NSA, the patriot act, the war on drugs, budget cuts, patent reform, education reform, health care reform, scaling back TSA, scaling back the rest of the government, regulating chewing gum additives, decreasing defense spending, pro choice or pro life debate, electoral college reform, campaign finance reform, the debate of the minute about taxes, EPA standards, the carbon tax, gun control (pro or con), term limits, gerrymandering, third party politics, national ID laws, net neutrality, affirmative action, immigration, etc. No matter what your political beliefs, no matter your news source, it's tough to flip on the news and not come to the conclusion that everything is going to hell. That's kind of the goal of the news. After a while, most people get burned out if they ever cared.

      I have no proof that THAT is the reason people are clueless beyond that's why I often ignore politics, but it's more plausible to me than Jersey Shore (which, by the way, ended about a year ago) or other entertainment forms you don't personally like ruining America.

    29. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Langalf · · Score: 1

      Damn, I should have thought of that. I could get PAID for this?

      Seriously, I just put up a quick snarky comment when I saw the post. Now "I" am the one surprised at all the hot and bothered response.

    30. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      No-one is surprised. Some people are, however, apparently surprised that such "chartered" activity may have repercussions when the other parties find out about it.

    31. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      Let's just take it as given that nobody is surprised.

      Doesn't that make suspending data with the US *more* urgent? They are having high-profile leaks of this information! You don't share private information with people who can't keep it private.

    32. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is laughable, not your comment, but the FAKE outrage of these countries, they all knew about it and cooperated allowing it to happen, now that a bunch of unconfirmed "documents" come out exposing them for partaking in this little venture now they "act out in anger" (eyes rolling).

      What was the excuse prior to the NSA? Have we forgot that this spying game has been going on prior to WWII? Now the NSA and the US is getting targeted by this FRAUDULENT behavior of anger.

      The old saying "we know they are spying on us, and they know we are spying on them, but everyone acts like no one is spying on anyone" Key thing "acts" but they all are "aware" it is going on.

    33. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by davester666 · · Score: 1

      No Souls Allowed

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    34. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by strikethree · · Score: 1

      Where this conversation went off track is this: The NSA *is* supposed to be doing all of this just as foreign SIGINT services are supposed to be doing it.

      The real surprise, hence the real problem, is that this spying is not being used purely for State related safety. It is being passed to various other entities to be used for common criminal prosecutions. This is just plain invasive and abusive. It gives WAY too much power to the unethical greedy powermongers.

      I recall back in 2011 when Bush made the statement that September 11th happened because of lack of data sharing... and I knew then that THIS was going to be the result. The types of data that were not being shared were common criminal type data. I knew the powermongers would try to get at the State related data through this "lack of data sharing" issue. It is a shame that they succeeded because America is now officially the most Ultimate Police State ever created on this planet.

      There is no need for lip service concerning freedom and liberty anymore. It is all gone now. Everything I do, including posting this message, I do with the knowledge that it is being stored, filed, sorted, and categorized somewhere and that at some point, it WILL come back to haunt me. THAT IS NOT FREEDOM. Those are chains.

      America will likely survive but I doubt that the police apparatus will. It is not a function that belongs in a civilized society.

      Dave

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    35. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Were the NSA chartered to spy on allies and friends?

    36. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't NSA stand for No Such Agency?

      No Scruples at All

    37. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by Feyshtey · · Score: 1

      I dont think that those kinds of things actually rot the brain. I just believe that people priorities and values are so far out of whack that they spend exponentially more time finding out what shoe brand Snookie is wearing instead of reading the bills being proposed in Congress. They spend more time sharing videos of cats falling into toilets than they do finding 3 opposing articles on the practices of the Federal Reserve, and are appauled at the notion that they doi a little research to see which article appears to be grounded in the most fact. They sign petitions supporting causes they've never heard of, they elect politicians based on the single piece of information they have (the party affiliation letter next to the name on the ballot), and they take as fact clever one-liners from hacks that label themselves journalists.

      The fact that these mind-rot shows have high ratings isnt a cause-effect argument. It's a symptom of the level of intellectual strength and honesty of far too many Americans.

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    38. Re:The NSA did what they were chartered to do ... by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      How old are you? When I got on the internet in 1992 as a 9th grader, the NSA didn't even officially exist, but I knew full well that the NSA was monitoring foreign and domestic network traffic.

      I knew the NSA existed and was headquartered at fort a Meade some time around the late 70's to early 80's. It really wasn't much of a secret by then. They just didn't do things to draw attention to themselves. However the culture of deney everything continued well after this. I still remember how humorous the article in the Baltimore Sun was about the NSA museum when it opened in 1992 (or there about). The journalist mentioned how difficult it was to find out where it was. I thought he was joking about it's location until I went there myself. There were no signs anywhere and I had to turn off of the main road onto an unmarked gravel road beside an abandoned gas station and drive a couple hundred yards to the unmarked building with a hummer armed with SAMS out front. The author of the article said he had to speak to over a dozen people go find someone who would confirm the museum even existed, several of those also denied the existence of the NSA as well.

  2. The laws! They do nothing! by fustakrakich · · Score: 0

    How will this stop the US from tapping into their cables?

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:The laws! They do nothing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      New EU laws to restrict where EU ISPs can route their traffic, routing to the USA on need rather than a wanting for cheaper rates.

      As for undersea cables, we have the Navy to defend those, well in theory anyway.

      Maybe Europe could create a super Navy to defend them from foreign evil like the USA.

    2. Re:The laws! They do nothing! by no_go · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The amount of information obtained in the "french affair" isn't attainable via "tapping cables".
      It entails access to switching equipment, call detail records, etc.

      This access is via either of two ways:
      - Backdoors
      - Agents in place that have access to those systems.
      It also entails some very fat "pipes" connecting to those systems.

      These aren't new issues regarding security (and I don't mean "cyber security").

      Maybe the powers that be need to start mandating more security to that part of the infra-structure.

      That, and :
      - Auditing of software and hardware (and not just rubber-stamping)
      - Increased security for physical assets (data-centers, overland cables, etc...)
      - And active enforcment of anti-espionage laws
      will mitigate the problem.

      What won't solve it, and will certeanly lead to more abuse and friction between states, is just shrugging
      it of or brushing it under the carpet.

    3. Re:The laws! They do nothing! by lgw · · Score: 1

      Maybe Europe could create a super Navy to defend them from foreign evil like the USA.

      Europe doesn't have the money (though France's military is larger than most people realize). On the other hand, the US doesn't have the money either, and the coming decade will see massive cuts to all this sort of thing: military, NSA, spying in general, you can cut all of it with less squawking than cutting social programs, so we will.
       

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  3. Good luck by stewsters · · Score: 2

    "MEPs vote to suspend US data sharing"

    How do they plan to stop it? I am being serious here. It sounds like the NSA has taps on all their data already, whether Europeans give it freely or not.

    1. Re:Good luck by Aryden · · Score: 4, Informative

      They are talking about a specific program where the EU hands over financial data on suspected terrorists to the US. They will no longer be handing that data over willfully.

    2. Re:Good luck by ledow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why do they need to even bother to stop it? If the US are doing things that we don't want them to do anyway, why go to ANY effort to help them do them legally? This is about removing our assistance that we give them to do it, not stopping them being able to do it.

      Let them take the administrative burden (and I highly doubt they are monitoring every flight and every person on every flight, or else the agreement wouldn't have existed in the first place anyway), let them take the fall when the data is released by accident, and let it look to EU citizens like you're not caving in to the US (which is what we all accused them of when this agreement first appeared).

      Nobody expects it to STOP the US stealing the data, but why should we help them do so at enormous expense to us? It's like piracy - the data is going to be stolen anyway, so why bother putting in a system of controls, contracts and everything else to our cost?

      But, to be honest, this is nothing to do with data leaks or agreements. If you're not already reading this as the first step to broken EU/US relations, then you haven't been paying attention. That this happened is FAR MORE IMPORTANT than what's actually happened. No more easy rides for the US when they want something from us. (As it should be, because they never play ball when we ask for something).

      Even Anglo-US relations are tenuous nowadays. You've just pissed off the French and the Germans. That's pretty much the three biggest economies/countries in the EU. There's not much of a step left until the whole of the EU has problems with the way you do things.

      And then you can say bye-bye to us lending a hand for things like extraditions and terrorist bug-hunts. The EU followed the US into a pointless, long and very, very expensive "war" that never was (you can say what you want - it was NOT a war, legally or ethically - it's was a criminal hunt with guns in foreign countries), in the middle of massive economic troubles, and what did we see from it? Much stricter airport controls for ourselves, giving the US all our data (and getting nothing back), and lots and lots of expensive military action.

      And what do we get back for our assistance? The US spied on us and then couldn't even be bothered to keep the information properly secret (Note: A whistleblower running around the world telling people all these things is TEN TIMES more damning than the fact that you spied them in the first place - it's just amateur). That's not how you treat an ally.

      The biggest thing here is that the EU no longer wants to play ball with the US. If more things emerge, that distrust will deepen. You can play the "most important country in the world" card all you like, the fact is that the EU has more money in trade, and a much greater influence over other countries. It's going to hurt if the US continue to piss off the EU, and there aren't that many people in the EU who would care.

      It's a question of how long before this affects US trade and before we're the ones imposing sanctions and forcing agreements on the US. Because, seriously guys, you might be big, but without the co-operation of your allies, you're in serious trouble.

    3. Re:Good luck by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 5, Informative

      And more specifically, they're talking about a program that undermines SWIFT. As a reminder, in the wake of 9/11 the Bush administration concluded that it could find terrorists through financial transaction tracking. The problem - global wire transfers and other financial messaging is controlled by a Belgian company. The CIA apparently had to be almost restrained from just immediately hacking them outright. Instead the US Treasury got involved and SWIFT were forced to hand over data by virtue of them having a US based datacenter (as a backup for their EU datacenter).

      SWIFT have said, several times and on the record, that they are not happy about being abused for political purposes and immediately began constructing a second backup datacenter also in the EU. The USA, seeing that their leverage over SWIFT was starting to disappear, decided to apply heavy pressure the EU in order to avoid losing access to this data source even after the US datacenter was decommissioned. The result was the EU data sharing agreement.

      The EU parliament was never particularly happy about this arrangement and insisted on there being auditing, etc, which turned out to be a worthless rubber-stamping exercise in which the EU appointed inspectors tried to visit the US Treasury and get reliable documentation on what the data was being used for, but were told to go fuck themselves and that the information they needed was classified. So basically the EU folded under pressure and was then abused, to nobodies surprise at all.

      Now that the TFTP data sharing agreement is suspended, and SWIFT no longer need their US datacenter, the only way back in is hacking. And I'm sure the people at SWIFT know that, and will do their best to stop it.

      Anyway, this is a very good thing. Next up - airline passenger data!

    4. Re:Good luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why lock your car since crook will just break in anyway?

    5. Re:Good luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not true. It's financial data for everyone with bank accounts under the guise of "terrorists". They're also looking for US people with overseas accounts that aren't declared on their tax returns (FBAR).

    6. Re:Good luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyway, this is a very good thing. Next up - airline passenger data!

      Now that would raise a stink, EU passengers not being allowed passage on USA soil.

    7. Re:Good luck by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      That would NEVER happen. The tourism industry would probably launch a coup themselves if the government even *suggested* the idea.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    8. Re:Good luck by mythix · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As a EU citizen, I can only agree. We're increasingly seeing the US (government) as the actual terrorists, which is the only truth as far as i'm concered. I'm happy these economic and data sharing relations are crumbling down. Maybe it will knock some sense into the US government.

      It's a pity for the social and human aspect though, I've been twice and love the country and people.

    9. Re:Good luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The tourism industry VS the USA Government.

      Round One.

      FIGHT!

      seriously, the US government isn't known for its intelligence, they probably will suggest it at least.

    10. Re:Good luck by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Well the EU telco staff now know. Its not legal and they have to pick a winning team and fast. What do a generation of cleared technicians, scientists, engineers and other graduates do working for their nations telcos?
      Do what their legal system says or keep helping a nice 'general', 'political leader', 'boss' who visits from time to time with expensive splitting optical "work"?
      Will that 'general', 'political leader', 'boss' protect them from their own internal security forces and any new investigations?
      The work orders, files, hardware all exists. ID numbers and names are linked. It all depends on most nations internal security forces and their feelings towards their phones been tapped long term.
      Will the 'general', 'political leader', 'boss' win the day or will the internal security forces start interviewing their nations top telco scientists and engineers?
      Will the military intelligence services and foreign security forces take on their own and stop anything getting to the press?
      If the 'general', 'political leader', 'boss' wins its domestic spying as usual - jobs and huge pensions stay. If the internal security forces win the public trials start.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    11. Re:Good luck by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      If the US are doing things that we don't want them to do anyway, why go to ANY effort to help them do them legally?

      We were supposed to be friends. We always sort of knew that the Americans were assholes, but the recent revelations are beyond what most people believed. Now we have proof and are naturally unfriending them.

      Unfortunately the UK is full of arseholes as well, and now the people I used to do business with in the EU don't want to know me. We picked the wrong group to have a "special relationship" (i.e. gimp) with.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:Good luck by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Think of it as keeping EU tourist cash from propping up Cuba.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    13. Re:Good luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      The UK is a prostitute country to foreign affairs for a VERY long time.

      Are the UK sheeple awake yet? or still drugged up on Britain's Got Talent?

    14. Re:Good luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      seriously, the US government isn't known for its intelligence

      Not for THAT kind of intelligence, indeed.

    15. Re:Good luck by rsborg · · Score: 2

      As a EU citizen, I can only agree. We're increasingly seeing the US (government) as the actual terrorists, which is the only truth as far as i'm concered. I'm happy these economic and data sharing relations are crumbling down. Maybe it will knock some sense into the US government.

      It's a pity for the social and human aspect though, I've been twice and love the country and people.

      Don't pity us. Be happy. The demise of the NSA and US security empire as it exists begins at the extremities... we should never have annexed EU data in the first place.

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    16. Re:Good luck by geogob · · Score: 1

      How about the "business industry". They tend to travel a bit.

    17. Re:Good luck by sociocapitalist · · Score: 2

      Now that the TFTP data sharing agreement is suspended, and SWIFT no longer need their US datacenter, the only way back in is hacking. And I'm sure the people at SWIFT know that, and will do their best to stop it.

      Anyway, this is a very good thing. Next up - airline passenger data!

      Yeah it's not like TFTP is very secure...

      (ducks)

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    18. Re:Good luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Now that the TFTP data sharing agreement is suspended

      Nothing has actually been suspended. This was a non-binding vote.

    19. Re:Good luck by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

      My guess is the nsa wouldn't mind if their servers were hacked by concerned Europeans. That's the same as what they do anyway. And don't complain. My national security is a national matter.

      --
      Privacy is terrorism.
    20. Re: Good luck by yacc143 · · Score: 1

      Actually the backup data centre is outside of the EU, located in Switzerland.

    21. Re: Good luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. This was all about posturing, typical of the EU. (Written as a citzen of said government.)

  4. Next up. by sjwt · · Score: 1

    How long before we hear calls to declare the whole EU as terrorist sympathisers?
    As more of this comes out, I hope others join the EU and we start looking at a embargo on sharing information with the US until it learns.

    --
    You have 5 Moderator Points!
    Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
    1. Re:Next up. by scuzzlebutt · · Score: 1

      No need for that. NSA will grab whatever they want anyway. They've been tapping all comms for decades already.

      --
      In C++, your friends can see your privates.
    2. Re:Next up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No need for that. NSA will grab whatever they want anyway. They've been tapping all comms for decades already.

      They won't be able to grab much if the EU stops ISPs from routing data to the USA and back again for the sake of being a cheapskate.

      Ditto for the UK as well, do you want the NSA's twin sister sucking up your data from the boundary of the EU itself?

      PRISM is another matter, and needs a completely different approach, like making popular national alternatives over those that are based in the USA, China has a good example with Baidu.

      You attack the NSA's capability using a multi-pronged attack not a single one.

    3. Re:Next up. by coinreturn · · Score: 4, Funny

      How long before we hear calls to declare the whole EU as terrorist sympathisers? As more of this comes out, I hope others join the EU and we start looking at a embargo on sharing information with the US until it learns.

      I think Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Fox News are already doing that.

    4. Re:Next up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be just easier to classify American as a terrorist organisation as most of the world feels that way all ready.

    5. Re:Next up. by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      While MSNBC, CBS, and ABC are probably defending the NSA spying because criticizing it would tarnish Obama's godlike reputation.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    6. Re:Next up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wow, there's the most ignorant statement I've ever seen here. Are you not aware that Glenn Beck is vehemently opposed to all of this NSA snooping crap, as are an overwhelming majority of "conservatives?" Try reading news sources with a variety of biases so you can get a better overview of what's going on the in the world, rather that just reading leftist sites. (Yes, righty sites are correspondingly biased.)

    7. Re:Next up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI their actual views are (since you don't seem to listen to any of them - but don't let their actual views tarnish your preconceived images):

      - Glenn Beck is quite vocal about the war being a mistake in hindsight. He is quite against what the NSA is doing what they are doing. In short, he's on your side on this. I recommend you actually listen to him - you probably will be surprised.
      - Rush Limbaugh has avoided mentioning the NSA since Snowden came forward much to my dissatisfaction. He doesn't like Snowden personally (probably since he insulted Cheney - who knows...), but has come out against dragnet surveillance summing it up with "I'm a small government guy". Later he was a little more wishy-washy whether it was a big deal or not. I'm guessing he will use this suspension of data sharing to bash Obama if he mentions it at all. Limbaugh does not talk about these matters much though, and prefers to go on endlessly about immigration, health care, and social topics. You're not missing much if you don't listen.
      - Fox News is a large group and they are hardly as uniform as you'd like to believe - you'll have to be more specific. I imagine the Krauthammer and Bill Crystol types will be the most outraged though.

  5. So, let the USA ... by PPH · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... cut off the reciprocal data sharing agreements with EU authorities. The ones where their intelligence agencies can hoover up all financial data from any US organization associated with any EU citizen.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:So, let the USA ... by jareth-0205 · · Score: 4, Informative

      ... cut off the reciprocal data sharing agreements with EU authorities. The ones where their intelligence agencies can hoover up all financial data from any US organization associated with any EU citizen.

      I think that's the issue (and why this sharing has been a bit controversial over here), is that those reciprocal agreements don't exist. The US have been given a view into EU data, and the same sharing doesn't come in the other direction. (whether it was sought... I don't know, but one-sided arrangements are troublesome in and of themselves)

    2. Re:So, let the USA ... by PPH · · Score: 1

      That was sort of my point. I just forgot the <irony> tags.

      Industrial/financial espionage aside, the USA is instantiating a policy much the same as that of the Warsaw pact nations and the USSR following WWII. The next war, or terrorist activity, will be fought on EU territory as a buffer zone. Not in the USA. Unlike the World Wars, there is no physical 'front line'. But a logical one can be created by making an asymmetrical defensive barrier.

      I think the EU is starting to realize this. And they are not happy.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:So, let the USA ... by jalopezp · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure the gp was being coy.

  6. Not hugely suprising by jareth-0205 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The TFTP was a pretty one-sided agreement, and it's therefore politically fragile and the first thing that's likely to be pulled when the trust in the USA's respect of EU data breaks down.

    1. Re:Not hugely suprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, I wonder what was the point of sharing data, if you don't give a peek at it. How can the EU act surprised at the abuse? Special laws always get abused in the end, sometimes they are conceived to be abused in the first place: nazi propaganda anyone?

    2. Re:Not hugely suprising by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 3, Funny

      TFTP is not one-sided, it actually is an ACK'd protocol.

      maybe EU should give the US the BOOTP, then. (but even that is not one-sided, exactly).

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    3. Re:Not hugely suprising by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 1

      It was an abnormally long wait until someone made a TFTP joke...

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    4. Re:Not hugely suprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not known for having a reliable transport mechanism.

  7. Oh no! by barlevg · · Score: 2

    The EU members won't share data with us that we want! If only one of our intelligence bureaus had a way to get data from other countries without their consent...

    1. Re:Oh no! by gsslay · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seriously? The US is in the middle of seriously pissing off all its allies, and your response is simply "We don't care! We'll do what we want and you can't stop us!"

      And people use to wonder why the Middle Eastern countries hated America. This is Europe getting some of the same treatment.

    2. Re:Oh no! by realxmp · · Score: 1

      "had" being the past participle. You had a way to get data from SWIFT without consent but it's likely that particular doorway is now firmly closed. It's possible that the NSA could attempt to penetrate SWIFT again, but the heightened security measures likely to be in place and the political risks of getting caught again so soon after being caught once mean that's a long term op which is unlikely to be approved in the near future. Realistically though it is unlikely SWIFT data access will actually be cut, and even if it were, they'd still be able to access it through friendly agencies such as SIS and DGSE. The point is it's embarrassing and it slows things down.

    3. Re:Oh no! by barlevg · · Score: 1

      My point was that telling a robber "You stole our TV, so now we're not going to invite you over to watch the game at our house" is a pretty funny response. If this gesture is accompanied by, say, installing a lock on the back door that you're confident the robber can't break, then that's another matter entirely.

    4. Re:Oh no! by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      middle eastern (what you really mean is muslim) countries hate ALL non-muslim nations. the US is just a proper subset of that.

      US spying is wrong and evil, but this has nothing to do with why the disagreement based on religion exists so strongly in the M.E.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    5. Re:Oh no! by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well SWIFT is based in Belgium. Now their failover datacenter is not in America anymore the US theoretically doesn't have much political leverage left, and will have to rely on hacking. How good their IT security is anyones guess, but they've been around a while and more importantly will be on the alert. A lot of this hacking was invisible for so long because nobody was looking for it. You'll notice that once Snowden started leaking the GCHQ operation against Belgacom was busted, Merkel's phone being tapped got busted by German intelligence, etc. Belgian counter-intelligence will probably be a part of defending SWIFT. They know 5 Eyes are coming for them, and when you know an attack is coming it's much easier to fight it off.

    6. Re:Oh no! by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      It costs more time and money to obtain the data covertly than overtly, time and money that would have to be redirected from other parts of the NSA's work.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    7. Re:Oh no! by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 1

      Are you aware that Islamist terrorists have attacked London and Madrid more recently than the US?

    8. Re:Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ...It might be good for us to go back to isolationism and let everyone else deal with the bullshit.

      Dear America,

      Please do.

      Love ya, The Rest of the World

    9. Re:Oh no! by Xest · · Score: 2

      Given that the whole reason this agreement was set up in the first place is because it was data the US felt it desperately needed and couldn't get then I think that lock is already there.

    10. Re:Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love how they hate us, but then they let us station thousands of troops in their countries and they sell us all of their oil.

      You are very confused. There's two different groups you are trying to refer to as the same "they" here. Just as in the US, the people of a country and the government of a country are quite capable of disagreeing. The people (at least, some of them) in Middle East may not be too happy about the US troops in their countries, but the governments aren't complaining.

    11. Re:Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No they don't. Iran has pretty cosy relationships with China and Russia, for example, not to mention a bunch of South American countries.

    12. Re:Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear Rest of the World,

      China called, they say they're taking over next and they won't even pretend to play nice.
      Have fun.

      America

    13. Re:Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice false dichotomy you have there. There are degrees of hatred and the US (+Israel) is right at the top of these people's hate list. Not entirely unjustified, the cynic in me might add.

    14. Re:Oh no! by wijnands · · Score: 0

      The "we don't care!" attitude has ruled US policy since.. 1950?

    15. Re:Oh no! by lxs · · Score: 2

      So the Boston bombings were really only a failed attempt at beef Wellington? That explains the cookware involved!

    16. Re:Oh no! by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      Seriously? The US is in the middle of seriously pissing off all its allies, and your response is simply "We don't care! We'll do what we want and you can't stop us!"

      And people use to wonder why the Middle Eastern countries hated America. This is Europe getting some of the same treatment.

      Minus the bombs...

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    17. Re:Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      By far not the same treatment. When Europeans are used as soldiers in a proxy war between the US and Russia or China, and after the US takes some of the most extremist people they can find in Europe and put them in power to rule over the people with an iron fist... then you can say the Europeans are getting the same treatment as the people in the middle east. Until then, you're comparing someone winking at another with someone raping another and their entire family for generations as being the same thing.

    18. Re:Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having worked with Swift IT in the past I can tell you they really don't need counter-intelligence support. They bloody well know a thing or two about security.

      On the other hand, it must be fun to watch Swift, funded by banks, to take on NSA and by extension the US government, for all intentions and purposes also owned by banks. I think this will be decided at boardroom level.

    19. Re:Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It might be good for us to go back to isolationism and let everyone else deal with the bullshit.

      Yes, please. That would be great.

    20. Re:Oh no! by gsslay · · Score: 1

      You've been taken in by the whole religious wrapping on what is essentially political\economic friction. It suits those in charge for people to believe it's about religion (even if they claim it isn't) because that way they won't look for the real reasons. Religion is just a convenient tool to manipulate/motivate/con the masses.

      The ones in charge are ultimately motivated by the same basic things that motivate everyone; ownership and access to resources. i.e. Money and power. If you want plenty of both, but don't yet have much in the way of either, religion is an excellent way of getting people to do what you want. Not the only way, but a very good way.

    21. Re:Oh no! by gsslay · · Score: 1

      You are attempting the same dishonest trick many people try in internet discussions. I didn't say "same treatment", I said "some of the same treatment".

      Comparing two different things is not saying they are they are exactly equivalent in all possible ways. It is saying they have some similarities that may help in understanding one or other. If they were exactly the same, then they would be the exact same thing, and noting a comparison would be pointless and redundant.

    22. Re:Oh no! by gsslay · · Score: 1

      Except this is not a robber stealing your TV. This is an invited guest who is supposed to be a friend.

      First thing you do is stop inviting them around your house.

  8. Children it is your own fault. by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Every child knows that if you abuse a privilege it gets taken away.

  9. SubjectsInCommentsAreStupid by lesincompetent · · Score: 2

    That's THE LEAST that ought to be done.

  10. US credibility has reached parody by ElitistWhiner · · Score: 0

    NSA tapped the firehose ( internet meta-style) getting all EU data. I'd be one pissed EU citizen.

  11. It's about time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully, other countries will cease cooperating with the US until we reign in the NSA. Bring on the blowback!!

  12. Can be intellectual property next? by gmuslera · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why Europe should honor US intellectual property if the US government is officially ignoring the intellectual property of all EU citizens, including the one of their leaders?

    1. Re:Can be intellectual property next? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      I don't think that phrase means what you think it means. The right of freedom of apeech and the right to speak privately have nothing to do with artificial property rights created to provide invention incentive by restricting copying.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    2. Re:Can be intellectual property next? by Kremmy · · Score: 1

      the United States does not hold copyright over private conversations, but they're copying them all anyway. This is extremely relevant.

    3. Re:Can be intellectual property next? by cpghost · · Score: 1

      Since when are leaders intellectuals, to have "intellectual property" in the first place?

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    4. Re:Can be intellectual property next? by sI4shd0rk · · Score: 1

      The right of freedom of apeech and the right to speak privately have nothing to do with artificial property rights created to provide invention incentive by restricting copying.

      Freedom of speech is actually relevant, given that authorities utilize censorship to try to combat copyright infringement.

      --
      Ignorance is a choice
    5. Re:Can be intellectual property next? by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      Who I am, where, with who, doing what, that is privacy. But what i do, what i write, say, draw, etc specially in private or shared with a limited group, that is intellectual property... and that is what is being violated by US official policies.

    6. Re:Can be intellectual property next? by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      Intellectual property is not about property of intellectuals, but of what your intellect creates, even if was just a phone conversation with a friend. You can't have both intellectual property and the right of spy on everyone, you are denying one doing the other.

  13. FATCA Repercussions by Froggels · · Score: 1

    I wonder what repercussions this may have regarding EU countries' compliance with FATCA?

  14. Business as usual by qbast · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From article "The vote is non-binding but illustrates MEPs' growing unease [...]" . So parliament showed right amount of outrage, won some brownie points among electorate and managed to do it without pissing off USA. Good job.

    1. Re:Business as usual by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's non-binding because the EU Parliament is not a real Parliament. It's very weak and has limited influence, the real power at the EU level is in the European Commission which is sort of like an executive branch that is directed by national governments. The EU Commission may still decide to ignore the Parliament on this one, but I guess that wouldn't do a great deal for their legitimacy, which is at any rate already heavily weakened after years of sustained attacks on their decision making ...

    2. Re:Business as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Commission also exists at the mercy of the Parliament, which can hold a vote of no confidence in its president at any time, which would force the entire commission to resign. It has never been used, but the thread of it has been, in order to replace individual commissioners that the parliament didn't like.

    3. Re:Business as usual by qbast · · Score: 2

      Exactly. That's why EU Parliament is doing the posturing, not Commission. Because they can do it safely and Comission would be expected to actually do something.

    4. Re:Business as usual by flagboy · · Score: 1

      It has been used actually, in the mid 1990s. More recently the EP also used its power to reject an entire Commission line-up because it objected to one particular candidate.

  15. Cuts both ways by david.emery · · Score: 1

    Europe is a lot closer to, and has been more impacted by, terrorist strikes than the US. A reduction in data sharing will impact both sides of the Atlantic.

    Of course, MEPs aren't really -accountable- to anyone for their decisions, it's the European sovereign governments who will be left holding the bag if terrorist strikes increase.

    1. Re:Cuts both ways by qbast · · Score: 2

      No, it does not cut both ways. TFTP is sharing data in one direction from Europe (SWIFT headquarter is in Belgium) to USA.

    2. Re:Cuts both ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What does terrorism have to do with Americans spying on European citizens?

    3. Re:Cuts both ways by david.emery · · Score: 1

      Why should the US share data with Europe, if Europe closes TFTP? That's my point (albeit perhaps not particularly well made.)

    4. Re:Cuts both ways by qbast · · Score: 4, Informative

      You don't seem to get it. TFTP is one direction only - there is no reciprocal program which gives EU authorities access to transactions within USA (at least nobody heard about one). So USA gets great amount of data particularly useful for industrial espionage (I am sure Boeing would just love to know how much money Airbus is getting, from where, how much it is paying subcontractors,etc.) and Europe gets nothing.

    5. Re:Cuts both ways by david.emery · · Score: 1

      Well, until there's an Edward Snowden equivalent from UK, France, Germany, etc; I'm not sure I believe there are no reciprocal data sharing agreements.

    6. Re:Cuts both ways by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Of course, MEPs aren't really -accountable- to anyone for their decisions,

      What are you wittering on about?

      The elections are next year.

      What more accountability do you want?

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    7. Re:Cuts both ways by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Why should the US share data with Europe, if Europe closes TFTP? That's my point (albeit perhaps not particularly well made.)

      Your reply is based on the unsupported assertion that the US currently "shares" data with Europe.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    8. Re:Cuts both ways by david.emery · · Score: 1

      Well, there have been indications to that effect. But my response is not -predicated- on the prior existence of such agreements.

      Rather it asserts the willingness of the US to share -in the future- would be impacted by an European unwillingness to share.

    9. Re:Cuts both ways by david.emery · · Score: 1

      Do you really think a French MEP's re-election will be impacted by a terrorist strike in the UK, or vice versa?

    10. Re:Cuts both ways by Sique · · Score: 1
      There was one silent agreement to share data from the U.S. at least to Germany. In Germany, spying on its own citizens is much more verboten than in the U.S., where it has rather clumsily to be derived from the right to privacy, which can be nearly everytime be overturned by claiming that there was no expectation of privacy in the first place.

      Thus, the Germans have allowed foreign spy agencies to set up operations in Germany while in turn they do the dirty work of spying on German citizens, which the German authorities have no right to without probable cause and judgemental review. This was one of the main reasons why Germany's goverment was very reluctant to act on the first revelations about the scope of the NSA's and GCHQ's spying and was even declaring the "NSA affair" to be over already in August -- they were fearing to lose a useful spying ability.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    11. Re:Cuts both ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But other countries in the world eventually get over themselves and move on. And any terrorist worth the name will still want a piece of the USA.

      You guys just cant keep your foot out of your mouth, of course you will still be enemy number one.

  16. Why should Independent nations not react ? by no_go · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The NSA is chartered to do that by a specific nation. The USA.

    Why should independent nations not react to the (very real and ilegal) actions ot the NSA against those nations' interests and citizens?

    For anyone that is minimaly informed about history and politics, the desire of the NSA (or any other inteligence agency) to have access to EVERYTHING is obvious.
    My surprise is limited to the extent to which the NSA as been allowed to gain that information.
    The level and volume of information that it is said that the NSA acquires regarding communications inside european countries would'nt be possible without:
    - A faily big operational capability (which isn't neither new nor chocking in itself)
    - Cooperation from local entities , government and private (which is very unsettling)
    - The belief by those that make the decisions, in Europe, allowing access by the NSA to local resources, that that access wouldn't be abused. (which was unbelievable as it is mind-bogllingly STUPID).

    Putting it bluntly, these actions by the NSA are illegal in most (if not all) of the european countries.
    - It's agents and enablers are breaking laws. Those should be punished legaly when caught (yes, prison).

    Also, "good will" with regards to access to some information sources should be re-evaluated.
    Those include the aforementioned finantial data and should also include the passenger information now routinely shoveled out by the EU to the US, even regarding flights that don't touch the USAs airspace.

    1. Re:Why should Independent nations not react ? by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      > For anyone that is minimaly informed about history and politics, the desire of the NSA (or any other
      > inteligence agency) to have access to EVERYTHING is obvious.
      > My surprise is limited to the extent to which the NSA as been allowed to gain that information.

      And anyone that is minimaly informed about history and politics, shouldn't be surprized.

      Its very simple to see what is up. All you have to do is look at the way they make decisions, with their secret briefings, their threat assesments etc. Then just remember that the first question that (just about) any one of them is going to have on their mind is "If I oppose this, and there is another 9/11 sized event, will I get blamed".

      see, if they approve it along with everyone else, and nothing happens, all is good. If they approve it and it turns into a scandal, it wont come back on them personally. If they approve and their is an attack, the same, because they covered their ass by approving.

      On the other hand, if they deny and there is a scandal, or if they deny and there is an attack, then they get blamed as being against security and helping the terrorists. The only reasonable outcome for them on denial is that nothing happens.

      So.... it should be pretty unsurprizing that they make this choice. Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM right?

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  17. So the US still gets the data ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but doesn't have to say "Please and Thank you"

  18. That is an extremely mild response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about actually arresting and prosecuting the criminals who spy on European citizens, governments and companies, funded by our so-called friends at the other side of the Atlantic?

    1. Re:That is an extremely mild response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You actually think the USA cares about what some EU politicians think? even with the implemented EU wide laws, they still lack the jurisdiction to 'arrest' any of the NSA's staff, unless of course they travel to the EU where they could be considered fairgame for an EU arrest warrant.

    2. Re:That is an extremely mild response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If it were the other way around, the U.S. would just kidnap the suspects, along with some random other people, and torture them on some island without any form of due process (or outsource the torture to a friendly dictatorship in the Middle East). Unfortunately, Europeans are too civilised for such an enterprise, so I am afraid the NSA criminals will simply get away with it (and maybe get some medal from their government).

    3. Re:That is an extremely mild response by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      EU NATO command would side with the US. Any "hint" at prosecuting anyone would result in the fall of a gov, early retirement or a perfect scandal until the domestic surveillance networks where safe.
      The courts would need the full protection of their respective security forces.
      Think Poland ~ 1980 or around East Germany in 1988...

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:That is an extremely mild response by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      If you look at the French case it's pretty clear that some people who work for the NSA have been in France.

      Some of them are probably still here.

      These people, especialy if they are French citizens, should be arrested as soon as possible.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
  19. you're either with us or you're with the terrorist by beefoot · · Score: 1

    That makes EU a terrorist state.

  20. Translation by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    "So we found out that even though we're giving you all that information for free, you're also spying on us and taking it secretly. That seems kind of redundant. It'd save money if we just let you steal the info yourself instead of handing it over."

  21. Re:The NSA did nothing wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I am sure the Chionese government is very happy that you are OK with them spying on anything in the U.S. they like and violating any American law they please, as long as it is in accordance with their own laws.

  22. TFTP out, FTP in by cpghost · · Score: 1

    The TFTP is being phased out in favor of FTP. Everyone is tracked financially, not just (presumed) terrorists.

    --
    cpghost at Cordula's Web.
  23. TFTP? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With a name like that it should have been obvious that US was going to FTP all EU data Trivially.

  24. Re:you're either with us or you're with the terror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well it would, if the EU were a state, but the point holds. The War on Tourism is going well.

  25. yeah, tit for tat, that oughta teach 'em! by swschrad · · Score: 1

    get caught spying, get expelled from NoValueIstan. this is the same thing.

    otherwise known as shit on the neighbors, they won't like you any more.

    something three-year-olds catch onto quickly, but governments never do...

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  26. Conspiracy time.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The time when EU started to agree with the US and made SWIFT hand over the data willfully was after the London Subway bombings...

    Looks like we will need another attack to convince them to continue handing over the data.... ehehehehehehhehe

  27. Bluff your way out of that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That's like saying "the army did what they were chartered to do and we are all surprised?" upon encountering mass graves. Or "Collateral Murder" videos.

    1. Re:Bluff your way out of that... by mbkennel · · Score: 1


      Monitoring international money transfers is like massacring people?

      Isn't monitoring just that what you expect to be doing to find criminals and enemy activities? All the governments are cracking down on their own banks over potential money laundering violations for the same reasons and monitoring the systems, intentionally.

  28. never say never by wijnands · · Score: 2, Insightful

    North America is NOT a major tourist destination for Europeans. It's a destination where people travel on business because they have to.

  29. Dream on by wijnands · · Score: 0

    First of all, the actual effect of your data hungry KGB is debatable. Secondly, the EU is a lot less keen on annoying the muslim world than you guys are. We may be a slightly softer targer, we are a lot less attractive to the idiots.

  30. All your base are belong to US by rsborg · · Score: 1

    Even Anglo-US relations are tenuous nowadays. You've just pissed off the French and the Germans. That's pretty much the three biggest economies/countries in the EU. There's not much of a step left until the whole of the EU has problems with the way you do things.

    What are they going to do? We have far more military might than the EU combined, and the EU doesn't have a military chain of command worth speaking about.

    So this info "sharing" (aka data fealty) agreement is going to end. Perhaps this is for the best even for the US. As a citizen of the world, I think it's a move in the right direction.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    1. Re:All your base are belong to US by j35ter · · Score: 1

      Your military might be impressive when facing a bunch of goatf*ckers hiding in caves. Facing modern armies (EU, Russia, China), it starts looking quite shabby.

      --
      Delta-Mike November Bravo Tango
    2. Re:All your base are belong to US by tomtomtom · · Score: 1

      What are they going to do? We have far more military might than the EU combined, and the EU doesn't have a military chain of command worth speaking about.

      Don't worry, the EU isn't about to invade the US in some weird reincarnation of Red Dawn. But they (or individual member states) could do a lot of things which would hurt the US a great deal.

      Off the top of my head for example, while still keeping things at least nominally relatively "targeted": (1) economically punish the US: impose import/export tariffs on relevant US goods/services (particularly tech but perhaps also bandwidth/peering etc), make it much much harder for US citizens to get visas to come over here for business, expropriate the EU assets of US companies who have been complicit in this eg Google, Facebook, etc, or even impose full-on trade sanctions e.g. banning EU companies from dealing with US companies in certain sectors (eg ban EU companies from using or buying Cisco gear); (2) withdraw military cooperation and support from the US: close US military bases on EU soil, cancel their (remaining) participation in various joint procurement projects eg the JSF project, immediately withdraw EU-country troops from roles around the world where they are supporting or working alongside US troops, and stop sharing intelligence with the US; (3) diplomatically punish the US, by removing some of their diplomatic staff from the US and expelling some US diplomatic staff from EU countries, stopping cooperation on international treaties such as extradition agreements, ending support for the US in international fora such as the UN etc etc.

    3. Re:All your base are belong to US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are they going to do? We have far more military might than the EU combined, and the EU doesn't have a military chain of command worth speaking about.

      So now you're going to invade the entire planet? You can barely take on shitty little mideast countries, and your entire country is running scared of "terrorists". What do you think your citizens will do when the real fighting starts?

    4. Re:All your base are belong to US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Patrick Swayze is dead now. Who is going to protect the US if the EU invades? Charlie Sheen?

    5. Re:All your base are belong to US by rsborg · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, the EU isn't about to invade the US in some weird reincarnation of Red Dawn. But they (or individual member states) could do a lot of things which would hurt the US a great deal.

      Off the top of my head for example, while still keeping things at least nominally relatively "targeted": [a list of things which would be highly unpopular with their constituency or go against WTO rules]

      Almost of these things you mention are very costly responses to the US, in some cases, the EU would actually lose more (e.g.: uprooting of a US base from German soil would likely have an economic effect like a tactical nuke).

      About the only things I think are low-cost for the EU would be the diplomatic moves - i.e., high profile, no major business or strategic impact. The removal of extradition/rendition agreements are probably for the best - given the dark and dirty uses they've been put to since the "war on terrah".

      The likely biggest viable slap in the face to the US would be to ditch, and just start getting very friendly with another superpower like China of course, this likely won't happen either because, who's worse on human rights? I think before the end of the decade it could be that China has far more bases than she has now.

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  31. Information Security Jobs by rsborg · · Score: 1

    All I can get from this cold-war type move is that Info Sec will be a hot market in the coming days. Intrusion / CounterIntrusion will be the new game by which big organizations (including governments) thrive or suffer.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  32. They aren't chartered by the EU. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So how the hell can being chartered to do that be of ANY FUCKING POINT WHATSOEVER?

    Saddam's gassing of the kurds was done by people whose actions were as ordered by legal authority in their own country. This, however, didn't stop a pogrom against the poor daft bastard, did it.

  33. Pfft. Not working, America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Oh, no don't go with THEM, they're MUCH worse! Honest! You know I won't lie to you. OK, you're leaving because you found out I lie to you all the time, but I've never lied about something like THIS!"

    Not buying it. FOAD, merkin.

    Signed,
    Every Human On The Planet

  34. A suitable reciprocation towards the US: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Grant Edward Snowden political asylum and an EU-citizenship of choice.

    1. Re:A suitable reciprocation towards the US: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then Edward Snowden will just disappear. The CIA has agents everywhere and they have lots of experience in handling this kind of issue.

  35. TFTP is known to be insecure by drwho · · Score: 1

    I mean, it doesn't have any authentication or authorization methods at all. What's wrong with these Europeans? It's not my fault they didn't guard their router configs...

  36. Not everything has to be about violence by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What are they going to do? We have far more military might than the EU combined

    As surprising as it apparently is to a certain kind of American, not everything in international relations has to be resolved with violence.

    The US is committing hostile acts against EU member states, and measures like withdrawing cooperation in these programmes are a reasonable and proportionate response. Trade sanctions would be a more serious step up: no-one would win in the short term if that happened, but the US would probably lose a lot more. There would be direct costs, of course, but also probably irreparable damage to the United States' wider international credibility and reduced cooperation from other nations who were already less predisposed to support the US on matters of mutual interest.

    From the outside, it seems very strange that so many people in the US are so proud of their vast military-industrial complex and security services. Here in the UK, the most damaging coverage of the US recently had nothing to do with spying or wars, not that those are winning many friends here. The really sad stuff was shots of pathetic posturing from the political leadership of both the main US parties, juxtaposed with footage of federal workers in DC holding banners saying "Please do your jobs so we can get on with ours", and stories of couples whose wedding days were spoiled, and descriptions of children with very serious health problems who weren't getting experimental drugs that were their only hope because the programmes to trial them were suspended. The idea that such a dysfunctional government, run by politicians so completely out of touch with the basic needs of their own people, should be trusted with anything of significance, security-related or otherwise, just seems bizarre at this point.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    1. Re: Not everything has to be about violence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a citizen of a member Country of the EU, the US shutdown made the Brussels/Strasbourg farce look functional.

  37. Re:The NSA did nothing wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Merica Kiiiiiks Asssss!!! rrraaaAAAUUUURRRR!

  38. EU Parliament not weak by flagboy · · Score: 1

    This particular vote is non-binding, but the same is true about a lot of votes in national parliaments. You are also wrong to say that the Europarliament "[is] very weak and has limited influence"; actually it has equal power with the European Council over all EU legislation, and it has full veto pwer. For instance, MEPs rejected ACTA last year, meaning that the EU is unable to sign the treaty. It also rejected the software patents directive (remember that?) in 2005. Also because of the principle of separation of powers, MEPs are independent of both the Council and the Commission: there is no "payroll vote" as in most national parliaments, and consequently party discipline is much weaker. The situation is similar to that of US Congress; a US President cannot bank on unqualified support from Congress even when both the House and Senate are controlled by his own party. Finally the European Commission is indeed the executive branch of the EU, but it is NOT "directed by national governments": you are probably thinking of the Council, which is indeed made up of representatives of national governments. You can think of it as a kind of unelected Senate. Commissioners are appointed by national governments of each country, but once appointed they are independent of the government that appointed them.

    1. Re:EU Parliament not weak by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the corrections.

  39. Germany leading the way by Geeky · · Score: 1

    I see talk about trade sanctions and so on as a way for the EU to "punish" the US.

    Germany are leading the way in that regard. I work for a UK company with subsidiaries in Germany. We are looking at moving various services in the cloud (management's bright idea), including Office 365 and one of the cloud based authentication services to tie it all together.

    At the moment Germany are pretty much vetoing it. Nothing can be US hosted. That rules out Office 365 for email, anything running on AWS or Azure... unless it's hosted in the EU (or for some data, Germany itself) they tell us it's not compliant with their data protection laws.

    --
    Sigs are so 1990s. No way would I be seen dead with one.