Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Vodafone Reveals Warrantless Wiretapping

Posted by Soulskill on from the confirming-expectations dept.

Charliemopps writes "According to Vodafone, multiple governments have installed equipment that collects data on its customers without a warrant. This includes metadata, location data, and voice. They say, "In a small number of countries, agencies and authorities have direct access to communications data stored within an operator’s network. In those countries, Vodafone will not receive any form of demand for communications data access as the relevant agencies and authorities already have permanent access to customer communications via their own direct link." It's a rather long, and very interesting report. Vodafone also criticized the transparency process: "In our view, it is governments – not communications operators – who hold the primary duty to provide greater transparency on the number of agency and authority demands issued to operators. We believe this for two reasons."'

73 comments

  1. A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    From all the noise here, it seemed pretty clear that ONLY the NSA did this kind of stuff and not any other government in the world. Isn't that why we're all supposed to toe the "NSA is evil" line?

    1. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Exactly. The Western world is becoming more and more like Moa's China and the USSR. These western governments are perpetrating all the same crimes that we condemn all the banana republics for:

      1) Extrajudicial killings
      2) Massive surveillance
      3) Widespread censorship

      The list goes on. The West has no moral high ground anymore.

    2. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      You're right that some people have a stick up their ass regarding the US government, and see conspiracy upon conspiracy in behaviors dominated by realpolitik thinking.

      The unique thing about the US is the 4th amendment that prohibits such behavior with only the most minimal of interpretation.

    3. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Multiple counties doesnt mean the NSA is not evil. It just means NSA is not the only evil one. We are not supposed to toe any line, each of us can toe any line we choose too.

    4. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nah, the 4th amendment very clearly makes it blatantly illegal. They just redefined the meaning of "search" to mean something completely different. It now means when they attempt to use the data against you rather than when they actually gather it.

      You know, it's kind of like when you lose your keys. You don't "search" for them around the house. That would be silly. You're simply "acquiring" them. When you insert the key you already have into your door and turn it... THAT is searching! Or, how about a better example: when a policeman runs up to you, begins frisking you and stealing your possessions, without warrant or probable cause, again that's just "acquiring" your stuff. It's only after he's already conducted his sear--I mean, acquiring, that he can then get a warrant to search you.

    5. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Charliemopps · · Score: 5, Insightful

      From all the noise here, it seemed pretty clear that ONLY the NSA did this kind of stuff and not any other government in the world. Isn't that why we're all supposed to toe the "NSA is evil" line?

      The government is like a child.

      I tell my 6yr old that throwing sticks at people is wrong.
      He says "Look! Philip, Lacey and Clancy are throwing sticks!"
      I tell him "I'm not their parent. I can't tell them what to do. I can only teach you what's right or wrong. It's not acceptable for my child to throw sticks. I'll talk to the other parents about their kids."

      I'm an US citizen. I can't vote the UK's government out of office. I'm in charge of my own government and it's NOT acceptable for them to do this.

      This story is about other countries. It's good to let the other parents know what their governments are up to so they can discipline them.

      It's not that hard of a concept. Perhaps you should read this?
      It helped my kid.

    6. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      The minimal interpretation required is that "persons, papers, and affects" would be extrapolated to phone calls if the tech had existed when it was written.

    7. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm aware. I'm just mostly joking around at the government's expense. However, in my opinion, the things our government pries into do classify as either papers or affects.

    8. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 2

      Other countries could very well be totalitarian states. Atleast we are not China, is not a point in favour of NSA.

    9. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Totenglocke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm an US citizen....I'm in charge of my own government

      That's funny that you actually believe that voters get any say in these types of programs. The US government does whatever it wants without repercussions, regardless of which party is in power - and it's been that way for a long time. They only bother with elections to provide the illusion that you're in control in order to keep the populace pacified.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    10. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by mrvan · · Score: 1

      In those six countries, the direct tapping is a legal requirement. Vodafone said it isn't disclosing the names of those countries for fear of local sanction and retaliation by governments against its staff.

      In Albania, Egypt, Hungary, India, Malta, Qatar, Romania, South Africa and Turkey it is unlawful to disclose any information related to wiretapping or interception of the content of phone calls and messages, Vodafone said. Because of that restriction, Vodafone isn't disclosing any information about those countries.

      So, it is not a hard guess what countries they are talking about, i.e. 6 out of those 7...

    11. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vodaphone operates in Europe, Africa and the middle east. This includes several countries that has been officially declared "evil" by the US.

    12. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its why if you want to send something without anybody messing with it, send it in an envelope, in a encrypted file embedded in printed QR codes. they won't legally be able to view it according to the literal word of the law, and you can still use it electronically. An encrypted jump drive could work too.

    13. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's a wonderful call to inaction you've got there. It would be a shame if you had to live with it.

      No, people need to get off their asses and actually do something. The government and politicians will listen eventually, and all it takes is a lot of letter-writing and actual voting. But if you sit back on your apathetic butt and complain that the system is rigged and do nothing but whine about it, yeah, it will continue to be ruled by the people who do vote and do communicate with their representatives.

    14. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      US citizens haven't been control of our government since around the 80s. For the most part we are ignored and stifled unless enough of us get together and coordinate which happens once in a blue moon. Don't believe that 1 incident per 1-5 years is equivalent to "citizens control the gov't", because it's corporations that do.

    15. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The list can indeed be long but torture or as they call it enhanced interrogation techniques should also be listed. After all it was all done in interest of democracy, human rights, increased prosperity and Obama's dog.

    16. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by fraxinus-tree · · Score: 1

      I know at least 1 more country where Vodafone operates (besides US), mandating "transparent access" to some government body.

    17. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Totenglocke · · Score: 0
      It didn't say that people shouldn't do anything, I simply pointed out that voting doesn't accomplish anything - especially since incumbents almost always win. Writing letters and voting does nothing and never has - it takes making the government truly terrified of rebellion to inspire them to make changes...and the American people have lost the will to stand up for themselves.

      But if you sit back on your apathetic butt and complain that the system is rigged and do nothing but whine about it, yeah, it will continue to be ruled by the people who do vote and do communicate with their representatives.

      I do vote and write to representatives - I'm just not foolish enough to think it actually makes a difference.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    18. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      They do assert that things that voluntarily pass through the government controlled post office can be inspected, though.

    19. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US cCitizens haven't never been in control of their governments. since around the 80s. For the most part we are ignored and stifled unless enough of us get together and coordinate which happens once in a blue moon. Don't believe that 1 incident per 1-5 years is equivalent to "citizens control the gov't", because it's corporations that do.

    20. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      In Albania, Egypt, Hungary, India, Malta, Qatar, Romania, South Africa and Turkey it is unlawful to disclose

      So, it is not a hard guess what countries they are talking about, i.e. 6 out of those 7...

      Six of those nine, you mean?

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    21. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by click2005 · · Score: 1

      The government and politicians will listen eventually, and all it takes is a lot of letter-writing and actual voting.

      That just shows how little you know about how government works. I suggest you watch if you want to learn the truth.
      http://www.ted.com/talks/lawre...

      Lawrence Lessig's SuperPACs might be the only thing that could actually change things and even that is a long shot.

      --
      I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
    22. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Charliemopps · · Score: 2

      We don't have control because people like you throw up your hands and say "There's nothing we can do! Big evil people are in control!"

      I can't say that I've never had that opinion. But I'll not my apathy ruin the world for my son. Whats wrong is wrong. My rage may amount to nothing, but at least I speak out. At the very least, in the future my son can look back and know that his father was not ok with this. I'll not vote for anyone that supports this sort of thing. I'll not remain friends with anyone that defends this. I'll not be a part of building a prison for our children. This is THE civil rights issue of our generation.

    23. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously my list was not meant to be exhaustive but yes that would also be one of the many atrocities committed in the name of "freedom". The only difference between the US government these days and some two-bit dictator that the two-bit dictator doesn't have more than a tiny fraction of the US government's budget.

    24. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in a small democracy in Europe. Our telecoms laws have included the mandatory access to the authorities a very long time. In fact, the Brussels agreement in 2000 about the mutual assistance and cooperation in police matters imply that the whole of EU is already tapped and metainfo-slurped.
        The issue is how the different governing cultures interpret, implement and utilize these laws and the capabilities. US style slippery slopes are denied by a general law controlling the behaviour of all authorities here, police or otherwise. I understand that such laws are not a commonplace in this corrupted world, or that their implementation takes multiple generations of officials.

    25. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Do you mean the 1780s? The first thing the founders did when they established the US government was restrict who could vote to land-owning white males (the top 10%) and frequently had wealth requirements for public office so only the top 1% could be elected. The public has never controlled what the government does or how it does it.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    26. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's funny that you actually believe that voters get any say in these types of programs. The US government does whatever it wants without repercussions, regardless of which party is in power - and it's been that way for a long time. They only bother with elections to provide the illusion that you're in control in order to keep the populace pacified.

      That kind of cynicism is goes way past "useless", all the way into "harmful". If you want to convince yourself that you are powerless, that's your right, but the rest of us don't need that kind of discouragement. Despite it's many imperfections, the US is still a democracy and our leaders are in place because we put them there. No way around that. It is, most assuredly, on us to fix this.

    27. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      Really? I was under the impression that the reason why we toe the "NSA is evil" line is because they have wanton disregard for the fundamental principles of government in addition to the gross incompetence in regards to internal security meaning that any malicious actor competent enough to infiltrate the NSA has access to tons of information on anybody on the planet. The impression that the NSA is the only country without warrantless wiretaps was never something I've heard claimed. In fact, I heard the opposite, saying that our mass surveillance makes us like China, Iran, etc.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    28. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Well the land-owning aspect actually has valid reasoning behind it - those who own property have a stake in the outcome, whereas those who have nothing to lose don't care about negative outcomes. See how those who make poor choices today consistently vote for a larger and more oppressive government to absolve them of responsibility for their choices / actions.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    29. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US is like China. Extrajudicial torture and murder, massive surveillance, widespread censorship via NSLs and their resulting gag orders, secret courts, etc. These are all things the Chinese government has done and we condemned them for. Now the US government and their bootlickers attempts to use "THE TERRISTS HATE OUR FREEDOM!!!" to justify acting no better than Chairman Mao and his government.

    30. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Western World is becoming like porcelain owned by an extinct flightless bird?

    31. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Despite it's many imperfections, the US is still a democracy and our leaders are in place because we put them there.

      Not really, when the political parties decide who you can vote for. Hell, even primaries they don't really give you any choice. When they control what choices you get, you don't really have a choice. That's not even counting the fact that most of the choices are nearly identical (like Romney and Obama). Thinking that you can change a broken system by using the broken system doesn't work. The American people need to make it loud and clear that they will literally throw the government out if they do not respect our rights and the Constitution. Sadly, the overwhelming majority of Americans lack the spine to do just that and we're stuck in an endless spiral of things getting worse and worse.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    32. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Daetrin · · Score: 2

      The voters have _all_ the say. The voters can elect whoever they want. The problem is not a lack of control, the problem is that about half the people abdicated their responsibility and control, a large percentage of the remainder do not actually study the issues in depth, and the remainder are too fractured in their opinions to agree on any one candidate or set of policies.

      If we could get everyone in the US to agree that NSA surveillance was bad, and then only support candidates who agreed with that position, then we could end it about 5 minutes after the next election. (Well, about 5 minutes after the new people got sworn in anyways.) The problem is not the system, the problem is the people. And sadly it's probably harder to fix that problem than it would be to reform the system.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    33. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      If we could get everyone in the US to agree that NSA surveillance was bad, and then only support candidates who agreed with that position, then we could end it about 5 minutes after the next election.

      No, it wouldn't end. Politicians LIE in order to get elected. Once they're in power, they don't give a damn about what you think. We've had countless politicians run on things like ending the wars and ending spying, yet do the exact opposite once they're in power.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    34. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      So don't elect politicians. Pick a regular bunch of people who've never held office before. Get them to sign a binding contract that if they're elected they will disband the NSA. Then elect them. It's entirely possible. We have the _ability_ to do so. We just don't have the collective will and agreement to actually do it.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    35. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by praxis · · Score: 2

      I do vote and write to representatives - I'm just not foolish enough to think it actually makes a difference.

      If you believe voting is a no-op, then why do you expend the mental and physical energy to do so? That seems irrational.

    36. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Voting is meaningless. It's just a show to keep the masses happy about having a way to "influence things".

      Regardless of who is voted to power, what really changes? Nothing. It's always the same shit.

      The only way to escape is to become filthy rich and 0wn the politicians by paying them. That is the only way they will ever serve you.

    37. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by symbolic · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm not so sure this is related to searching so much as the Third-Party Doctrine, which was created by the Supreme Court as part of a ruling in a drug case. It needs to be abolished. There is practically little we can do in our day-to-day lives that does not require interaction with a third party, and this will almost always leave some kind of data trail. Third party or not, the government should have no access to this information, and no reason to acquire it, unless a person is a legitimate suspect in an ongoing investigation.

    38. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by CMYKjunkie · · Score: 1

      The more we hear about surveillance the more I think about this quote from the 1995 movie "Heat":
      "Assume they got our phones, assume they got our houses, assume they got us, right here, right now as we sit, everything. Assume it all."

    39. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by mrvan · · Score: 1

      Oops :-)

    40. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Problems with that - 1) Those "regular people" will never end up on the ballot due to the way the existing system works. 2) That contract won't hold up in court once they're in power (remember - the government makes the rules and can change them at any time without your consent).

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    41. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Because it's at least trying to do something, even if you know it's a wasted effort.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    42. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      Your #1 is patently false, given the premises. If everyone agreed on a choice, they could elect anyone they want. Getting on the ballot is not as hard as you make it out, and in most places write-ins are possible anyways. Again, you're conflating the reality that many people are lazy and easily misled with the idea that the system can't work. The system _can_ work, it just doesn't because many people are lazy and easily misled, so they don't fight to find the best candidate and make sure that person gets on the ballot.

      As for #2, you're arguing that it is impossible to find approximately 537 honest people in America. (Or 1074 if you want to have both a liberal and a conservative option.) Or do you believe that getting into office instantaneously makes one irredeemably evil? And also stupid given that they were elected for essentially a single issue and if they don't follow through they have zero chance of getting elected in the next term.

      And remember the disagreement we're having is whether the political process gives the public control over the government. You say they have no control, i say they have control but in aggregate they choose not to use that control. I think we both agree we're never going to actually see the results we'd like, but you seem to think it's because there's something wrong with the system, while i think it's because there's something wrong with human nature.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    43. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      If everyone agreed on a choice, they could elect anyone they want

      No, they can't because the existing political parties control who gets access to the ballot. Sure, you could try to do a write in campaign, but there's all sorts of legal loopholes to make that incredibly difficult. The existing system will not change that in order to make it easier for you to remove them, they are currently in fact making it harder for you to have any choice between the Republicans and Democrats. That's one issue that Republicans and Democrats are very bi-partisan on - doing everything possible to block anyone else from the ballot. You have a delusion that the existing political parties will vote to end their reign simply because you tell them to. Ron Paul is a great example of this - he was too popular, so the RNC changed the rules for the primary to ensure that their preferred candidate (Romney) won. The Democrats are no better with the incident in 2012 of the members soundly rejecting putting religion as part of the party platform and then the DNC put it in anyways to try and get more religious people to vote for Democrats. Corruption is beyond rampant and you will not eliminate the corruption by playing by the rules instated by the corrupt politicians.

      I'm saying that it's almost impossible for an honest person to get elected and that even the better people that get elected are rapidly corrupted by the new-found power. It's not stupid to vote against that single issue because 1) incumbents almost always get re-elected and 2) they can always BS and claim something prevented them from achieving their goals and that they "need more time" or that there were "bad things in the bill" and that they didn't want to cause more harm than good.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    44. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      No, they can't because the existing political parties control who gets access to the ballot.

      [Citation needed]

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...

      I've only looked through the rules for about ten of the states, but so far it seems pretty damn easy to either get an independent on the ballot or get yourself declared as a major party and thus be on the ballot, assuming of course you've actually got enough people supporting you to actually have a chance of winning the election. (Generally it seems to require an indication of support of anywhere between 10,000 people and 20% of the registered voters.)

      So what evidence do you have that it's not actually as easy as that page seems to indicate? And please note that despite being a relatively small group, the Libertarians have succeeded in getting a number of their candidates onto the ballot.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    45. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Assume it all.

      Only amateurs ever assumed otherwise.

      Signed,

      An Old Hippie

      captcha: organize (I kid you not)

    46. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you could consider making a smalllllll tradeoff in the freedom of political speech to remove protections from political candidates (and their official agents) deliberately lying to affect the outcome of an election. Other countries attempt to do that while balancing their own equivalents of the First Amendment, with various results.

    47. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In New Zealand, our elected government decided that there was such an uproar on a particular topic (about 6 years ago). We had a referendum, where the majority of the population - 93% - voted against the topic. That's effectively the entire population.

      The government just ignored it, and the backlash regarding it..

      There was another, that had a similar response, and the government again just ignored the results.

      So you go right on believing that your government listens to you, just be aware that the facts demonstrate that they only listen to you when it suits them.

    48. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See how those who make poor choices today...

      Aaaah, you're one of those, who think that humans operate in isolation. Well, your opinion on the topic is quite simply a load of uneducated bullshit.

    49. Re: A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and that's why we're doomed.

    50. Re:A number of countries?? Say it ain't so! by praxis · · Score: 1

      Because it's at least trying to do something, even if you know it's a wasted effort.

      Sounds like you have some hope then, which is very different than truly believing voting is absolutely pointless.

  2. Actually.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    .....this was always the case. When it came to national security, governments pretty much always did what they wanted.

    Case in point; Pre-2001, if the US wanted to spy on American citizens, all the did was ask Canada or Australia to tap them, then shared the information back to them in exchange for the same favor when those countries needed the same.

    2 things have now changed:

    #1 They do not bother pretending anymore.

    #2 We now have the ability to learn about it thanks to the internet (for now). Previously if a whistle blower wanted to leak this info, the gov could easily silence the mega media corps (also known as their propaganda departments).

  3. It's a shame ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Vodafone must be annihilated !
      Vodafone Sucks campaign

  4. Better that we make a buck than some other company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Vodafone said that it had to acquiesce to some governments’ requests for data to comply with national laws. Otherwise, the company said, it would face losing its license to operate in certain countries."

    Look, no matter who is providing the phone service, they're going to spy on you on behalf of the government. Why shouldn't we get that sweet, sweet money? Do you want Bob's Discount Phone Service to make that money? We sure don't. We like money. I mean, we really really really like money.

  5. Apathy by Oysterville · · Score: 1

    How much of this has to be revealed before the general population in America cares enough to do something about it?

    As an American, I worry.

    1. Re:Apathy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As an American, you should know that Vodafone isn't an American company. It provides service in every habitable continent except North America.

      People need to stop thinking that this is an American-only problem.

    2. Re:Apathy by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      How much of this has to be revealed before the general population in America cares enough to do something about it?

      As an American, I worry.

      Don't worry about everyone else. Worry about you. Do the right thing and you've done enough. If someone is dying of a heart attack and everyone's walking by, do you think to yourself "I wish someone that knew CPR would stop. I don't, so I'll just keep walking." ?!? No, stop, offer what aid you can. Scream for help. They will probably die anyway, but that doesn't excuse you from caring.

      The same goes for the NSA (and other governments agencies) Yell for help... for example I posted this to Slashdot, and I'm commenting. I'm doing my best to make my slashdot friends (and enemies) aware of what's going on. Vote for people that oppose this. They will probably lose, but at least you did something. Apathy is the NSA's most powerful tool.

    3. Re:Apathy by praxis · · Score: 1

      Apathy is the NSA's most powerful tool.

      That is the most important sentence I've read here. It also applies to more than just the NSA.

  6. Same-O: Encrypt or Else by BoRegardless · · Score: 1

    At your device, what else can you do?

  7. Vodafone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are they still in business? haven't heard them in the news for years. was wondering what happened to Vodafone.

  8. Re:Same-O: Encrypt or Else by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

    At your device, what else can you do?

    Vote

  9. call Snowden by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    so even though we knew "The NSA Has Massive Database of American's Phone Calls" in **2006**

    and everyone else did it or worse

    yet this news arrives with a thud...

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:call Snowden by no_go · · Score: 1

      I would guess the "everyone" you are refering to is some subset of the countries on the report.

      If you look closely, you will see that some put some very stringent limitations on what info can be obtained, when can it be intercepted and by whom.
      And , gasp , some even report the number of intersections and requests.

      Not being a US citizen/resident, it's none of my bussiness what the NSA does in the US, but I do take offence at their actions abroad, specifficaly those that impact MY leaders, MY country and MY liberties.

    2. Re:call Snowden by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      Yep. It's not really about the NSA or its activities. It's about hating on America. Nobody gives a shit if a dozen other countries do the exact same thing.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    3. Re:call Snowden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, we do give a shit if "a dozen other countries do the exact same thing," it's just those dozen other countries don't go running up to you, blow a big slobbery raspberry in your face, and then scream "WE'RE TRULY FREE AND YOU'RE JUST AN EVIL NEO-COMMIE SOCIALIST" into your ear so loud it rings for weeks, only to say "You can't criticise us because you do it, too!"

      Now, if you can't understand why it's not OK for someone to pretend to be free, yet do something that they bully others for doing, then frankly, you're a lost cause.

      Say it loud, say it proud: THE US IS AS BAD AS EVERYBODY ELSE.

      Keep saying it, and the rest of the world won't be busy "hating" on America.

      Tip: "haters" and "hating" are simply a juvenile attempt to discredit someone else's disapproval/dislike of a given topic while avoiding a debate. To continue using that term simply makes you look childish at best.

  10. cold_fjord... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is that you? We miss you badly!

  11. Re:Same-O: Encrypt or Else by praxis · · Score: 1

    You can vote in government elections, you can vote with your wallet by supporting business that better support privacy, you can vote with your wallet form opting out from business models that make privacy impossible and you can communicate your views to others.

    Democracy has always fared better when the public discourse was contributing. Businesses have always looked at their bottom lines first.

    For example, I have three options for an ISP: Comcast, the local Telco and an old-school ISP. I go with the old-school ISP despite that I can only get 3MB DSL on my line and it costs more than Comcast. I do this because 3MB is enough for my needs. They don't filter any ports, they give me a static IP address and let me run any server I damn well please, they let me max out the line 24/7, they answer their phone in minutes with a competent tech when I call and I don't support a business who's hostile towards me. Three Mb/s is enough to stream SD, download HD for offline viewing, patch giant computer games overnight and send my backup data offsite. Yes, it's not as fast as 30 MB/s that Comcast offers me, but the more money they have to advance an agenda that harms most of the people in this country.

    I'm just one persona and I am sure my $100 a month Comcast doesn't see does little, but if there were 100 million of me? That would send a message. Same goes for voting. Same goes for expressing what I do and why I do it.

  12. Re:Same-O: Encrypt or Else by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, because that really works.

    We voted out a guy who decides what we can do and what we can't, what's safe for us, what isn't, for... someone who'll do the exact same thing.

  13. Is United States one of the countries ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    Vodafone only says that there are several countries which are engaging in tapping phones without warrants

    Is the United States of America one of them ?

    Anyone ?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Is United States one of the countries ? by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      What difference does it make? The NSA doesn't need warrants to tap phones in other countries.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
  14. 'merica by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    I would guess the "everyone" you are refering to is some subset of the countries on the report.

    "everyone" is every civil body politic, monarch, tribal chief, dictator, republic, or any other human organization at this level, ever in history

    maybe you're one of those stereotypical ignorant Europeans, but here in **AMERICA** we have mandatory History education.

    learn your history and stop being a hypocrite...you're proving the other commenter below right...you're just taking this chance to bash America

    if you want to bitch and moan about bad government, let's start with Bashar Al-Assad, North Korea, China, and the Queen of England and Canada

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:'merica by spazzmo · · Score: 1

      mandatory History misinformation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

      --
      The cheese stands alone...