Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google and Facebook Can Be Legally Intercepted, Says UK Spy Boss

Posted by Soulskill on from the you-can-trust-us dept.

mpicpp sends this news from the BBC: The U.K. government has revealed that intelligence service GCHQ can snoop on British citizens' use of Facebook, Twitter and Google without a warrant because the firms are based overseas. U.K. spy boss Charles Farr said that such platforms are classified as external communications. The policy was revealed as part of an ongoing legal battle with campaign group Privacy International (PI). PI said the interpretation of the law "patronizes the British people." According to Mr Farr, Facebook, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and web searches on Google, as well as webmail services such as Hotmail and Yahoo are classified as "external communications," which means that they can be intercepted without the need for additional legal clearance."

9 of 104 comments (clear)

  1. um... by Type44Q · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Fascist toadie says what? :p

    1. Re:um... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3

      I complained to my MP about this. She passed it on to some other ministers and after a few months the reply came back. It was two pages long but could be accurately summarized as "fuck off, pleb".

      This is pretty much their attitude. They feel righteous and in their minds every threat is blown out of all proportion and justifies the means.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  2. Internal and External Simultaneously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Funny that Facebook et al are internal when EU courts want to issue subpoenas or legal rulings, yet are external when the spy agencies want to snoop on them.
    Captcha: Gambit

    1. Re:Internal and External Simultaneously by brainboyz · · Score: 5, Funny

      We consider these services to be in quantum hyper-position states until a need is chosen.

    2. Re:Internal and External Simultaneously by moronoxyd · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is the UK, not the EU.
      This is about UK law and a British intelligence service, not about the EU.

      As far as I know Facebook and Google have their European headquarters in Ireland or Luxembourg or something, which is outside of the UK.

  3. state of affairs by epyT-R · · Score: 3, Funny

    These are the kinds of politicians that need to be excised from their positions, regardless of party or affiliated ideology. They are supposed to treat their positions as duties, not twist the law to justify committing 'end justifies means' immoral acts out of self interest.

  4. Legal... by FuzzNugget · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Legal" means whatever you want it to mean when you're the one who gets to determine what it means.

  5. Re:So, why pay UK taxes? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the contracts are signed in Ireland, and both parties agree that the terms of the contract are to be governed by the laws of Ireland, then they are made in Ireland.

    They are not signed in Ireland they are signed in the UK where both parties live and work. You should not be allowed to just arbitrarily decide which countries laws apply when everything is taking place in the UK unless you are going to give individuals the same power and I can go shopping for the country with the lowest income tax rate too. The problem is that large, international companies can afford enough lawyers that they twist laws into knots to get out of paying their share of society's infrastructure costs.

  6. The FSA vs OathBreakers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem here is one of The FSA vs OathBreakers. Those in the F_ree S_hit A_rmy want youtube channels and free email and that crappy webpage on facecrook. The OathBreakers don't give a f**k about the rule of law. My personal oppinion is that if you publish to a website you don't actually OWN, then you

    A. have to trust said company, not so incompetent to expose your database tables accidentally, or maliciously, or secretly.
    B. anything actually published is now in the public "somewhere" if not archive.org, *.cache.com ; If the Oath breakers want to collect that "published data" without a warrant who cares.
    C. The FSA wouldn't be here if they paid for their own websites. WHY DO YOU HAVE ACCOUNTS ON THESE WEBSITES STILL? WHY?!

    anyway, you know how the latest in that Stingray ( http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/judge-allows-us-marshals-seizure-of-stingray-records-dimisses-lawsuit/ ) ordeal with the ACLU getting end-run by the US Marshalls well now then

    A. Whoever has the data can manipulate/ cleanse it / further deny it - fsck all burn in hell you backstabbing piece of dung fsck OathBreakers )
    B. WHY do you PAY for a god dammned phone still?! WHY?! Go buy a HAM RADIO for god sakes, learn electronics, pay for something that is going to last your lifetime and can be either sold at Estate Sale or Passed down to your children when you die. All you young ass idiots, do you know back in the 60's we didn't have no fucking mobile phones, you had to find a PAY PHONE BOOTH. You had to coordinate when people would be around--to even answer the phone sometimes. Phone Tag. You all don't seem to grasp that. You are allowing "a Luxury" , a Convienence, a NON necessity to steal your fscking data!!
    C. This stops overnight when nobody will buy their god damn phones or deal with these fscking communications companies gone fascist. IF nobody has a fscking AT&T account, AT&T doesn't get paid, enough time and eventually NO MORE AT&T at all. Unless AT&T want to spend their own money to stay lit -- make no mistake they have a LOT of money.

      Somewhere down the line, Government has tossed the rule of law out, this is the neucleous for all this grief. Banksters are propped up by NSA spying, and nothing is sacred anymore with this fscking Extra Constitutional HORSESHIT.