Slashdot Mirror
Challenge Over UK Bulk Hacking Powers Taken To European Court of Human Rights (vice.com)
Joseph Cox, reporting for Motherboard: On Friday, activist group Privacy International and five internet and communications providers lodged an application before the European Court of Human Rights to challenge the UK's use of bulk hacking powers abroad. "The European Court of Human Rights has a strong track record of ensuring that intelligence agencies act in compliance with human rights law. We call on the Court to hold GCHQ accountable for its unlawful bulk hacking practices," Scarlet Kim, legal officer at Privacy International, said in a statement. The application has been made with UK-based non-profit GreenNet, the Chaos Computer Club from Germany, Jibonet from South Korea, US internet service provider May First, and communications provider Rise Up. In 2014, Privacy International filed a complaint over the country's bulk hacking powers with the UK's Investigatory Powers Tribunal, a court which determines if public authorities have unlawfully used covert techniques. In February of this year, the IPT concluded that GCHQ's hacking was legal under the UK's Intelligence Service Act 1994. Privacy International is now challenging whether the UK's interpretation of the Intelligence Service Act for using bulk hacking powers complies with the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR).
UK to hold referendum on exiting the Human race. Being Human is just not that popular in majority of the world govts.
UK hasn't initiated their leave yet.
The European Convention on Human Rights and its associated court aren't EU institutions, so Brexit won't directly affect them. However, all EU member states are required to be signatories of the ECHR, so Brexit does mean that the UK could at some future point do things like withdrawing from the ECHR and repealing the Human Rights Act (which is the associated national law), while such actions are not permitted as long as the UK remains a member of the EU.
(Just to confuse the issue, there is also a separate Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which would typically be enforced in the European Court of Justice, which is one branch of the Court of Justice of the European Union. At least one other high profile case regarding the British government's surveillance powers, brought by two serving MPs no less, recently followed that path rather than relying on the ECHR. And to think, some people argue that European politics is overcomplicated...)
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
European Court of Human Rights is not a body of the EU. So Brexit has nothing to do with it one way or another.
The ECHR isn't the ECJ. When we leave the EU, we'll leave the jurisdiction of the ECJ. The ECHR is a completely different body, with 47 member states.
Even that wouldn't necessarily disentangle them from this matter since the allegation is bulk hacking outside of the UK.
To make the story even more complicated: the uk has opted out of the charter of fundamental rights: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
And when did we get a referendum on whether we wanted 'fundamental rights'? Honestly the Poles and the Brits (I am one) are stupid enough to vote against having rights. Kind of like stabbing yourself in the face just in case you're a terrorist.
Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
Ignore it, and it'll go away. That's always worked out so well...
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Given the total needed overview e.g. of Ireland/UK and all communications in and out of Ireland in the ~1970-90's no future treaty would in any way hinder such ability to bulk collect.
The UK gained amazing and total insight into Irish fundraising and resulting hardware shipments from the US east coast by bulk collecting every call to and from the USA to Ireland and the wider UK.
Any needed help from the telco sector was a given when setting up a new network, been granted a telco role.
Police powers might be reworked for the public but thats to hide deeper gov and mil bulk collection from legal teams in open court.
e.g. CID might not get as much raw material as a good legal team might uncover the origins given time, funds and questions in open court or to gov. The ability to stay more hidden e.g. a more protected Special Branch could have been a better option for mil/gov collected material. All any open court questions would find is very legal primitive sigint, call logs vs very advance sat ability, decryption, teams to track any person globally.
The other option was to present the legal teams with police support teams as been the full and only the origin of all logs, collection and advice. No further legal ability was then given to uncover the more complex role of gov, mil teams in any open court setting.
Any other skill set was not for open court and thus outside discovery and did not fall under any public treaty consideration.
Any treaty is fine to sign and keep if nobody can ever find or report on any issues with the obligations and protections in public. In or out of the EU does not confirm, uncover, allow for the discovery of or gain oversight of any wider digital collection ability.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
You utterly fail at the reading comprehension thing, don't you?
That's ok, you failed at the reality comprehension thing...
What is the court going to do about it? Go to war with the UK? The 5th largest economy and military in the world?
Why do you think Japan still hunts whales? Because no one can actually do anything about it to stop them... Because they are Japan... If it was New Zealand doing it, then they could be stopped...
It's OK. Bow out gracefully. You don't seem to understand this, which is fine.
Yea, you're a moron, go back to your weed and stay out of adult conversations...
Every single comment I've seen from you has been completely stupid, you are an idiot, you probably come from a whole family of idiots.
You frankly have nothing useful to say.