Slashdot Mirror


EU Seeks New Powers To Obtain Data 'Directly' From Tech Firms (zdnet.com)

Zack Whittaker reports via ZDNet: European authorities are seeking new powers to allow police and intelligence agencies to directly obtain user data stored on the continent by U.S. tech companies. The move comes in the wake of an uptick in terrorist attacks, including several attacks in Britain and France, among others across the bloc. Tech companies have been asked to do more to help law enforcement, while police have long argued the process for gathering data overseas is slow and cumbersome. The bloc's justice commissioner, Vera Jourova, presented several plans to a meeting of justice ministers in Luxembourg on Thursday to speed up access for EU police forces to obtain evidence -- including one proposal to allow police to obtain data "directly" from the cloud servers of U.S. tech companies in urgent cases. "Commissioner Jourova presented at the Justice Council three legislative options to improve access to e-evidence," said Christian Wiga, an EU spokesperson, in an email. "Based on the discussion between justice ministers, the Commission will now prepare a legislative proposal," he added. Discussions are thought to have included what kind of data could be made available, ranging from geolocation data to the contents of private messages. Such powers would only be used in "emergency" situations, said Jourova, adding that safeguards would require police to ensure that each request is "necessary" and "proportionate." Further reading: Reuters

40 comments

  1. 'Emergency' indeed by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Now all you need is to declare a never-ending 'state of emergency' and you can take whatever you want from whomsoever you want, whenever you want, and shoot anyone in the face who gets in your way.

    1. Re:'Emergency' indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, that - no worries. They already did. France, for example, has been in a state of emergency since 2015 for example.

    2. Re:'Emergency' indeed by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2

      The UKs National Threat Level has been at "severe or "critical" for 9 of the last 11 years. We are already in the midst of a never ending emergency, the UK government would *love* this...

    3. Re:'Emergency' indeed by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 2

      Where do you think I got the idea from? it's the backdoor way of instituting an authoritarian/dictatorship government. Constant state of emergency. Police state. Later, curfews, and shootings if you're out when you're not allowed to be. Doors kicked in. Black bags over peoples' heads. Police in full jackbooted-thug mode. Go watch V For Vendetta again for a full explanation.

    4. Re:'Emergency' indeed by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1
    5. Re:'Emergency' indeed by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

      H.L. Mencken.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    6. Re:'Emergency' indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this the same EU who were up in arms about the lack of privacy protections if the data was stored on US servers because the NSA might have access to that data? For the record I am pretty sure the NSA could collect data no matter where the physical servers are actually located. Unless European data centers have discovered a way to operate their servers without accessing any network. The beauty of digital communication is that you do not need physical access to the servers. On the off chance that the NSA would need physical access to a particular server a good B&E or special ops raid could get what they need. Their accusations and shrill complaints implied that data stored on European servers was basically a guarantee of strict and comprehensive privacy protections. Evidently the people in Europe who believed this tripe were to dumb to comprehend that any data the NSA may have had access to was collected, sorted, analyzed, stored, and shared by the various European intelligence agencies. The NSA doesn't need to waste resources on collecting European data because it was already being collected by the European privacy guarantee experts.

      Like most countries in the world the Europeans have to deal with their own national governments. However, these guys went ahead and created an additional governmental bureaucracy known as the EU. And the EU is not answerable to the countries they claim to represent. But there is hope for a better future. Now that the US has been openly debating why they should continue to underwrite European security and receive nothing of benefit in return may de-ass some peoples heads and let them gaze upon the threats they have been able to ignore for the past 60+ years. A word of advice. Capable militaries are a waste of money and resources until that one day when you find yourself actually needing one. Sort of like data backups. You never need a backup until the day comes when you really need a backup. Europe has been able to sit back and polish their political rhetoric and praise their shining social systems while endlessly berating and throwing insults at the one country on the planet they could call on when Armageddon comes a calling.

    7. Re:'Emergency' indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why the need to bring in migrants?

    8. Re:'Emergency' indeed by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      France, for example, has been in a state of emergency since 2015

      And after initial investigations,it was mostly used to silence protesters, according to Amnisty International.

    9. Re:'Emergency' indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank god for unvetted migration from Islamic countries, then.
      They will provide the required emergencies for years to come.

  2. Before you act outraged... by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Before you start shouting, consider that these tech companies are using your data and selling and sharing it to anyone they want. So just stop. You should be more concerned that the data exists in the first place.

    1. Re:Before you act outraged... by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      You mean the anonymous encrypted data that Apple deletes after six months?

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re:Before you act outraged... by Hentes · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If that was true, the police could just buy the dataset without any need for legislation. But user data is too valuable for tech companies to directly sell it. Instead, they sell all sorts services built on top of the data. For example, you can post an ad on Google or Facebook that only working class middle aged red-haired women with breast cancer and a passion for model railways can see, but you won't know who those people actually are.

    3. Re:Before you act outraged... by david.emery · · Score: 1

      I think I know 2 people that would get this ad. I don't know about the cancer thing, but they match the other criteria.

    4. Re:Before you act outraged... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't make sense. You want us to shout less instead of more?

      No, I'm going to stick with my first reaction: being outraged.

  3. Yet another power grab by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in the wake of a crisis.

  4. possible futures. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Possible futures:

    (a) Because terrorism / the children, the internet finishes dying as a means of free, open, un-censored and un-surveilled communication between human beings. All communication happens on a handful of central services subject to pressure from governments all around the world.

    (b) People learn to communicate without centralization, using strong encryption, as the standard form of online socialization. No one in the middle gets to see, profit from, or surveil the plain-text.

    1000000:1 odds on (a).

    1. Re:possible futures. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      In the current socio-political climate, it's going to end up being Option A. Only fools and the tragically uninformed will use the Internet for anything important.
      Currently, it's basically impossible to conduct your lifes' business using the Internet and have any reasonable modicum of privacy. I've tried using Tor, and while the Captchas all over the place (usually because of Cloudfront) are annoying but negotiable, there are sites that flat-out won't allow you access of any kind if you're on Tor; wanting to order a pizza online from Dominos is something you could work around (walk around the corner, order it in person, pay cash) there were a few others that aren't necessarily physically accessible that just plain wouldn't work with Tor. I considered a VPN, but that's one more thing to pay for every month, and there's ZERO guarantee of your privacy there, either. So no matter what you do, one way or another anymore, someone is storing data on you -- which means your government, sooner or later, will strong-arm someone into giving up the data they have on you. Kind of like Wargames, the only way to win this game is to not play. :-( That's what I think will eventually kill the Internet: too many people get too pissed off about too much invasion of their lives, and they'll just stop using it. It would be hard at first to go back to not using it, but it can be done.

    2. Re:possible futures. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what I think will eventually kill the Internet: too many people get too pissed off about too much invasion of their lives

      I see where you're coming from, and I'm inclined toward that direction myself. But, respectfully, I'd disagree that is a likely outcome at any kind of scale. The internet was once not nearly as invasive. People have made an endless series of decisions all of which lead to the dystopia it is becoming. They decided to give all their communications to companies like FB that mine them for profit. They've chosen closed systems over open ones, surveillance over privacy, lock-down over control, and centralization over decentralization. And they appear not to care one whit: billions will happily use Facebook for almost everything, including news and all personal communication.

      People just do not appear to mind invasion of their lives. I mean, some do, sure... but very few, and they can be ignored because the vast majority do not care, because "I'm not doing anything wrong".

    3. Re:possible futures. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Someone needs to present people with the minute-by-minute transcripts of everything they do and say on the Internet, then they'll see how much they care about being surveilled 24/7/365.

  5. Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Such powers would only be used in "emergency" situations, said Jourova, adding that safeguards would require police to ensure that each request is "necessary" and "proportionate."

    Why do these guys parrot the same bullshit conditions? They will only follow it until the next administration at best, and more likely not at all.

    1. Re:Again? by NatHoward · · Score: 1

      Yes. I would love to see the list of bureaucrats imprisoned under similar regimes for non-emergency use of this "emergency only" access. Due to sophisticaed data compression, I feel confident that I can store this list in a zero-byte file.

  6. This is great! by elcor · · Score: 1

    1- that the EU is calling attention to itself so much, people may realize that they never elected these politicians in the first place. 2- that it's bringing attention to companies harvesting us for Data. So bring on the outrage and focus it to one thing: taking back your power. We don't need apps, we don't need corporations we don't need politicians or anyone else to format who we are.

    1. Re:This is great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we don't need politicians or anyone else to format who we are.

      Then they'll just mandate that you are required to use the apps for everything from a driver's license, to being the only legal method of payment for goods and services. Oh, and you can forget about rooting the damn device, only a terrorist would do that.

      Yes, the future is bleak. There's not enough people to say "No" to these Authoritative Assholes, so they can get away with pretty much anything, and they know it.

      capcha: idealism

    2. Re:This is great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The commissioners are not elected by popular vote; the national government ministers who appoint them, however, generally are, as are the MEPs who can dismiss them through a vote of no confidence. It's not perfect, but better than a system where every position from dog catcher to court magistrate must be filled via direct election.

  7. Quick, who do we blame? by locater16 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Oh no, another terrorist attack and people expect US to do something to stop them! Quick, who can we deflect the blame to? The internet, of course. It's all their fault,terrorists never existed before the internet. Or something. Assistant boy, to the press release!

    1. Re:Quick, who do we blame? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      So one wonders how much planing is required to go to the discount shop buy a knife and then hire a truck and pick a crowded spot. One assumes it must require a whole organisation, to plan that, discussion going back and forth on what type of knife to buy, where to buy it from, what brand of knife, how long you should own the knife before the attack to prevent being flagged for owning a knife and the truck, where to rent it, what brand of truck, how much fuel to buy and the target location, oh wait, no planning at required, just but burgers waffling on with their religious nut baggery till they finally snap, grab a knife from the kitchen, open the phone book and rent a truck and pick the first major target that pops into their empty heads (keep in mind they managed to miss a country planning to fly planes into buildings and all the planning and support that was required to carry that out, even aligning it with secretive government activities to ensure success and having a film crew on hand to record it and celebrate, in fact the efforts of three countries and they all missed that).

      Reality is, don't want them to do this, do not let them in the country. This kind of attack can quite readily be carried out by tourist terrorists, barely any planning required what so ever. Especially do not let people in from countries that you are attacking or have destroyed, they are very likely to be highly motivated to attack and after suffering that militaristic depredations from your country, they are likely to be some what mentally unstable (plus the lesson that prayer does not do very much good at all, basically your sky person wish machine is broken).

      So it is all about mass internet censorship, attacking and silencing all political activists and targeting real journalists, anything that threatens the utterly corrupt establishment, the psychopathic order disorder (crazed individuals pursuing their own greed and ego at the expense of the entirely of human society).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    2. Re:Quick, who do we blame? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      A holy book, a place of worship and some funds. A person with the documents to rent or buy what is needed.
      The security services need to track the funding, support groups, faith and law reform groups who support fund and hide the people of interest, find all the people in the nation who are supporters, stop the flow of all new supporters into a nation.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:Quick, who do we blame? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh no, another terrorist attack and people expect US to do something to stop them!

      Sorry man, haven't you heard? The US is tired of being the world police... Pay your share Europe ! ;)

  8. Let them have it. Who cares? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    We're supposed to be developing adequate encryption and ad hoc mesh networks to bypass the ISPs anyway.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:Let them have it. Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, and then they will be declared illegal and the usage of such mechanisms an act of terror in of themselves. People will be OK with it under the idiocy of "well if you dont have anything to hide..."

  9. After crossing that ocean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...good luck with trying to force them to hand over data.

  10. "do more to help law enforcement" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... require police to ensure that each request is "necessary" ...

    Yeah; don't make them illegally copy your cloud; stop a data-tap and give them the keys to all your data.

  11. "e-evidence"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just kill me now.

    1. Re:"e-evidence"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, terrorists or a fascist government (also terrorists) will do it soon enough.

  12. Correct ZDnet URL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  13. Re:Breaking News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Media matters stooges should get real jobs. And souls.

  14. Re:Breaking News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Absurdly asserts around half the voting population of the U.S. never reads a book or newspaper

    2. Claims it's these others who are "fucking dumb"

    I can appreciate your liberal modifications to how logic and reality always work.

  15. What's an "uptick"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, you mean "increase", but you're a journalist and therefore too stupid to remember basic words like "increase", so you make up stupid new ones, like "uptick" instead. Well done.