MASS SURVEILLANCE
MASS SURVEILLANCE
Key Question : If the technology can do some real good, should we accept it?
Translate in English
Les fuites historiques ont incité à légiférer : pourtant, les gouvernements trouvent de nouveaux moyens de nous surveiller. Le projet de loi britannique sur la sécurité en ligne est l'un d'entre eux. Dix ans se sont écoulés depuis qu'Edward Snowden s'est retranché dans une chambre d'hôtel à Hong Kong et a révélé à un groupe de journalistes les opérations de surveillance de masse menées par la Grande-Bretagne et les États-Unis. Ses révélations fracassantes ont montré comment les gouvernements américain et britannique espionnaient leurs citoyens, interceptaient, traitaient et stockaient leurs données, et partageaient ces informations. Depuis lors, bien qu'aucun des deux États n'ait perdu son appétit pour la collecte d'énormes quantités de données personnelles, les nouvelles contraintes en matière de transparence et de contrôle, ainsi que le développement de la technologie cryptée, ont fait pencher la balance en faveur de la protection de la vie privée.
Les révélations de Snowden ont suscité l'indignation et la colère. Les interceptions massives étaient effectuées sans mandat démocratique et avec peu de garanties réelles. Lorsque l'ampleur de cette surveillance a été révélée, les autorités ont affirmé que la plupart des informations n'étaient pas "lues" et que leur collecte ne portait donc pas atteinte à la vie privée. Les données pouvaient révéler une image intime de la vie d'une personne - un fait qui a été confirmé par des recours juridiques ultérieurs, qui ont prouvé que la surveillance violait la vie privée et la législation sur les droits de l'homme.
Après les fuites, trois examens ont eu lieu au Royaume-Uni. Le premier a été réalisé par la commission parlementaire sur l'intelligence et la sécurité (ISC). Il n'a guère permis d'examiner ce que les espions faisaient réellement, tout en reconnaissant qu'une nouvelle législation était nécessaire. Un examen effectué par David Anderson QC, le réviseur indépendant de la législation sur le terrorisme, a été plus circonspect et a suggéré une série d'améliorations. Enfin, le ministère de l'intérieur a convoqué un groupe d'experts (dont je faisais partie, aux côtés d'un ancien ministre, d'anciens chefs de la sécurité et de Martha Lane Fox) qui a produit un rapport et une série de recommandations.
VOCABULARY
Justice Department
catch up with
abide by
on trial
civil liberty
intelligence agency
code of conduct
National Security Agency
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
States haven’t stopped spying on their citizens, post-Snowden – they’ve just got sneakier
By Heather Brooke for the Guardian Tue 6 Jun 2023
The historic leaks prompted legislation: yet governments are finding new ways to monitor us. The UK’s online safety bill is one of them. It’s been 10 years since Edward Snowden holed up in a Hong Kong hotel room and exposed Britain and America’s mass surveillance operations to a group of journalists. His bombshell revelations revealed how the US and UK governments were spying on their citizens, intercepting, processing and storing their data, and sharing this information. Since then, although neither state has lost its appetite for hoovering up huge amounts of personal data, new transparency and oversight constraints, together with the growth of encrypted technology, have tilted the balance towards privacy.
Snowden’s revelations sparked outrage and anger. Bulk interception was being done without a democratic mandate and with few real safeguards. When the scope of this surveillance came to light, officials claimed most of the information was not “read” and therefore its collection did not violate privacy. This was disingenuous; the data could reveal an intimate picture of someone’s life – a fact that was upheld in later legal challenges, which proved the surveillance violated privacy and human rights law.
After the leaks, three reviews took place in the UK. The first was done by parliament’s intelligence and security committee (ISC). It did little to interrogate what the spies were actually up to, even while acknowledging that new legislation was required. A review by David Anderson QC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, was more circumspect and suggested a series of improvements. Finally, the Home Office convened a panel (of which I was a part, alongside an ex-minister, former security chiefs and Martha Lane Fox) that produced a report and a series of recommendations.
These three reports eventually led to the 2016 passage of the Investigatory Powers Act, which clarified what types of state surveillance were allowed and how these needed to be authorised. The act allowed bulk interception – much to the dismay of many privacy campaigners – but changed the process governing how this interception was authorised. This meant that while a secretary of state could sign off a warrant justifying the most intrusive powers, that warrant must also be approved by an independent judicial commissioner.
The legacy of Snowden’s leaks is mixed. Bulk interception and surveillance haven’t stopped, despite there now being greater transparency and more oversight. “There are a few more safeguards, but mostly it continues,” Caroline Wilson Palow, the legal director at Privacy International (PI), told me. The greatest legacy of Snowden’s leaks are the legal challenges they have made possible. Until these revelations, it was nearly impossible to bring a legal case challenging state surveillance. There have now been several successful lawsuits.
watch an explanation : https://youtu.be/GoM4jIZbTtQ?si=LLPgRacGK-UBsrvz
Answer the questions :
What are the two main ways that governments collect information from our phones and the internet?
2
What do spy agencies do with the content they collect?
3
How long do spy agencies keep metadata for in the UK and the US?
4
What can metadata be used for?
5
Why do US and UK governments argue that surveillance programs help keep us safe?
6
What is the potential consequence of being wrongly accused due to surveillance programs?
7
Who controls the internet now?
8
How does the knowledge of being watched change our behavior?
9
What impact have these revelations had on the internet?
10
Does privacy have a future online?