The first UN digital privacy chief says we need a Geneva convention to combat the threat of digital surveillance and attacks UK surveillance

[Bouzoo]

About a month ago, the UN elected their first digital privacy chief (you may find investigator instead of chief somewhere). His name is Joseph Cannataci and he is a a professor of technology law at University of Groningen in the Netherlands and head of the department of Information Policy & Governance at the University of Malta (c/p that part). 

 

As to his position and what he can do:

As the first person in the job, the investigator will be able to set the standard for the digital right to privacy, deciding how far to push governments that want to conduct surveillance for security reasons.

 

He is empowered to:

• Systematically review government policies and laws on interception of digital communications and collection of personal data.

• Identify actions that intrude on privacy without compelling justification.

• Assist governments in developing best practices to bring global surveillance under the rule of law.

• Further articulate private sector responsibilities to respect human rights.

• Help ensure national procedures and laws are consistent with international human rights obligations.

 

 

What's interesting about him, is that he doesn't see US as the biggest threat to privacy in the west, but UK. He decided to compare it to George Orwell's 1984., which is famous for mass surveillance and technology usage as a means for controlling the public. He thinks it's even worse than what George Orwell had in mind.

Because if you look at CCTV alone, at least Winston [Winston Smith in Orwell’s novel 1984] was able to go out in the countryside and go under a tree and expect there wouldn’t be any screen, as it was called. Whereas today there are many parts of the English countryside where there are more cameras than George Orwell could ever have imagined. So the situation in some cases is far worse already.

 

“The way we handle it is going to be the difference. But Orwell foresaw a technology that was controlling. In our case we are looking at a technology that is ever-developing, and ever-developing possibly more sinister capabilities.” Because of this, the Snowden revelations were very important, he said.

 

He touched the Snowden case that people here really like to argue about (you can see that part in the article), but he also said that we need a Geneva convention:

The first UN privacy chief has said the world needs a Geneva convention style law for the internet to safeguard data and combat the threat of massive clandestine digital surveillance.

And I'm sure many will say why do we need it, it's gonna be ignored anyway like the current one is, but better anything that nothing I suppose. He thinks this can only be done by taking a "long-term view".

 

 

I read a lot of bad stuff about UK surveillance, be it here or somewhere else, and it's really bad stuff, so to people from UK, is it really that bad? I'd like to hear some first hand experiences. As to the UN digital privacy chief, he actually seems like a good guy. Of course, that may be media and many other things, but he seems like an honest guy that actually wants to change things. He doesn't even use Fb ot Twitter because privacy. What do you think? Time to put on your tin foil hats.

 

Sources: 1, 2

[Fulgrim]

If anything, from what i've read it's worse in the US.

[Trik'Stari]

For once, I actually agree with something the being done by the UN.

 

I'm fairly certain is this a precursor to a gargantuan financial collapse in September.

 

If anything, from what i've read it's worse in the US.

 

It's fairly safe to assume that if you say/do something online in the US, they have recorded it. Even if its "I like sandwiches"

[Sephiroth]

If anything, from what i've read it's worse in the US.

 

I would agree with you in terms of online surveillance. However, I think the reason that he likens the UK to Orwell's "1984" is the mass use of video surveillance in metropolitan areas in the UK. If I were to go into London, there is virtually nowhere I can go that I won't be filmed from at least one angle by CCTV cameras, outside of a restroom (and I will still be recorded entering and exiting). In addition to that, London also utilizes sophisticated facial recognition software, so that in the event of an emergency suspected persons are significantly easier to track.

 

Don't misunderstand, I'm not exactly saying this is a bad thing... I'm neither for, nor against it. There have been numerous instances of abductions and other such crimes which were rapidly halted due to this camera/software network, and honestly that's fantastic. However, one must admit it forces the average citizen to relinquish a sense of privacy which some feel entitled to, even if in most cities they would already be being recorded by the individual security cameras of local shops, some may argue that it's a bit different when it is the government which is recording and tracking people, and keeping a giant database. THAT is what feels especially Orwellian about cities in the UK especially. 

[Fulgrim]

I would agree with you in terms of online surveillance. However, I think the reason that he likens the UK to Orwell's "1984" is the mass use of video surveillance in metropolitan areas in the UK. If I were to go into London, there is virtually nowhere I can go that I won't be filmed from at least one angle by CCTV cameras, outside of a restroom (and I will still be recorded entering and exiting). In addition to that, London also utilizes sophisticated facial recognition software, so that in the event of an emergency suspected persons are significantly easier to track.

 

Don't misunderstand, I'm not exactly saying this is a bad thing... I'm neither for, nor against it. There have been numerous instances of abductions and other such crimes which were rapidly halted due to this camera/software network, and honestly that's fantastic. However, one must admit it forces the average citizen to relinquish a sense of privacy which some feel entitled to, even if in most cities they would already be being recorded by the individual security cameras of local shops, some may argue that it's a bit different when it is the government which is recording and tracking people, and keeping a giant database. THAT is what feels especially Orwellian about cities in the UK especially. 

I get what you mean, it's just i've never actually been to London myself so i didn't know how extreme the surveillance is.

[Bouzoo]

-snip-

I think I'm gonna go there this or next year, so I'm definitely curious about that. Gonna check it.

[Sephiroth]

I get what you mean, it's just i've never actually been to London myself so i didn't know how extreme the surveillance is.

 

Yeah. Love it or hate it, it's quite impressive how much security there is. And really, it doesn't bother most people I met there, but you always have some of the tinfoil hat folk who think that any government is out to get them and becomes suspicious that they're being watched for when they scratch their balls in public or something dumb like that

[Sephiroth]

I think I'm gonna go there this or next year, so I'm definitely curious about that. Gonna check it.

 

Going as a tourist, it honestly felt safer than most American cities (though I bet most European cities do)

[SurvivorNVL]

I approve of this.  

[atrash]

I get what you mean, it's just i've never actually been to London myself so i didn't know how extreme the surveillance is.

 

Hohoo it is pretty extreme here with all the CCTVs pointing at so many different directions. I would even think twice of crossing the road without waiting for the light to turn green first because cameras looking at me.LOL

[Bsmith]

For once, I actually agree with something the being done by the UN.

I'm fairly certain is this a precursor to a gargantuan financial collapse in September.

It's fairly safe to assume that if you say/do something online in the US, they have recorded it. Even if its "I like sandwiches"

In the UK it isn't just the online stuff that gets recorded.

In bigger cities like London I can gaurentee you that at every possible place they can justify it there hangs a police camera(or CCTV as they appear to be called) that allows for facial recognition and can be used to follow one around the city if needed. I am not really the kind of person sporting hooligans, but when I visited London I made sure to always wear a cap and keep low profile cuse of the cams just like they would do.

Call me paranoid, but it just celt much better doing that.

But with the online security it wouldnt surprise me if the UK was just like the US, remember the idea of the porn blocking software?

[Me1z]

For once, I actually agree with something the being done by the UN.

 

I'm fairly certain is this a precursor to a gargantuan financial collapse in September.

 

 

It's fairly safe to assume that if you say/do something online in the US, they have recorded it. Even if its "I like sandwiches"

 

Not that I disagree, because the economy has been in a state where it could tank at any moment for over a decade now, but why September specifically?

[Solkia]

I get what you mean, it's just i've never actually been to London myself so i didn't know how extreme the surveillance is.

 

What do you mean? Don't all British people live in England?

 

 

/s

[LePawel]

In UK, on an average walk through a city centre you're caught on 300+ cameras.

Now, here's the important info:

Most of those cameras don't record sound,

Most of these are sub 480p quality,

Only 1 in 1000 crimes in UK is solved by using CCTV footage

It is still one of the simplest forms of crime prevention, because potential criminal don't know these stats.

It's a good thing there are all those cameras because they belong to thousands of different companies and it's impossible to track where you go without a metric butt ton of work to even get footage from people. 

They should look at the online privacy Cameron wants to get rid of so badly instead of using something that works well as a fog for some another asshole move.

[rhyseyness]

I don't think it's that bad...

I'm not worried so much about CCTV, as all they get is your face, whereas with internet traffic they can find out everything about you.

I live in the UK, spend a fair bit of time in London, and I don't think the surveillance is that bad.

It often helps to find criminals too, so I'm all for CCTV.

However, I'm definitely against having my internet traffic monitored.

 

EDIT: I had no idea that the UK had so many more CCTV cameras than the rest of the world

[Fulgrim]

What do you mean? Don't all British people live in England?

 

 

/s

England is a country, London is merely the capital city. 

[Trik'Stari]

Not that I disagree, because the economy has been in a state where it could tank at any moment for over a decade now, but why September specifically?

Because the Chinese and US stock markets are on a downhill slope.

 

There are a number of tinfoil hat websites predicting something to happen on September 23rd, 2015. Not that I specifically believe them, but I do think something big is going to happen this year.

[othertomperson]

Cameras are everywhere. Literally everywhere. Big Brother is always watching.

[The_Strict_Nein]

I get what you mean, it's just i've never actually been to London myself so i didn't know how extreme the surveillance is.

 

London has the most CCTV cameras of any city in the entire world.

[The_Strict_Nein]

England is a country, London is merely the capital city. 

 

England is (effectively) a state, not a country.

[Fulgrim]

England is (effectively) a state, not a country.

No.

[The_Strict_Nein]

No.

 

England is not recognized as Sovereign territory. The Interpretation Act of 1978 provides a statutory term for what England is (and as such allows for it to be referenced separately to the UK) but England is not in and of itself recognized internationally as an independent country.

[Trik'Stari]

Cameras are everywhere. Literally everywhere. Big Brother is always watching.

There's a solution to that. It's called a BB gun, or a slingshot.

[deviant88]

I hope they also regulate MS(lol) for their spyware on win10, if they want to sell products in UN countries and EU they need to remove spyware and telemetry.

[Master Disaster]

England is (effectively) a state, not a country.

What?? Says who exactly?

England is a country, the United Kingdom is a commonwealth.

@post as long as they're intended for good I have no issues with outdoor surveillance, problem is these days it's a fine line between public safety measure and invasion of privacy and when the guys deciding are the people running it all lines do get crossed.

Electronic privacy is a fucking joke in England, at least as bad as America.