*Consistently full of stuff one doesn't see anywhere else.
======================================================================
EDRi-gram
biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe
Number 11.17, 11 September 2013
Contents
1. US and UK intelligence campaign against encryption
2. EDRi and FREE want an end to lawless surveillance
3. PACE: Resolution on massive eavesdropping in Europe
4. Net Neutrality threatened by the Commission’s draft regulation
5. More than 20 000 protest in Berlin against surveillance
6. German newspapers sued for pointing out an alleged illegal site
7. LIBE inquiry on surveillance
8. ENDitorial: EU Parliament wastes time and money on gambling? You bet!
9. Recommended Action
10. Recommended Reading
11. Agenda
12. About
1. US and UK intelligence campaign against encryption
Top-secret files obtained by the Guardian from former contractor Edward
Snowden reveal that NSA and GCHQ, that is the US and British
intelligence agencies, cracked the online encryption used by people to
protect their personal information such as emails, banking and medical
records.
The guarantees offered by Internet companies to their consumers that
their personal data are secure appear to be extremely thin in reality.
A NSA 250 million dollar/year program, known as “Sigint [signals
intelligence] enabling", has been used in collaboration with IT
companies to introduce weaknesses into encryption products so that
intelligence agencies may attack "the use of ubiquitous encryption
across the internet". Through these partnerships, the agencies have
inserted secret vulnerabilities (backdoors or trapdoors) into commercial
encryption software. The program "actively engages US and foreign IT
industries to covertly influence and/or overtly leverage their
commercial products' designs" and is designed to "insert vulnerabilities
into commercial encryption systems". These vulnerabilities are to be
known by the NSA, but to no one else, including ordinary customers
considered "adversaries".
The NSA considers strong decryption programs as the "price of admission
for the US to maintain unrestricted access to and use of cyberspace".
"For the past decade, NSA has lead an aggressive, multi-pronged effort
to break widely used internet encryption technologies. Vast amounts of
encrypted internet data which have up till now been discarded are now
exploitable," says a 2010 GCHQ document.
A GCHQ team has been working to develop ways to get into the encrypted
traffic on Hotmail, Google, Yahoo and Facebook. Technology companies
stated that they worked with the intelligence agencies only when legally
compelled to do so. The Guardian has previously reported that Microsoft
co-operated with the NSA to circumvent encryption on the Outlook.com
email and chat services but the company stated it had been obliged to
comply with "existing or future lawful demands" when designing its products.
Independent security experts have suspected that the NSA was introducing
weaknesses into security standards and this is now confirmed by the
disclosed documents which show that the agency has worked covertly to
get its own version of a draft security standard issued by the US
National Institute of Standards and Technology approved for worldwide
use in 2006.
"Cryptography forms the basis for trust online. By deliberately
undermining online security in a short-sighted effort to eavesdrop, the
NSA is undermining the very fabric of the internet," said Bruce
Schneier, an encryption specialist and fellow at Harvard's Berkman
Center for Internet and Society.
It seems that the agencies have not yet succeeded in cracking all
encryption technologies as the leaked documents reveal and as it was
confirmed by Snowden during a live Q&A with Guardian readers in June.
"Encryption works. Properly implemented strong crypto systems are one of
the few things that you can rely on," he said.
Bruce Schneier has given five pieces of advice on how to preserve one’s
personal data:
1. To hide in the network and use Tor to anonymize oneself;
2) To encrypt one’s communications by using TL, IPsec;
3) To use an air gap; “Since I started working with the Snowden
documents, I bought a new computer that has never been connected to the
internet. If I want to transfer a file, I encrypt the file on the secure
computer and walk it over to my internet computer, using a USB stick. To
decrypt something, I reverse the process.”
4) To be “suspicious of commercial encryption software” as probably most
encryption products from large US companies as well as many foreign ones
may have NSA-friendly back doors. “Closed-source software is easier for
the NSA to backdoor than open-source software. Systems relying on master
secrets are vulnerable to the NSA, through either legal or more
clandestine means.”
5) To use public-domain encryption that has to be compatible with other
implementations and to use symmetric cryptography rather than public-key
cryptography. “Prefer conventional discrete-log-based systems over
elliptic-curve systems; the latter have constants that the NSA
influences when they can.”
Revealed: how US and UK spy agencies defeat internet privacy and
security (5.09.2013)
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/05/nsa-gchq-encryption-codes-security
NSA surveillance: A guide to staying secure (6.09.2013)
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/05/nsa-how-to-remain-secure-surveillance
The US government has betrayed the internet. We need to take it back
(5.09.2013)
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/05/government-betrayed-internet-nsa-spying
TOP SECRET//SI//REL TO USA, FVEY (16.06.2010)
http://statewatch.org/news/2013/sep/uk-usa-encryption-bullrun-guide-final.pdf
Secret documents reveal N.S.A. Campaign Against Envryption (5.09.2013)
http://statewatch.org/news/2013/sep/nsa-sigint-enabling-nyt-13-0905.pdf
2. Net Neutrality threatened by the Commission’s draft regulation
For the past years, EU Commissioner Neelie Kroes, who started by
advocating for net neutrality, has constantly given in to the pressure
of large telecom companies, changing her direction from protecting net
neutrality to threatening it. The current draft Regulation made public
on 11 September 2013 just confirms this direction.
La Quadrature du Net and several advocacy groups have accused Kroes of
killing net neutrality through the Commission's draft proposal on the
reform of the EU telecom market, under the disguise of defending it. In
a leaked draft of Commissioner Neelie Kroes’ proposals for new telecoms
rules, “net neutrality” was taken out from the one place where it had
been previously mentioned.
“The Commission would be giving telecoms freedom to enter into business
deals with big content providers such as Google or Facebook to
prioritize their data flows over the Internet. Such a corporate
power-grab would relegate the rest of citizens and new-entrant
innovators to a slower Internet with disastrous effects for freedom and
innovation online,” said Jérémie Zimmermann, spokesman for La Quadrature
du Net.
The document has been re-written from previous drafts and includes now
an article saying that “any operator shall have the right to provide a
European Assured Service Quality (ASQ) connectivity product. End-users
shall be free to agree to enter into agreements on data volumes, and
speeds and general quality characteristics with providers of electronic
communications.”
Kroes’s spokesman Ryan Heath has, however, stated on a blog post that
the Commission cannot encourage deals between operators and content
providers. “The Commission has no capacity or interest to interfere in
voluntary commercial arrangements such as this,” he said.
But there was a huge opposition also in the European Commission to the
assault on net neutrality. As revealed by a leak from EDRi on 10
September 2013, in the past days, the draft Regulation was the subject
of extensive and heated debates in internal meetings and two services
of the European Commission are leading the attacks on the current draft:
The Directorate-General for Justice and Fundamental Rights (DG Justice)
harshly criticised Kroes' proposals that would bring about the exact
contrary of net neutrality. Above all, DG Justice is concerned about the
inevitable restrictions on freedom of communication of European
citizens: "Furthermore, we consider that such limited possibilities of
accessing Internet content and services of their choice would run
counter to the stated objectives of Article 38 of the EU Charter of
Fundamental Rights, whereby EU policies must ensure a high level of
consumer protection"
The Commissioner for Enterprise and Industry (DG Enterprise) is also
concerned about the effect on European entrepreneurs.
Despite the debate within the European Commission, the college of
European Commissioners decided to keep the provisions on net neutrality
with a 25 to 3 vote to keep the current text. The official presentation
of the text was made public on 11 September 2013.
Article 23 of the current draft text leaves the door open for a two-tiered
Internet by allowing ISPs to offer speeds at different rates through
“specialized services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity.”
“Anyone with even a passing knowledge of the functioning of how regulation
is imposed on a national level in the E.U. will know that the provisions
that have been proposed will be about as useful as an umbrella in a hurricane,”
explains Joe McNamee from EDRi.
"Mrs Kroes' draft is flawed by design to allow commercial breaches of Net
neutrality, through forms of discrimination which undermine our freedom
of communication and are anti-competitive by nature. Rushing such measures,
a few months before upcoming elections, is outrageous and shows the profoundly
disturbing disconnection between the Commission and citizens," explains Jérémie Zimmermann.
If the text is approved by the Parliament and the Council, it can
enter into law and if adopted as is, the regulation will put a strong
blow to growth and innovation and will end the present egalitarian
platform of free communications.
EDRi: Kroes launches her attack on net neutrality in Europe – a
“death sentence for innovators” (11.09.2013)
http://www.edri.org/Regulation-singlemarket-connected-continent
FAQ - Net Neutrality in draft Regulation (11.09.2013)
http://www.edri.org/files/11092013-FAQ-NN-regulation.pdf
Leak: Damning analysis of Kroes' attack on net neutrality (10.09.2013)
http://www.edri.org/NN-negativeopinions
Leaked DG Justice opinion on net neutrality (10.09.2013)
http://www.edri.org/files/10092013-Opinion-DGJust.pdf
Draft Regulation (11.09.2013)
http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2013/EN/1-2013-627-EN-F1-1.Pdf
Press release - Commission proposes major step forward for telecoms single market (11.09.2013)
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-828_en.htm
Reding tackles Kroes: new EU telecoms law puts free speech at risk
(10.09.2013)
http://www.iptegrity.com/index.php/telecoms-package/net-neutrality/903-reding-tackles-kroes-new-eu-telecoms-law-puts-free-speech-at-risk
Neelie Kroes Pushing Telcos' Agenda to End Net Neutrality (30.08.2013)
http://www.laquadrature.net/en/neelie-kroes-pushing-telcos-agenda-to-end-net-neutrality
Digital rights activist: EU's proposed net neutrality law 'as useful as an umbrella in a hurricane' (11.09.2013)
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2048563/digital-rights-activist-eus-proposed-net-neutrality-law-as-useful-as-an-umbrella-in-a-hurricane.html
Kroes' clientelism threatened Net Neutrality at the European level (only in German, 10.09.2013)
https://digitalegesellschaft.de/2013/09/pm-kroes-klientelpolitik-gefaehrdet-netzneutralitaet-auf-europaeischer-ebene/
3. EDRi and FREE want an end to lawless surveillance
Civil society groups European Digital Rights (EDRi) and the Fundamental
Rights European Experts Group (FREE) have demanded an end to lawless
spying on individuals around the globe. At a meeting with the Chair of
the European Parliament's Civil Liberties Committee today, the two
groups handed over a document containing detailed analysis of the
current European and US legal frameworks. The document will be submitted
to all relevant policy-making and governmental bodies.
In light of recent revelations, which have profoundly undermined trust
in online communications tools, there is an urgent need for
transparency, predictability and proportionality. In the United States,
new laws are needed at federal level to provide much stricter rules, to
strictly limit the scope of administrative subpoenas, to strengthen open
judicial warrants and rulings, and full democratic control, in
accordance with international human rights and privacy/data protection
standards. Specifically, we demand that when such laws are in place,
they should afford equal protection, overseen by truly independent Data
Protection authorities, to US and non-US citizens.
The submission calls for clarity from both the European Union, the
Council of Europe's Member States and United States regarding law and
practices for online surveillance. In particular, the joint document
demands:
- that, in compliance with its new prerogatives and responsibilities
under the Lisbon Treaty and the EU Charter, the European Parliament's
frame of reference be broad enough to encompass all relevant data
processing and that the Parliament continue to resist the external and
internal EU pressure to weaken the rule of law and to permit the
creation of a surveillance society;
- that any disclosure of personal data to national security agencies,
especially when these are outside the EU, be subject to European data
protection law;
- that, inside the EU, the exclusive competence of Member States with
regard to national security not be abusively invoked and, in any case,
not undermine Member State obligations for sincere cooperation and
mutual trust arising from Treaties and the Charter;
- that the Council of Europe insist on full disclosure from all Member
States of their surveillance practices and obtain assurances of the
effective implementation of the fundamental right to privacy;
- that the Commission as Guardian of EU law and of the implementation of
international agreements suspend the “Safe Harbor” agreement with the
United States, as this has now been shown to be inadequate for the
protection of the fundamental rights of European citizens;
- that the so-called “anti-FISA” clause, “article 42” should be
re-introduced as part of the wider European data protection reform,
which must also include effective enforcement, transparency and data
minimisation in order to offer effective protection to European citizens.
Only by following these recommendations can trust be re-built - trust
that laws that protect individuals' fundamental rights are not being
broken, trust that democratic decision-making is not being subverted and
undermined, trust that societies that claim to be free do not monitor
all of their citizens.
Full press release by EDRi and FREE: EDRi and FREE urge European
Parliament to bring an end to lawless surveillance (4.09.2013)
http://www.edri.org/edri_free
EDRi and FREE submission (08.2013)
http://www.edri.org/files/submission_free_edri130801.pdf
4. PACE: Resolution on massive eavesdropping in Europe
On 29 August 2013, EDRi signed together with other international and
national human rights and freedom of expression organisations (ARTICLE
19, Reporters Without Borders, Privacy International, Vrijschrift, Open
Rights Group, INDEX, English PEN and Access Now) a petition to
strongly urge the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE)
to support the Resolution, Massive Eavesdropping in Europe, tabled on 31
July 2013 by 23 members of the PACE.
The Resolution calls on member states to regulate and effectively
oversee the secret services and special procedures and to pass
legislative provisions at the national level to protect whistleblowers.
The resolution also calls upon the Secretary General to launch an
inquiry under Article 52 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The signatory organisations support this timely Resolution and remain
concerned about the recent revelations of surveillance of internet and
telephone communications by the governments of the USA and the Council
of Europe’s members, including France, Germany, Turkey and the United
Kingdom. These revelations suggest a blatant and systematic disregard
for human rights as articulated in Articles 8 and 10 of the European
Convention on Human Rights and other international and European treaties.
The blanket application of surveillance mechanisms to global digital
communications drastically threatens the protection of human rights in
the digital age. We remind the PACE members that in his June 2013
report, the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the
right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, highlighted
the negative impact of surveillance on civil liberties, including the
right to inform and be informed, freedom of expression and respect for
privacy. We believe that the proposal, formulated in the PACE
Resolution, could offer an invaluable assessment of the strength of
legal safeguards for the right to freedom of expression and privacy in
the Council of Europe member states and offer a unique insight into the
legal framework of surveillance.
Further, the signatory organisations also support the emphasis of the
proposed Resolution on the need to protect whistleblowers.
Whistleblowers play a critical role in promoting transparency and
upholding the human rights and interests of all members of society. PACE
must strengthen the protection of whistleblowers and support efforts to
combat violations of fundamental human rights.
Original text: PACE: Resolution on massive eavesdropping in Europe
(29.08.2013)
http://www.article19.org/resources.php/resource/37224/en/
5. More than 20 000 protest in Berlin against surveillance
The Freiheit statt Angst (Freedom Not Fear) mass anti-surveillance rally
took place in Berlin, Germany on 7 September 2013.
The event was organized by a broad civil coalition of over 80 NGO,
associations and parties demanding an end to surveillance and a clear
statement from the government on the surveillance scandal.
While the organizers expected more than 10 000 protesters, on 7
September 2013 more than 20 000 people were present in Berlin's
Alexanderplatz not just for the march, but also for the opening and
closing rally.
“The demonstration is a huge success. There are four times as many of us
as there were at the last demo in 2011! The citizens are going out onto
the streets in defense of their fundamental rights and of democracy,”
said padeluun of the Demo Alliance.
“Only a dictatorship needs censorship,” “Anonymity is not a crime,” or
“Freedom of the press needs data protection” – in imaginative costumes,
with creative banners and pithy slogans, the people in Berlin are
protesting peacefully against the spying practices of the NSA, against
the continued violation of their privacy, and against persistent
inaction by the Merkel government.
Rena Tangens of the EDRi member Digitalcourage noted that “Surveillance
is going on in Germany, too, and all citizens are affected. Online
searches, data retention, stored-data information systems and the
disproportionate use of cell dumps are just a few examples of
anti-democratic control measures that need to be abolished.”
The other speakers of the closing rally struck a defiant note as well.
Parker Higgins, an activist from the EDRi member Electronic Frontier
Foundation (USA), voiced an urgent warning of the consequences of
blanket surveillance for human dignity. “We need to take the system back
— and to do that, we need an informed citizenry and we need to bring
national policies back into line with international principles of human
rights. I’m ashamed of what my country is doing in my name, but today I
feel that I’m among my real people – people who believe in freedom and
stand up against fear!”
Michael Rediske from Reporters Without Borders emphasized the threat to
press freedom that has become an everyday reality with the surveillance
and monitoring of journalists around the world via the Internet.
“They’re arrested for blog posts or tweets, their e-mails are monitored,
their contacts are investigated, their computers are infected with
monitoring software.” He pointed out that the NSA scandal has now made
it clear that even German journalists are being monitored as a matter of
course. This surveillance not only threatens German freedoms, it also
destroys Germany’s credibility as an ally. “We can’t do dictators the
favor of becoming like them.”
“We could give Snowden asylum if only we wanted to,” said Christian
Humborg of Transparency International. He cited Snowden’s response to
receiving the Whistleblower Prize: “Governments must be accountable to
us for the decisions that they make. Decisions regarding the kind of
world we will live in. What kind of rights and freedoms individuals will
enjoy are the domain of the public, not the government in the dark.”
The organizers even reported praise from the police due to the fact that
the march proceeded completely peacefully and without any negative
incidents.
Press releases from the event
http://blog.freiheitstattangst.de/englisch-pressreleases/
More info on the protest (only in German)
http://blog.freiheitstattangst.de/
Photos from the event
http://www.flickr.com/photos/digitalcourage/sets/72157635372016963/
http://piratpix.com/fsa13/
(Thanks to EDRi member Digitalcourage - Germany)
6. German newspapers sued for pointing out an alleged illegal site
At the end of August 2013, a group of German publishers sued newspapers
Der Tagesspiegel and Die Zeit, accusing them of assisting copyright
infringement for having printed an interview with the operator of an
alleged unauthorized ebook site, giving the site name as well - TorBoox,
which claims to be the largest ebook piracy site in Germany, with 1.5
million books downloaded monthly.
While hosting copyright infringing material may be considered illegal,
and, in some cases, linking to illegal content and indexing links
containing illegal material has been considered illegal, to consider
publishing an interview and just naming an illegal site as an
infringement seems a little far fetched.
“With the direct and multiple naming of the Internet address the reader
is immediately aware of the illicit supply of the website. With regard
to objective journalistic reporting there was no need for direct
nomination,” the publishers write in their complaint.
As the admin of the site in question told TorrentFreak, the funny part
is that even the online magazine of the German Book Publishers
Association had itself published the complete URL of the site. And while
the publisher association decided to take action against the newspapers,
it seems there is little to do against the site itself which has a
hidden server (Tor) with its content. What’s more, the site operators
intend to make it international.
The complaint was withdrawn right away but this shows the big mess
related to liability over copyright infringement and the lack of
adaptability of publishers to a new market. Only a few months ago,
German researchers cooked up a new form of DRM aimed at discouraging
piracy by changing the text of each book, thus creating a form of
digital watermarking which is actually an invasion into the author’s work.
And although the e-books market is still limited, maybe it is time
publishers should find ways to develop this market and conquer it by
modern business models rather than spending money in court, suing
newspapers.
Journalists Face Criminal Complaint For Mentioning Name of Pirate Site
(30.08.2013)
http://torrentfreak.com/journalists-face-criminal-complaint-for-mentioning-name-of-pirate-site-130830/
"In the network there is no property" (only in German, 26.08.2013)
http://www.boersenblatt.net/634256/
German publishers sue newspapers for just mentioning an e-book pirating
site (5.09.2013)
http://www.mhpbooks.com/german-publishers-sue-newspapers-for-just-mentioning-a-e-book-pirating-site/
Books steal as a business model (only in German, 25.08.2013)
http://www.tagesspiegel.de/kultur/internet-piraterie-buecher-stehlen-als-geschaeftsmodell/8690178.html
7. LIBE inquiry on surveillance
On 5 September 2013, the Civil Liberties (LIBE) committee from the
European Parliament organised a first inquiry hearing, which included
Jacques Follorou from Le Monde, Jacob Applebaum from the Tor and
Wikileaks projects, Alan Rusbridger, editor in chief of the Guardian,
Carlos Coelho, socialist MEP and former member of the Echelon committee
and Gerhard Schmid, former socialist MEP and rapporteur of the Echelon
report and Duncan Campell, investigative journalist.
Jacques Follorou explained the French interception system. He explained
that there exists absolutely no parliamentary control, neither any
control organism, this system obeying only to the executive and having
its own sharing logic. This results in an "inscrutable deep state behind
the official institutions" which endangers national sovereignty.
Appelbaum detailed to the MEPs the functioning of the Prism programme,
how the NSA has insiders at Google and most Telcom giants and thus
outsources its information collection, commenting that "it might be a
bug but maybe it is a feature". He also pointed out to one NSA programme
which specifically targets types of software to sweep up data from
people who are not terrorists and to another system which sends NSA
agents into urban areas to penetrate people’s home wireless networks.
He repeatedly regretted the illegitimate harassment by American security
forces due to post 9/11 laws, which resulted in him being searched and
arrested without a warrant: "It is better to be an immigrant in Berlin
than a citizen in New-York".
Alan Rusbridger urged for a stronger press freedom protection, including
a law that explicitly protects whistleblowers: "Please protect us as
journalists". According to him, article 10 of the European
Convention of Human Rights is insufficient or insufficiently enforced.
He also denounced illegitimate harassment of journalists and their
family by British secret security forces. He insisted that “the mass
harvesting of information of entire populations, anybody who is using
digital equipment is being put under some form of surveillance, and that
seems to be something that cannot happen without consent, it cannot
happen without the consent of the population, and that consent cannot be
given without information.”
Also both MEPS explained their work on Echelon, and reported that there
was nothing new under the sun, except for the available techniques of
surveillance. It is just the scale that changed, not the purpose.
Another piece of news at the hearing came from Duncan Campbell who said
Sweden's National Defence Radio Establishment (FRA) is partnered with the
NSA and the British intelligence service GCHQ. Campbell said Sweden was
the biggest collaborating partner, outside the English speaking countries,
with the GCHQ.
Video of the entire session
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ep-live/en/committees/video?event=20130905-1500-COMMITTEE-LIBE
Unreported NSA spy systems revealed (6.09.2013)
http://euobserver.com/justice/121335
8. ENDitorial: EU Parliament wastes time and money on gambling? You bet!
On 17 February 2009, it also adopted a non-binding resolution on the
same subject. On 14 October 2011, it adopted another non-binding
resolution on the same subject. Most recently, on 10 September 2013, the
European Parliament adopted a non-binding resolution on online gambling.
Each time the Internal Market and Consumer Committee (IMCO) has decided
to undertake such a report, it has given responsibility for the dossier
to a different Parliamentarian from a different political group. Each
time, there has been a division of MEPs across traditional party lines,
but also between those who are fighting to defend national monopolies
and those who are working for the goals of the Committee – the promotion
of the internal market and consumer protection.
In the most recent report, MEPs from almost every political group
represented in the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee
proposed amendments in favour of web blocking. They did so in full
awareness of the fact that web blocking is being used by EU member
states to protect national monopolies, to create barriers to the
creation of a European market and to reduce choice for European citizens.
We were told informally by the European Commission that one Member State
has introduced blocking as a targeted measure, with the specific
intention of preventing access to British websites. According to the
information from the Commission, the average payout for bets in the
country in question is approximately 75%, whereas the average payout
from a UK gambling site is approximately 90%. The government of the
country in question wins though higher tax revenue, the gambling
websites in the country win because they don't have to compete with the
British sites. The only losers in fact, are the consumers – and any
benefits that could be gained from a liberalised, competitive,
innovative European market are lost.
Interestingly, however, this is not entirely true, according to an
unpublished analysis from the European Commission. Low-level gamblers
would not bother to access a foreign site in a foreign language, so they
are not impacted by the blocking. High-level gamblers are aware of the
significant losses that come from using domestic services. As a result,
high-level gamblers take the time and effort to circumvent the blocking
system. The web blocking does not impact low level gamblers, it does not
impact high-level gamblers. Yet, according to the text adopted by the
Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee, the blacklisting of,
and prevention of access to, illegal gambling websites constitutes a
“best practice”. Best for whom, we do not know.
When the most recent text was put to the vote this week in the European
Parliament, a campaign run by EDRi and its members successfully led to
the deletion of the IMCO Committee's proposal that “preventing access”
to illegal gambling websites should be referred to as “best practice”.
Remarkably, after a huge amount of cost in terms of the time of MEPs,
assistants and Parliament staff, the final text adopted with a large
majority in the European Parliament does not make sense on this point:
“recommends the exchange of best practices between Member States on
enforcement measures – such as on establishing white and black lists of
illegal gambling websites”.
A whitelist of illegal gambling websites can only be understood as a
list of illegal sites that must be approved for use in EU Member States.
It is unclear if the illegal websites that are supposed to be put on the
white list will be the same as the illegal websites that will be put on
the black list.
A waste of time and money? You bet!
Analysis of the Committee report
http://www.edri.org/gambling
Final Parliament Resolution
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=20130910&secondRef=TOC&language=en
(Contribution by Joe McNamee - EDRi)
9. Recommended Action
Consultation on guidelines on recommended standard licences, datasets
and charging for the re-use of public sector information
Deadline: 22.11.2013
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/consultation-guidelines-recommended-standard-licences-datasets-and-charging-re-use-public
10. Recommended Reading
Police data abuses difficult to safeguard despite new systems (6.09.2013)
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/technology/police-data-abuses-difficult-to-safeguard-despite-new-systems-1.1515890
Fighting against a censorship machine (4.09.2013)
http://googlepolicyeurope.blogspot.com/2013/09/fighting-against-censorship-machine.html
Digital Personae and Profiles in Law: Protecting Individuals' Rights in
Online Contexts (21.08.2013)
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2313576&download=ye
11. Agenda
14-15 September 2013, Vienna, Austria
Daten, Netz & Politik 2013 - DNP13
https://dnp13.unwatched.org/
16-18 September 2013, Geneva, Switzerland
2013 Open Knowledge Conference (OKCon)
http://okcon.org/
18-20 September 2013, Berlin, Germany
8th International Conference of Information Commissioners (ICIC
2013)
http://www.info-commissioners.org/index.php/blank-menu/281-8th-international-conference-of-information-commissioners-icic-2013-germany
23-26 September 2013, Warsaw, Poland
Public Voice Conference 2013
35th International Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners conference
http://www.giodo.gov.pl/259/id_art/762/j/en/
24-25 September 2013, Brussels, Belgium
EU hackaton - hack4yourrights
This year’s theme is privacy
http://2013.euhackathon.eu/
27-30 September 2013, Brussels, Belgium
Freedom not Fear 2013
http://www.freedomnotfear.org/
http://www.freedom-not-fear.eu
1 October 2013, Warsaw, Poland
CopyCamp conference
http://copycamp.pl/en/
2 October 2013, Budapest, Hungary
ePSI Platform Workshop
http://epsiplatform.eu/content/register-now-epsi-platform-workshop-budapest
14-18 October 2013, Athens, Greece
RIPE67 Meeting
https://ripe67.ripe.net/
22-25 October 2013, Bali, Indonesia
Internet Governance Forum 2013
http://igf2013.or.id/
24 October 2013, Ljubljana, Slovenia
The LAPSI 2.0 Conference: “The new PSI directive: What’s next?”
http://www.lapsi-project.eu/lapsi-20-conferences
25-27 October 2013, Siegen, Germany
Cyberpeace - FIfF Annual Meeting 2013
http://www.fiff.de/
27–30 December 2013, Hamburg, Germany
30C3 – 30th Chaos Communication Congress
http://events.ccc.de/2013/07/18/30c3-call-for-participation-en/
22-24 January 2014, Brussels, Belgium
CPDP 2014: Reforming data protection: The Global Perspective
http://www.cpdpconferences.org/
24-25 April 2014, Barcelona, Spain
SSN 2014: Surveillance Ambiguities & Assymetries
http://www.surveillance-studies.net/documents/cfp_SSN2014_Barcelona_final.pdf
12. About
EDRi-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe.
Currently EDRi has 35 members based or with offices in 21 different
countries in Europe. European Digital Rights takes an active interest in
developments in the EU accession countries and wants to share knowledge
and awareness through the EDRi-gram.
All contributions, suggestions for content, corrections or agenda-tips
are most welcome. Errors are corrected as soon as possible and are
visible on the EDRi website.
This EDRi-gram has been published with financial support from the EU's
Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Programme.
Except where otherwise noted, this newsletter is licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. See the full text at
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
Newsletter editor: Bogdan Manolea
Information about EDRi and its members:
http://www.edri.org/
European Digital Rights needs your help in upholding digital rights in
the EU. If you wish to help us promote digital rights, please consider
making a private donation.
http://www.edri.org/about/sponsoring
http://flattr.com/thing/417077/edri-on-Flattr
- EDRI-gram subscription information
subscribe by e-mail
To: [email protected]
Subject: subscribe
You will receive an automated e-mail asking to confirm your request.
Unsubscribe by e-mail
To: [email protected]
Subject: unsubscribe
- EDRI-gram in Macedonian
EDRI-gram is also available partly in Macedonian, with delay.
Translations are provided by Metamorphosis
http://www.metamorphosis.org.mk/mk/vesti/edri
- EDRI-gram in German
EDRI-gram is also available in German, with delay. Translations are
provided by Andreas Krisch from the EDRI-member VIBE!AT - Austrian
Association for Internet Users
http://www.unwatched.org/
- Newsletter archive
Back issues are available at:
http://www.edri.org/edrigram
- Help
Please ask if you have any problems with subscribing
or unsubscribing.
