back to article Top Eurocop: People are OK with us snooping on their phone calls

Europol's director Rob Wainwright - the EU's top cop - told a conference in Brussels on Wednesday that “the public accepts that private phone calls may be intercepted. Society accepts that this is a reasonable way to run a democracy." The now familiar refrain of “give us all your data if you want us to keep you safe” was not …

  1. Neil Barnes Silver badge
    Headmaster

    He seems to have forgotten to include

    the words 'in specific named cases, for specific times, and with the oversight of a judge and warrant'.

    He will, of course, be making streaming audio of all his phone calls available?

    While I wait, how does Joe Public get encrypted phones?

    (And lest the usual haters start spouting about paranoia - this is nothing to do with whether I have anything to hide. It is simply NONE OF HIS OR ANYONE ELSE'S BUSINESS. I trust this is not too difficult to understand.)

    1. MrXavia

      Re: He seems to have forgotten to include

      Completely agree,

      'in specific named cases, for specific times, and with the oversight of a judge and warrant'.

      anything else is surely a violation of our human rights? oh wait, our leader wants that revoked...

      1. Tom Chiverton 1

        Re: He seems to have forgotten to include

        "anything else is surely a violation of our human rights? oh wait, our leader wants that revoked..."

        They still apply even if he scrapes the EU version.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: He seems to have forgotten to include

      Hear, hear +1

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: He seems to have forgotten to include

      Indeed.

      In my mind: May != Always

      In his mind: May == Always

      That "subtle" difference needs to be reconciled somehow.

      1. hplasm
        Big Brother

        Re: He seems to have forgotten to include

        "In his mind: May == Always"

        also In his mind: May == His Snooping Ally in the UK

  2. Anonymous Coward
    FAIL

    I have no problem...

    ....so long as i can listen on ALL of his calls, y'know, just in case someone is going to attack him.

  3. Vimes

    However, he still made the now-standard case of all police that they need more data.

    Why?

    Despite all the cries of 'because terrorism' I have yet to understand how more access can actually help the situation. Look at the cases 'foiled' by the likes of the FBI for example: they seem to include cases where the only reason the idiots got anywhere in the first place was because the agency helped them in order to entrap them (*). Even those working for the NSA have admitted that they're having problems dealing with the levels of data they're currently collecting (**), so how will it help matters over here if we repeat those mistakes?

    'Should have lawful access'. I think most people would agree with that to an extent. The problems start when 'lawful access' means no control over how much is accessed and insufficient judicial oversight (and this includes a lack of needing warrants).

    (*) https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/16/howthefbicreatedaterrorist/

    (**) http://www.zdnet.com/article/nsa-whistleblower-overwhelmed-with-data-ineffective/

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      The UK Police

      In the UK I know the police have to use a warrant to intercept data. The systems they use won't function without a valid warrant applied to the case. Even then the data they collect cannot be used in court and they have to find other evidence to use and they don't have the storage to keep it for long so its only used for live cases.

      Not sure the same can be said for the security services but at least the police are in the right area. Although this is still subject to abuse.

      1. Vimes

        Re: The UK Police

        I should add that I was referring to a warrant issued by a third party that has no direct interest in the request being either granted or denied (so that some degree of oversight of those making the requests is maintained).

        If memory serves the authorisation for such surveillance can come from anybody with sufficient authority to do so. This includes the chief constable.

        So the police can authorise itself to spy on people using RIPA as their legal cover.

        Is this really 'the right area' in your view? Or is 'because we say so' sufficient reason?

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Can I the public listen to all his private calls?

  5. Warm Braw

    Worth remembering he is a former spook

    He spent 10 years at MI5 and seems incapable of distinguishing between "spying" and "policing".

    One of his major concerns is British citizens who move abroad and then return to the UK intent on damaging society. We can only hope he stays in The Hague...

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Oh, I didn't know "society" had accepted this total disregard for everyone's freedom.

    Guess it's alright then, might as well just accept it now. Anyone know where I send my keys?

  7. chivo243 Silver badge
    Big Brother

    What planet are these "People" from

    Really?? people from this planet are OK with their privacy being invaded?? In what company does this yokel have stock? Gotta be making some walkin' around money if you're gonna lie to Brussels...

    Oh right, I am not ok with the guv listening in on my chats about what to buy to prepare dinner....

    I know I'm a bit odd, but I can't be the only one?

    1. Mark 85

      Re: What planet are these "People" from

      Well... where's his data? What poll? What vote? How the hell does he know what "most people" are 'ok' with? This is sheer self-serving BS.

  8. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

    "pre-policing"

    Is that another way of saying "guilty until proven innocent" ?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "pre-policing"

      "Is that another way of saying "guilty until proven innocent" ?"

      No - just "guilty" and "really there's no need to bother about a trial".

      1. Domino

        Re: "pre-policing"

        Like the royal wedding zombies for example.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "“the public accepts that private phone calls may be intercepted. Society accepts that this is a reasonable way to run a democracy.""

    This part of society fucking doesn't. IF there are grounds for suspicion and IF those grounds are enough to convince a judge to supply a warrant then, yes, that is reasonable provided that the law is adhered to; collection is focussed on the investigation in question; and all data collected is looked after properly.

    Comprehensive collection and fishing trips are absolutely not acceptable, in any way shape or form.

  10. phuzz Silver badge
    Holmes

    Sure I'm happy to have my calls listened to, provided a judge has issued a warrant based on reasonable suspicion.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "[...] provided a judge has issued a warrant based on reasonable suspicion."

      Too often it appears that "reasonable" is in the mind of the beholder.

    2. Cynic_999

      "

      Sure I'm happy to have my calls listened to, provided a judge has issued a warrant based on reasonable suspicion.

      "

      OK - but also provided that after the investigation is concluded with no further action, I am informed of the fact that my calls had been intercepted, and then have the right to challenge whether there was in fact "reasonable suspicion" in the first place. Because all too frequently a magistrate or judge is persuaded to issue a warrant by a police officer who exaggerates the facts or leaves out pertinent information. Remember that when a court is asked to issue a warrant there is nobody in that courtroom arguing that it should *not* be issued, so it is akin to a trial in which only the prosecution is permitted to present evidence or witnesses.

  11. Christoph

    At what point will he stop?

    The police are always demanding more access and more access and more access, without limit. No matter what they already have, they always demand yet more and tell us that we cannot be safe unless they have that access.

    Will he please stand up in public and state for the record At What Point Will He Finally Be Satisfied? How much data, how much intrusive spying, how much monitoring of everything anyone does anywhere will be enough? At what point will he admit that any more snooping would be unjustified interference with peoples' private lives?

    Where will he draw the line? Will he demand Orwell's Telescreens in everyone's bedrooms before he admits he might have gone too far?

    The answer is that they will NEVER be satisfied. Whatever the police are given, they are back the next day saying that they don't have enough. There is no point at which they will stop.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      At what point will the public feel safe?

      "The answer is that they will NEVER be satisfied. Whatever the police are given, they are back the next day saying that they don't have enough. There is no point at which they will stop."

      Then what happens when the next 7/7 or 9/11 happens on their watch and the public start yelling where the hell where you?! If the police are demanding more access it's because the voters are demanding no less than perfection from them (and recall that most voters are clueless and actually believe that perfection is possible--they won't listen to evidence otherwise). So what's a civilization to do when people demand the impossible from its government and will accept no less?

      1. Vector

        Re: At what point will the public feel safe?

        "So what's a civilization to do when people demand the impossible from its government and will accept no less?"

        You could start by implementing sane and reasonable policies that might actually accomplish the task.

        Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that he's granted his wish and they get access to all telecommunications, phone and internet. What would the result be? Could it possibly be that the criminals and terrorists they are seeking would evolve other ways to communicate, including the open air encryption of code words and such? The end result would be no better policing and far worse privacy.

        I always assume that if a system can be abused, it eventually will be. In this case, that means a whole lot of innocent people being swept up because their views don't comport with some megalomaniac's version of society. The best way to avoid this is to keep a lid on how much of our personal communications get out there in the first place.

      2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: At what point will the public feel safe?

        "So what's a civilization to do when people demand the impossible from its government and will accept no less?"

        Tell them they can't have it.

        1. Charles 9

          Re: At what point will the public feel safe?

          "Tell them they can't have it."

          They won't take no for an answer AND they vote.

      3. Captain DaFt

        Re: At what point will the public feel safe?

        "Then what happens when the next 7/7 or 9/11 happens on their watch and the public start yelling where the hell where you?!"

        And if they were honest they'd answer:

        "At my post, monitoring every thing you do, because if I didn't, things like this would happen."

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Until I find out how

    ...to get a message to him, can I just use the Reg comments section to tell the cunt to go fuck himself?

    1. Mark 65

      Re: Until I find out how

      Certainly can, he's likely scooped up that comment upon submission.

  13. Shades

    Hey Rob, Decrypt This...

    GIVL UPI"

  14. Jeremy Allison

    From "A Very British Coup"

    Sir Percy Browne: "Sometimes Mr. Fiennes, I think you'll only be content when you have the population of Great Britain under permanent, twenty-four hour surveillance. Would you be happy then ?"

    Fiennes: "Happy, sir ? Satisfied."

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Down

    "Society accepts that this is a reasonable way to run a democracy"

    Er .. no.

    The public generally accepts interception of calls to/from specific people and when there is reasonable suspicion that the call may be related to criminal activity and subject to judicial oversight.

    Society doesn't accept blanket eavesdropping on the off-chance that something criminal is revealed. The gentleman is talking through his arse.

    1. Charles 9

      Re: "Society accepts that this is a reasonable way to run a democracy"

      Are you sure? I believe you overestimate the collective intelligence of modern society.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: "Society accepts that this is a reasonable way to run a democracy"

        I believe you overestimate the collective intelligence of modern society.

        Hmmm I think you've hit on the main reason for the bastards getting away with their stuff.

        If you put the question to people as individuals then I believe you will get the view I stated. But as you say, collectively society does tend towards a lower level of intelligence.

        Depressing.

        1. Charles 9

          Re: "Society accepts that this is a reasonable way to run a democracy"

          I always put it this way. What good is one smart vote versus ten stupid votes?

  16. Gray
    Trollface

    It could be useful ...

    If one were able to simply lift the phone, speak softly: "We'll have the extra-large fish and chips, extra sauce, bucket of suds on the side; and please to message Gran that we're tied up Saturday; we'll see her on Sunday. Thanks ever so much!"

    A soft click on the other end confirms our message received. Shortly after, the delivery boy shows up: "'E said yer Gran's busy Sunday. Make it Saturday week, alright?"

    Government service wot works, right?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: It could be useful ...

      Actually the delivery boy just delivers your food. Siri or Cortana negotiate the rest (as well as placing the order, charged to the right card, ...)

    2. smudge
      Big Brother

      Re: It could be useful ...

      In the 1970's, my wife worked in the West Highlands of Scotland, where it was still necessary to ask the operator to connect local calls.

      "I'd like to speak to Mrs MacDonald at Croft number 5, please."

      "She's over having tea at Mrs McKay's. I'll put you through there."

      Very useful!

  17. James 51

    I wish they sounded less like mob enforcers. 'Nice society you've got there. Shame if something was to happen to it. Of course iif you handed all your data over to this registered charity me and the boys will keep an eye on thje place for you.'

  18. Graham Marsden
    Trollface

    Waiting for Matt...

    ... hang on, haven't we been here before...?

  19. Will Godfrey Silver badge
    Unhappy

    News at 11

    Cop tells lies to get his own way.

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The public?

    Nobody asked me. Were there like … sources or some other crazy shabingle?

    Fortress Europe is being turned into a facist nightmare (is this supposed to repell refugees?). Are you getting the big picture? Look at this. Look at what the French government just did. Look at what the German government is trying to get away with (they won't). Not even to mention the madness that is coming from London. Then there is TTIP, Peak everything and the constant drum for war with Russia, Libya and or Syria. The planned failings of Greece and others to follow. This continent is being set up for a terrible, terrible scenario where total population control via total information awareness will be the last straw for those in power as they try to retain their position in the remaining rubble.

    I have always felt myself to be a realist, never an alarmist. Yet it is becoming blatantly obvious that we are going to hell in a handbasket. I never considered leaving Europe for good but I am not willing to witness this from inside.

  21. Patrick Evans

    Ben Franklin nailed it 270 years ago

    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Ben Franklin nailed it 270 years ago

      But did anyone ever ask Ben, "Then what happens when even the smallest Liberty is the one thing keeping you from having any Safety at all?" IOW, what if it's found out that Liberty is one of the things preventing people from feeling safe in their beds, meaning you can't have both, which to him means it's impossible to have either one?

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I rather upset them ..

    .. when I demonstrated that there are effective ways to curtail their much desired freedom to intercept. Somehow being forced to play by the rules appears an unpopular move in these circles, but here is my opinion:

    The problem that agencies, wherever they are in the world, cannot get their administrative act together to collaborate and coordinate efficiently and with the required speed as a consequence of overbearing bureaucracy can only be addressed by forcing those agencies to find a way to cut through inter-agency rivalry and empire building and, if required get rid of the people doing just that. It can NOT be fixed by harming the rights of the average citizen by trying to bypass due process.

    Just my two cents.

  23. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    A questionnaire is required.

    When buying a new phone, the supplier should be mandated to ask the customer whether they consent to state snooping of their calls.

    As an added bonus it should be "opt out" so all the dissidents can be easily identified...

    Roll on the totalitarian state. Eh Theresa?

    /s off

  24. Spaceman Spiff

    What planet is he from?

    I'm guessing he comes from the planet Forkuall, somewhere beyond the outer fringes of Uranus!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon