Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: More on EU may investigate U.S. spy network
From: Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 16:16:07 -0500
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 14:01:05 -0500 From: "K. N. Cukier" <100736.3602 () compuserve com> To: "farber () cis upenn edu" <farber () cis upenn edu> Dave, There's a lot of mis-reporting about the US-UK listening station ECHELON and Europe's reaction to it. In the recent article you sent out, "European Union may investigate U.S. global spy computer network" by Daniel Verton of FCW Government Technology Group, there are a few inaccuracies and important nuances that ought be made. For one thing, the STOA (Scientific and Technological Options Assessment) unit is a part of the European Parliament and cannot be considered to speak for the European Union. While the latter has far-reaching powers via the European Commission (as MCI WorldCom and U.S. companies who fall under the EC data protection directive have learned), the Parliament is an impotent forum with no policy-making powers. For instance, in 1995 the European Parliament passed a resolution to ban all crypto without law enforcement access -- a toothless and immature declaration that was completely overturned in October 1997 when the Commission released its "Communication" calling for "effective and proportionate" crypto policies. Additionally, the article does not at all substantiate its claim that the EU -- or the Parliament for that matter -- is, as the piece states: "considering launching a full-scale investigation" to see if the NSA spies on "government and private groups around the world." On the contrary, it's important to remember that despite the EC's broad commercial powers, it is specifically prohibited from treating the issue of national security. (That's one reason why all the crypto politics in Brussels have centered on the commercial implications of key recovery, not privacy or spying issues.) Some history is useful: The STOA report, written for STOA by the U.K. human rights group Omega Foundation, was published in January 1998 as preliminary findings. (At the time, you sent to the IP list Bruno Giussani's excellent article in the NYT's CyberTimes of February 24.) An updated report to the January report, clarifying aspects of ECHELON, was released in September. (You sent out the summary and URL to the IP list.) Another, fuller study is expected next year, to quantify the degree of the problem, as I report in the article below. Yet I suspect that neither the EP or EC will actually set formal recommendations or policies on the matter. The EP is useful for symbolic sabre-rattling and getting some of the groundwork research out into the public realm. But once it gets too close to the really salacious stuff, the national governments will ice it, preferring to address the issue privately, and perhaps via bilateral rather than multilateral dialogue. Cheers, Kenn ________________________________________ Below is an excerpt from a long article I wrote on the matter in Communications Week International, 2 November 1998. "[...] The information about ECHELON ... startled European business executives, galvanized European officials, and led, according to one person close to the European Commission, to a memo sent to all EC Commissioners to be aware that their phone, fax and e-mail communications may be monitored by the U.S. and U.K. governments. The U.S. does not deny the existence of international listening stations, but claims they are not used to provide commercial information to U.S. firms. [...] Glyn Ford, a U.K. Labour Party member of the European Parliament, notes that "the allegations made in the report are serious but not proven." Yet he adds: "We have no reason to believe [the report] is fundamentally wrong. There's some kind of system there and it seems to imply that companies should not use [voice] telecoms, faxes and e-mails that use communication satellites." Meanwhile, a senior official at the German Ministry of Economics is reluctant to accept the STOA report immediately, but adds that they take the allegations seriously. "We do feel it is necessary to distinguish between the pure facts and fiction -- there's a lot of fiction around this affair," he says. "I don't believe we have a stable ground" to set policy yet, he adds. Dick Holdsworth, the head of the STOA unit, admits the report's findings lack concrete data on the extent, and cost, of the problem. "We want to take the analysis one step deeper and prioritize the economic aspects," he says. A further study that seeks to quantify the problem will begin before year's end and is due in mid-1999. Since STOA simply advises the Parliament, explains Holdsworth, the report's goal is to "provide a range of options from which our political masters [at the Parliament] can select on the basis of their political judgments." The Parliament, however, has no formal powers to set policies; instead, its resolutions can be used by the European Commission or national governments to set policy. [...] Yet one U.S. citizen living in Europe with close ties to U.S. intelligence agencies snickered at the public outcry. "This [ECHELON program] has all been known for a long time," he told CWI. "Where were these people?" Two officials at France's Service Central de la Securite des Systemes d'Informations (SCSSI), the country's cryptography intelligence agency, claim that all countries, including the United States, practice some degree of economic espionage. And they say the practice is increasing swiftly due to the Internet, an inherently public and "open" system that makes it vulnerable to attack. Yet a former senior NSA official interviewed for this article douses the allegations that U.S. commercial spying is as widespread as some make out. "This flap shows how much the European governments don't 'get it.' They think it takes a government role to enhance competitivity, when it is exactly the lack of a government role that is best," he says. "The notion that government should get involved in commercial espionage assumes that government can do it well," he adds. He calls the idea a "profoundly European" perspective, because that is how European governments would try to help their industries. [...]" NNNNNNNN
Current thread:
- IP: More on EU may investigate U.S. spy network Dave Farber (Nov 12)