Brit spies want rights to wiretap and snoop on US companies' servers

And American agents would get access to UK systems

The US and UK authorities are holding secret negotiations that would allow British domestic spies to tap into servers in the Land of the FreeTM when investigating Her Majesty's citizens.

A draft proposal, seen by the Washington Post, would allow MI5 to get access to data stored on overseas computers run by American firms, and conduct live wiretaps if necessary. It's a reciprocal deal, so US agents would also get access to British servers.

Currently, MI5 agents – who primarily tackle bad guys on Blighty's soil – can apply for access to data from US companies under a mutual legal assistance treaty, but it's a lengthy process that can take months. Under the proposed deal, US companies would be compelled to hand over the data on request.

"This has been an issue with the UK and other countries for a number of years," said one senior US administration official.

"More and more, UK nationals — including criminals in their country — are using providers like Google, Facebook, Hotmail. The more they are having challenges getting access to the data, the more our US providers are facing a conflict of laws."

The plan may run into legal obstacles however, due to UK law. Wiretap orders don't require a judicial review in the UK – instead they can be issued by the British Home Secretary (the elected official who oversees the police) at her whim.

"What it means is they're going to allow a country that doesn't require independent judicial authorization before getting a wiretap to continue that practice, which seems to be a pretty fundamental constitutional protection in the United States," said Eric King, visiting lecturer in surveillance law at Queen Mary University of London. "That's being traded away."

Curiously, that doesn't seem to bother the US government. The UK "already [has] strong substantive and procedural protections for privacy," an administration official said.

"They may not be word-for-word exactly what ours are, but they are equivalent in the sense of being robust protections. We are not weighing into legal process standards in the UK, no more than we would want the UK to weigh in on what our orders look like."

Plenty of people don't agree, not least the NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. "Last time they did this, we assembled the Minutemen," he commented on Twitter.

US Congress might not agree either, particularly as the White House seems keen to strike a deal with the Brits. Any agreement would require changes to the Wiretap Act and the Stored Communications Act, and the Republican-controlled Congress might decide that that dog just won't hunt. ®

Broader topics

Other stories you might like

  • Tim Hortons collected location data constantly, without consent, report finds
    Hortons hears a sue

    From May 2019 through August 2020, the mobile app published by multinational restaurant chain Tim Hortons surveilled customers constantly by gathering their location data without valid consent, according to a Canadian government investigation.

    In a report published Wednesday, Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) of Canada and the privacy commissioners from three provinces – Alberta, British Columbia, and Quebec – presented the results of an inquiry that began shortly after the publication of a June 2020 National Post article.

    That article revealed the Tim Hortons app tracked location data every few minutes even when relegated to the background, and the report compiled by Canadian privacy officials confirmed as much.

    Continue reading
  • Behind Big Tech's big privacy heist: Deliberate obfuscation
    You opted out, but you didn't uncheck the box on page 24, so your data's ours...

    Opinion "We value your privacy," say the pop-ups. Better believe it. That privacy, or rather taking it away, is worth half a trillion dollars a year to big tech and the rest of the digital advertising industry. That's around a third of a percent of global GDP, give or take wars and plagues. 

    You might expect such riches to be jealously guarded. Look at what those who "value your privacy" are doing to stop laws protecting it, what happens when a good law  gets through, and what they try to do to close it down afterwards. 

    The best result for big tech is if laws are absent or useless. The latest survey of big tech lobbying in the US reveals a flotilla of nearly 500 salespeople/lawyers touring the US state legislatures, trying to either draw up tech friendly legislation to insert into privacy bills, water then down through persuasion, or just keep them off the books.

    Continue reading
  • Google has more reasons why it doesn't like antitrust law that affects Google
    It'll ruin Gmail, claims web ads giant

    Google has a fresh list of reasons why it opposes tech antitrust legislation making its way through Congress but, like others who've expressed discontent, the ad giant's complaints leave out mention of portions of the proposed law that address said gripes.

    The law bill in question is S.2992, the Senate version of the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA), which is closer than ever to getting votes in the House and Senate, which could see it advanced to President Biden's desk.

    AICOA prohibits tech companies above a certain size from favoring their own products and services over their competitors. It applies to businesses considered "critical trading partners," meaning the company controls access to a platform through which business users reach their customers. Google, Apple, Amazon, and Meta in one way or another seemingly fall under the scope of this US legislation. 

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022