|
The following article appeared in London's Guardian newspaper
online section today. As mainstream media articles on Echelon and especially
Hacktivism go, it is surprising for its adherence to the facts (as far as I
can tell). Even the mistakes the list has published have been reported ad
verbum. This is certainly an encouragement as far as media portrayal of online
activism goes. No mention of cyberterrorism and so on. In fact it looks like a
very well researched article.
What I find most interesting about this whole affair is the
speed with which what was loosely discussed on this list (an elsewhere as well,
I'm sure) found it's way into the big press. To me it demonstrates that hacktivism is very effective, at least as long as there are a few
dedicated individuals at work. And there ARE, in this case. Apart from being
_fast_ and _efficient_ (discussion groups, mailing lists and info sites are
turning into governments'/corporations' worst nightmares) hacktivism is of
course also still a novelty. Journalists are people who already spend a very
large amount of time on the web, researching, grabbing pictures, making contacts
or just cutting and pasting. And news of the online world is always good for a
story. Online activism is therefore almost like having a direct line to
the newsroom. The question is just, how long will this last? Another question
that just occured to me is what kind of an effect this has on "traditional"
activism. In Britain at least it seems that no activist group can afford not to
have a website anymore. Otherwise they jsut won't be taken seriously.
Journalists as well as the public want to look up all they can as quickly as
possible. They don't want to phone around, meet people, go to demonstrations
that turn out to be 10 people affairs. Is hacktivism going to kill
activism?
jjf
P.S.: Let me stress again how mainstream this newspaper is
(ok, it likes to see itself as a left wing paper) and thus the significance of
such a balanced article.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From the "Guardian", 14/10/99:
Is Big Brother watching you?
Neil McIntosh on the backlash against electronic espionage
Thursday October 14, 1999
A group of cyber activists is calling on internet users
worldwide to help them "trip up" a mysterious global spy system managed by the
US National Security Agency, and operated in part by Britain's GCHQ.
An increasing number of activists and politicians claim to have evidence that the system, called Echelon, monitors much of the world's email, web traffic, telephone conversation and other communications in an effort to uncover terrorists and enemies. The monitoring system is said to be "routine and
indiscriminate", and triggered by certain keywords in the traffic, like
"terrorism", "bomb", "MI5" and "revolution". The Hacktivism mailing list
community has called on concerned net users to include the trigger words in
their communications on Monday, and so overwhelm the system.
The event coincides with an attempt by activists to get the US
congress to look into the affair.
After years of claims about the system, there is increasing
mainstream willingness to accept that a global electronic snooping network
exists. The British and US governments refuse to comment on the system.
The acceptance is largely thanks to charges raised in the
European parliament last year, when it was alleged that the system was used by
the US to get European government and industrial secrets.
Investigative reporter Duncan Campbell was commissioned by the
parliament's Science and Technology Options Assessment Panel (STOA) to look into
the network. In his Interception Capabilities 2000 report, which was accepted by
the committee in May, Campbell said he found "the first ever documentary
evidence of the Echelon system".
He also uncovered an attempt by a secret organisation - the
International Law Enforcement Telecommunications Seminar - to have "back door"
wiretap capabilities built into technology, including popular software packages
and communication systems.
Australia's Defence Signals Directorate,which has been accused
of involvement with Echelon, has admitted that the UK-USA agreement, which is
reported to govern the system, did exist.
Such reports have fueled fears that the system is monitoring
all internet communications - despite suggestions that the technology to cope
with such a huge operation does not exist. Campaigning groups in the US, and
some members of congress, are now calling for public accountability for the US
part of the network.
Shari Steele, director of legal services for the online rights
organisation, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said she had heard that
Echelon monitors "all of our communications"; if so, the governments involved
had gone too far.
"The government does not have the legal right to snoop on law
abiding citizens, even in its pursuit of criminals," she said. "If it exists,
and if it is as pervasive as it appears to be, the government has way
overstepped its bounds in the interests of protecting us citizens."
US congressman Bob Barr is pushing for congress to look into
Echelon. There could be a debate this autumn, says Lisa Dean of the
Washington-based civil liberties group, the Free Congress Foundation.
She said there was disquiet in the US that communications
could be open to prying by the governement. "A growing number of people do
believe that their communications - wireless, email or land phones - are not
secure," she said.
"The government would say it is the conservatives who believe
the 'vast rightwing conspiracy' as Hillary Clinton has called it, but I think
it's more widespread than that. Conservatives and liberals all believe the same
thing - they all have this concern.
"Congressman Bob Barr of Georgia has taken this very seriously
and has called for hearings in the House Government and Oversight community. To
our knowledge, there will be hearings this fall [autumn]."
D ean says that congress is taking an interest in the
capability of this system. House leader Dick Armey has sent a letter to attorney
general Janet Reno asking what technological capabilities the intelligence
community and law enforcement has.
"She has not answered the letter," says Dean, "and the
intelligence community has effectively told congress to go play in traffic
because they're not giving any information.
"There's a battle - and the big question here is: if hearings
are held, will intelligence testify? It could get rather ugly. But I don't think
congress is going to give up so easily."
|