Finnish police seek authorization for data crime

To sum up what's happening over on my Finnish-language blog, just two months away from the next parliamentary elections, the Finnish government is seeking to give the police new powers to covertly break into citizens' computers and mobile phones.

The legistlative proposal for a new police law recently became public. In addition to existing wiretapping and covert surveillance powers, the police will be allowed to secretly install keyloggers or other technical devices, or crack telephones and computer systems remotely.

Although the new law will give the police increased powers to act covertly, it provides no real oversight or any opoprtunity for citizens to challenge the legality of covertly obtained evidence. In order to carry out a covert cracking operation, the police will need to seek permission from a court of law. Once the operation is complete, the police are required by law to inform the targets that they have been under surveillance, and the targets can then challenge the legality of the surveillance permit in court.

However, if the police fail to inform the target of the surveillance, nothing happens. As for the court challenge, there is already a decision from the Finnish Supreme Court that even if a surveillance permit was found to be unlawfully granted, evidence obtained in the unlawful investigation is still fully admissible in court. If a court is found to have granted a permit unlawfully, or if the police gave false information while appealing for a permit, no sanctions will be applied.

The law very specifically delineates what actions the police will be allowed to take under any given form of covert information gathering, and specifically what kind of information they will be allowed to extract. Permits must be sought based on the severity of the crime being investigated. However, the different forms of covert information gathering overlap and use similar methods. For example, if a suspect is being investigated for treason or a similar very serious crime, the police can obtain a wiretapping permit that allows them to listen to his telephone calls and read his e-mails. However, if a suspect is being investigated for any crime that happens on the Internet, such as a copyright violation, the police can obtain permission to crack their smartphone. According to the letter of the law, they aren't allowed to listen to his calls or read any of the "messages" stored in the phone. However, if they do, any evidence they obtain is admissible in court. If the suspect files a complaint, the maximum penalty (in practice) for the officers violating the law will be a reprimand.

In short, the bill provides the police with the authority to break into any kind of data systems covertly. The only judicial oversight consists of the police themselves reporting their actions to the parliament's ombudsman. Confusingly, this seems to be based on the idea that if the police break the law, they'll admit it in an official report.

So in practice, there is no oversight. The only recourse a citizen has is to appeal to the same ombudsman, who has few actual powers and less willingness to use them. Under Finnish law, basically any evidence, no matter how it's obtained, is admissible in court. This, combined with the lack of oversight, seems to present the police with a carte blanche to engage in covert surveillance of just about anyone they like.

Finland may not be a police state yet, but it looks like we're on our way there. Frighteningly, the parties currently in office are solidly behind this proposal, as it's being presented in the name of the entire cabinet. Their strongest challenger in the upcoming elections is running on a populist platform that includes harsher penalties for criminals. So not only are we on our way to becoming a police state, but no-one seems to care.

Although nothing seems right

If this wasn't on Time Magazine's website, I wouldn't believe it.

Time: The Government Can Use GPS to Track Your Moves

Government agents can sneak onto your property in the middle of the night, put a GPS device on the bottom of your car and keep track of everywhere you go. This doesn't violate your Fourth Amendment rights, because you do not have any reasonable expectation of privacy in your own driveway — and no reasonable expectation that the government isn't tracking your movements.

That is the bizarre — and scary — rule that now applies in California and eight other Western states. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which covers this vast jurisdiction, recently decided the government can monitor you in this way virtually anytime it wants — with no need for a search warrant.

It is a dangerous decision — one that, as the dissenting judges warned, could turn America into the sort of totalitarian state imagined by George Orwell. It is particularly offensive because the judges added insult to injury with some shocking class bias: the little personal privacy that still exists, the court suggested, should belong mainly to the rich.

Read, and be amazed. As far as I know, this is no April Fools' joke. There's a bunch of other good privacy-themed articles on time.com as well.

Of course, the idea that where you drive in your car is in any way your business is increasingly becoming bankrupt in the West. With surprisingly little fuss, the UK has now installed a nationwide system of cameras that read number plates. You can read about it here.

The way Big Brother is sneaking up on us is frightening.

Finnish police to get fingerprint database

In January 2009, the Finnish government decided that all Finnish passports will incorporate fingerprint information. Over several protests from officials and citizen groups, the fingerprints were assembled into a database. We were told at the time that the database wouldn't be used for anything except identifying dead people.

Here's the question: how long do you think it will take for the Finnish police to get unrestricted access to the fingerprint register?

Yesterday, the minister of the interior announced that the ministry is looking into allowing the police access to the register "to solve serious drug and sex crimes". Now, I'd argue that under Finnish law, there is no such thing as a serious sex crime (see here), but nonetheless, this is what they're doing (sez Hesari).

If all goes as usual, the next parliament will probably approve this. After all, they'll use it to catch paedophiles. You don't hate children, do you? After that, how long until the definition of "serious crime" gets expanded? And, after all, the Finnish police will never exceed their authority.

Funny but true: according to Finnish Wikipedia, the slippery slope argument is a fallacy.

In Russia, the Internet searches you

Daily Mail: Every Google search to be logged and saved for two years under new Euro MP plan

Every Google web search could be stored for up to two years under a controversial new EU plan that has the backing of more than 300 Euro-MEPs.

'Written Declaration 29' is intended to be used as an early warning system to stop paedophiles by logging what they look for using search engines.

But civil liberty groups have hit out at the proposal which they say is a 'completely unjustifiable' intrusion into citizens' privacy.

And they claim that there is no evidence that it would even be effective in trapping paedophiles who would never use search engines like Google to look for child pornography.

The idea that "pedophiles" use Google to look for child porn is ridiculous, but what's even worse is that there are MEPs who are willing to sacrifice the privacy of everyone who uses a search engine in order to catch a pedophile who's too dumb to actually find kiddie porn is terrifying.

Is privacy a value at all for these people? Is pedophilia really such a terrible enemy that our decision-makers are willing to sacrifice all of our fundamental human rights to stop it?

This, along with the ongoing project to erect a Europe-wide version of Finland's failed Net censorship scheme make me very worried that as regards the freedom of the Internet, the EU is taking the high road to China.

Don't be evil

Whoops.

National fingerprint database for Finland

Hello, Big Brother!

Finland is going to go ahead with the plan to found a national fingerprint database (Helsingin Sanomat). It will eventually have everyone's fingerprints in it. The police have access to the database, but they won't use it. Right? Because the Finnish police never exceeds its authority. Right?

Big Brother is listening

BBC: Social network sites 'monitored'

Social networking sites like Facebook could be monitored by the UK government under proposals to make them keep details of users' contacts.

The Home Office said it was needed to tackle crime gangs and terrorists who might use the sites, but said it would not keep the content of conversations.

It is part of a plan to store details of all phone calls, e-mails and websites visited on a central database.

Civil liberties campaigners have called the proposals a "snoopers' charter".

Tens of millions of people use sites like Facebook, Bebo and MySpace to chat with friends, but ministers say they have no interest in the content of discussions - just who people have been talking to.

I should write a bingo card.

"monitored by government"
"terrorists"
"not keep content"
"central database"

It's time to say goodbye to the old Internet, and say hello to Big Brother.