Europe rejects "Safe Harbour"

Europe's highest court rejected the safe harbour agreement used by American tech companies. The ruling came after Edward Snowden's NSA leaks showed that European data stored by US companies was not safe from surveillance that would be illegal in Europe. The Irish data regulator will now examine whether Facebook offered European users adequate data protections, and may order the complete suspension of Facebook's transfer of data from Europe to the US if so.

Whoa.

good. Anything to stem the tide of data mining.

Before world wide satellite communication, communication was accomplished by undersea cable. I remember all the time reading about how intelligence agencies from both sides were "mining" data by tapping into those "cables" to spy on each other.

Same stuff different era. Nosy bastards aren't going to stop listening in to everyone they can, if you pick up a keyboard and put it out there, its out there.

Ivy Bells

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
Europe's highest court rejected the safe harbour agreement used by American tech companies. The ruling came after Edward Snowden's NSA leaks showed that European data stored by US companies was not safe from surveillance that would be illegal in Europe. The Irish data regulator will now examine whether Facebook offered European users adequate data protections, and may order the complete suspension of Facebook's transfer of data from Europe to the US if so.

Whoa.

Safe Harbour (or Harbor depending on where you live) has been disputed for a long time and doesn't not affect solely US companies, but any where data considered secure may be in some way administered somewhere else - not always in a different country. It pre-dates Snowden by a long shot but of course he has kind of made it his spotlight to bask in.

a reply to: ForteanOrg

That could be a bureaucratic nightmare: In theory, American companies with European customers could now end up trying to follow 20 or more different sets of national data-privacy regulations. Up to 4,500 US companies — not just tech firms — have relied on Safe Harbour.

So better don't touch it, eh? Oh the consequences...
Good to see that our judges get a grip after the politicians failed miserably.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

The general opinion - not only from what I have seen here - seems to be relief. Perhaps we can't stop nations snooping on our private or semi-public data, but we can outlaw the folks doing that. Next step would be to actually uphold these laws and punish those breaking them - including government personnel, agencies etc.

Also remember: most of the Internet is hidden anyway. For law enforcing entities, there are plenty of ways to catch the criminals - just like in the days before the Internet, plain old intelligence is key.

a reply to: ForteanOrg

Even if i don´t think that something will change with BigBrother collecting data now, but at least it says that data isn´t secure in the NSA...ah, sorry, in the USA!

People know that fact since a long time, but if even EU judges check it now...
I feel times will change for the role of the US in the world in nearest future, at least i hope so.
Will result in less chaos on earth, less "regulear"and covered wars, less refugee crises, less terrorism, less spying on earths citizen...

originally posted by: DerBeobachter
a reply to: ForteanOrg

Even if i don´t think that something will change with BigBrother collecting data now,

Well, if the Law says it is illegal to snoop data like it was (and is) done, and a government agency still continues these practices, they are outlaws. And outlaws should be dealt with. We may see the day that FBI agents roll up such an illegal NSA or CIA gang, bring them before justice and set an example. I hope so. I'm all in favour of human rights, decent laws and acting against criminals, but a society that snoops on each citizen as if he or she was an outlaw is plain and simple wrong.

Dont understand, could someone explain it to me like a retard please =)

originally posted by: Hyperia
Dont understand, could someone explain it to me like a retard please =)

Well, let's see how well I can impersonate a retard =)

Very short version: the yanks aren't to be trusted with EU data anymore as they misused our trust.

Slightly longer: in 1998 the EU regulators forbade exchanging privacy related data with non-EU countries unless they agree to our rules. The US Laws and regulations do not comply with ours. US companies could no longer accept customers from the EU as that requires exchanging sensitive data. They risked being sued by the EU if they did.

But the EU trusted the US, they were "our friends". Hence a kludge was invented: a "Safe Harbour". Organisations that wanted to trade with the EU could simply say they adhered to a set of rules that are agreeable to the EU - and then were allowed to handle EU privacy related data. The EU would simply trust the US to handle our data with care (within the bounds of the "Safe Harbour" rules). Note there was no real control, audit or whatever, it was an agreement based on thin air.

Yesterday, the EU Court of Justice has rendered this construction obsolete. The main reason was the uncontrollable mass surveillance of the US on (any and all) data, breaching our rules and Laws.

Hence, it now is up to the individual regulators in the EU to enforce the EU rules. As it should be. But it's a nightmare for the US, as they now have to risk being sued by EU regulators if they handle privacy related data - they clearly can't abide to our regulators' rules. Given that a very significant section of for example Google and Facebook customers reside on EU soil, this is a major issue.

Duuuuhh... dig?

a reply to: ForteanOrg

Although I read the stuff from the OP link, I like your explanation better; far more succinct and easier to understand.

a reply to: MrCrow

thanks to share this news...
Scourby.com

originally posted by: intrptr
Before world wide satellite communication, communication was accomplished by undersea cable. I remember all the time reading about how intelligence agencies from both sides were "mining" data by tapping into those "cables" to spy on each other.

Same stuff different era. Nosy bastards aren't going to stop listening in to everyone they can, if you pick up a keyboard and put it out there, its out there.

Ivy Bells

I think you might be referring to project Echelon

"In the summer of 2000, European Parliament appointed a special ad-hoc committee to spend a year investigating ECHELON, with some arguing that by spying on European communications, the U.S. was breaching the European Convention on Human Rights. Little materialized from the committee, other than a vote recognizing the program’s mere existence."

Why did the EU have any trust in Safe Harbour after that debacle?