Human Rights Groups Call for End to Surveillance Tech That 'Crushes Dissent'

BY LORENZO FRANCESCHI-BICCHIERAI

A group of major human rights organizations has launched a new initiative to end the proliferation of surveillance technology, which western companies have been accused of selling to governments around the world.

On Friday, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Privacy International, Reporters Without Borders and others launched a coalition dubbed CAUSE(Coalition Against Unlawful Surveillance Exports), to promote new regulations and restrictions on the distribution of spy technology, which activists define as "digital arms."

The spyware tools are typically marketed for law enforcement use but, in many cases, the countries that purchase them have been accused of abusing them for nefarious purposes. Cyber sleuths have uncovered numerous cases of political dissidents, citizen journalists or human rights advocates being targeted and spied on by governments using law enforcement software or monitoring gear sold by European or American companies.

"Western technology could immediately be traced back to individuals who had been dragged from their homes and put into prison," Marietje Schaake, a European Parliament Member who has been advocating for export controls on surveillance technology for years, said at a recent event in Washington, D.C.

The surveillance technology market was worth $5 billion dollars a year, according to The Wall Street Journal, and there are very few regulations that limit it.

This kind of technology could theoretically allow a government to hijack a target's computer, steal her personal information, spy on her through the laptop's webcam, and record Skype conversations, among other capabilities.

In February, researchers accused the government of Ethiopia of using spyware made by the Italian firm Hacking Team to target Ethiopians in the diaspora. Hacking Team's software was later found in 21 countries, including some with dubious human rights records such as Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, or Sudan.

In the past few years, there have been many similar cases.

In 2011, it was revealed that French company Amesys had providedsurveillance technology to Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi. The government of the United Arab Emirates, for its part, has reportedly used spyware made by German company FinFisher to target the pro-democracy activist Ahmed Mansoor.

"These technologies enable regimes to crush dissent or criticism, chill free speech and destroy the fundamental rights that underpin democratic societies," the organizations said in an open letter published on the CAUSE website.

The organizers want this uncontrolled proliferation to stop, and they think the best way to do that is to regulate the sale of spy technology through export controls.

In 2013, a group of 41 countries including the United States, Germany, the UK, and France agreed to update the weapons export controls framework known as the Wassenaar Arangement to include new limitations on exporting "intrusion software" and "IP network surveillance systems."

Supporters of export controls saw that as a "first step" in the right direction. But now, they say, countries that are part of the agreement need to incorporate these regulations into their internal legal regime to make it really effective.

Export controls would force a company selling these products to be required to ask its own government for a license before selling to a certain country. In the United States, for example, before exporting weapons or so-called dual-use items (which have both military and civilian uses), a company has to check if the item that it is trying to sell is controlled.

If it is, it needs permission, "giving the U.S. government the ability to approve or deny the application based on a number of factors, including the destination and end-use," as Danielle Kehl and Robert Morgus, researchers at New America's Open Technology Institute, explained in Slate.

But some fear that export controls on hard-to-define software products might end up preventing legitimate and useful products from reaching people in need.

A hacker and security researcher that goes by the name of Fukami pointed to the example of a group of Germans who wanted to send encrypted phones to Ukraine during the unrest in the country, to help protesters protect their communications.

"Since it takes a while to get the proper papers for that, the people in Ukraine simply didn't get those phones," he said at a panel on export controls at the human rights and technology conference RightsCon in March.

But proponents of stronger regulations against surveillance technology recognize the importance of "smart and targeted" regulation.

"Export controls are not alone enough, and absolutely must ensure that technology with legitimate purposes are not wrongly ensnared," Mike Rispoli, a spokesperson for Privacy International, told Mashable.

http://mashable.com/2014/04/04/human-rights-surveillance-tech/