Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy Communications Government The Internet News Your Rights Online

Wiretapping Bill Passes Swedish Parliament, 143 to 138 326

Posted by timothy
from the henceforth-it's-orkbay-orkbay dept.
Assar Bruno Boveri writes "Swedish lawmakers came down in favour of a fiercely debated surveillance bill in a vote at the Riksdag on Wednesday evening. Despite some cosmetic changes, Sweden's proposed surveillance law is still a monster, writes Pär Ström from the independent New Welfare Foundation." The Swedish newspaper DN (in Swedish; translations welcome) compares the implications of the proposed law with activities carried out by East Germany's Ministerium für Staatssicherheit (STASI).
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wiretapping Bill Passes Swedish Parliament, 143 to 138

Comments Filter:
  • Well... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @04:14PM (#23845485)
    there has to be at least one country out there that cares about the people, right?

    Right?

    Hello? Anyone there?
  • by Rod76 (705840) on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @04:15PM (#23845517)
    This is sure to have some interesting effects on The Pirate Bay. I wonder if there was any **AA money's or support in getting this passed.
  • by digitrev (989335) <digitrev@hotmail.com> on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @04:17PM (#23845559) Homepage
    Probably, but good luck finding the paper trail. As for TPB, it'll just migrate. There's enough countries who aren't exactly friendly to US copyright that are chock full of people willing to run Pirate Bay servers.
  • I got an idea (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @04:18PM (#23845579)
    As a Swedish citizen, I'm thinking of doing the following idea;

    Put up a couple of SMTP servers, and creating a script that makes them email each other unprotected emails in plain text with headers like "bomb" "nuclear bomb" "jihad" "destroy the Swedish government" "bomb assembly guide" "kill Fredrik Reinfeldt"

    If the government intend to fuck me with, I fully intend to fuck with them back.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @04:24PM (#23845671)
    No that their a Swedish news source or something, but for what it's worth, the register says something completely different [theregister.co.uk]:

    A controversial law in Sweden which would have allowed Sweden's National Defence Radio Establishment (FRA) to monitor all outgoing and incoming communications crossing Sweden's borders didn't get enough votes in parliament today.


    or am I confused?
  • by bo-eric (263735) on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @04:32PM (#23845763)
    If anyone wondered what FRA will be using its fairly new 13728-core, 102 Tflop/s (Rmax) Xeon cluster [top500.org] for, I guess this is it. When it was new on the previous list (November 2007), it held the fifth place. Here [computersweden.idg.se] is an article about it in Computer Sweden (in Swedish). Maybe now is a good time to upgrade to 2048-bit keys...
  • Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by init100 (915886) on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @04:51PM (#23846059)

    Right now there are two parties in parliament that I can trust. That would be the left party and the green party.

    On this matter, there is only one party that I trust, and that is the Pirate Party. They might be most well-known for their views on non-commercial file-sharing and copyright laws, but they also have really sane views on protection of privacy, something I care a lot about.

  • by init100 (915886) on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @04:57PM (#23846143)

    I got my free S/MIME certificate from Thawte today, for encryption of email, and so did all my co-workers.

  • Re:Sad sad sad day (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Imsdal (930595) on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @04:58PM (#23846161)
    There is exactly zero (0) chance the social democrats will remove this law. After all, it was their idea from the beginning.
  • Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by init100 (915886) on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @05:06PM (#23846281)

    And FRA, the agency responsible for the surveillance in question has behaved very well so far with every thing else they do.

    Behaved well? The leader of the Pirate Party, Rick Falkvinge, in a conversation with the director of FRA back then (which was secretly recorded by Rick) got a confession that the FRA has been tapping the wires for many years already. The Pirate Party filed a complaint with the police shortly afterward.

    And what worries me personally, is that the system will flag on encryption.

    If we could get enough people to encrypt their communications, such a flag would be worthless. They would have to break an enormous number of encrypted messages (which is hard work even for the biggest supercomputers in the world) just to find out that they are not relevant.

  • Re:Wha? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Arthur B. (806360) on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @05:07PM (#23846303)
    France has a load of crappy problems, the influence of islam is far, far down the list. The country actually has a strong belief in statism... it's a whole religion, with its dogmas, its heretics, etc. Islam is merely a puppet brandished - right and left - in France so that people turn back to "the one, true religion, that of the State"
  • Re:I got an idea (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RingDev (879105) on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @05:09PM (#23846313) Homepage Journal

    Or you can just cc Mr Reinfeldt everything.
    That's actually not a bad idea...

    I'm not even in Sweden (My great-great-grandfather was kicked out for marrying a Norwegian lass), but I think Mr Reinfeldt might like to know about my emails.

    All of them.

    Every day.

    Including system notices.

    Sure, my emails aren't that great in number, but what if a couple hundred people were to do such a thing? A couple thousand? Hundreds of thousands?

    -Rick
  • Re:Wha? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Markspark (969445) on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @05:23PM (#23846513)
    yeah, and it's what happens when 67 people decided not to go vote, because they had more important stuff to do, like finding lint in the bellybutton or something, one fifth of Riksdagen (the ruling organ) decided not to even show up and vote. It's a slap in the face of the public..
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @05:57PM (#23846955)
    Just registered it with a few viagra/cialis spam-sending sites... Maybe /.ers can do a few more? Just google "enter your email address" [google.com] and a spam term, and sign 'em up for "free" information about viagra, cialis, penis pumps, and all sorts of fun!
  • Re:Wha? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by AshtangiMan (684031) on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @06:07PM (#23847069)
    I didn't mod GP, but the part that strikes me as the "troll" is the part where you call California left wing, just after the extreme left wing examples above, as if somehow California is left wing in the same way that soviet Russia was. To me that is a troll, because the implicit comparison is invalid. It does very little towards having an informed and informing conversation. Both extremes (left and right) are obviously bad, but in the US and in the Slashdot community there seems to be a name calling mentality which breaks down to: you disagree with me, and I am [right,left] leaning so you must be a [commie hippie,fascist]. I don't see either side of the US political spectrum as being particularly interested in personal freedoms of the general population.

    Here in New Mexico there is water shortage, if not actual drought, and municipalities govern the use of water during the hot and dry periods. This does not strike me as "big brother", "left", or "right", but as a pragmatic compromise because for every environmentally conscious person of any political bent there are a few more who will attempt to install new lawns, run sprinklers during the day, and water sidewalks as much as they do plants. I think the thermostat example you bring up falls closer to the water use than to totalitarian regimes, and is not a political issue, but a practical issue.

    I think it is dialog, and good communication in general that is breaking down in political/governmental conversation attempts. Why is this? What political party stands for not telling other people how to live period? What political party does not pander to religious groups when making laws (indecency, substance abuse, etc)? I don't see it, but wish that I did. I feel like I am an old time conservative in economic and environmental policies, and a progressive when it comes to social agendas. And by social agendas I mean laws that govern how people live their private lives like same sex marriage, drug use, etc. You know, the ol' moral majority crap.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @07:04PM (#23847787)

    I'll try to translate into US politics.

    Consider a controversial legislation that would allow the US government to get a copy of all electronic communications that could somehow cross the US border. Because you cannot be sure if the communication could cross a border, the telecoms have to give your government a copy of all communications. (Even more true in a small country like Sweden.)

    Now think of this law being proposed again and again, and turned down each time. If you really want the law passed what would you do?

    Wait until the eve of the super bowl. Secretly inform the proponents of the law in advance, and then on the eve of the super bowl: Call in congress for a debate and vote on the law by email with one hour's notice. You would be sure to have the majority.

    This is what happened in Sweden. It wasn't the super bowl, but an important national soccer match. Soccer is the national sport in Sweden, just as football is in the US.

  • Re:So... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by GradiusCVK (1017360) <originalcvk&gmail,com> on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @07:07PM (#23847829)

    Right now there are two parties in parliament that I can trust. That would be the left party and the green party.

    On this matter, there is only one party that I trust

    Must be nice to trust one of your parties... man, that's gotta be sweet.*whistful sigh*
  • by Reziac (43301) * on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @11:33PM (#23850531) Homepage Journal
    Bah, just write in Latin, or some ancient Chinese dialect, or anything that will take a lot of effort to find a translator for.

    There was a famous Cold War story about a father and son, one in Soviet Russia, the other having escaped to the West. Both spoke Latin well. When they'd get together on the phone, they'd pass all the political news in Latin. By the time the state snoops found someone who could understand them, they'd already finished with the forbidden topics and gone on to mundane subjects.

  • Re:Wha? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Markus Landgren (50350) on Wednesday June 18, 2008 @11:37PM (#23850555) Homepage
    Oh right, the old "the social democrats started it!" excuse. Some of the right-wing politicians who passed this law actually used that one as a reason for not opposing it. While the observation is factually correct, it is not a valid reason to pass bad laws.

    And as for your statement that "The opposition (the previous administration) used a law that enabled them to defer a decision for one year", that was done by the green party + the left party + the christian democrats. To refer to that as "the opposition" seems weird, since one of them are part of the current administration and the list excludes the biggest party of the opposition.

    "The opposition" includes the green party, the left party and the social democrats. As for the social democrats I have no suggestion for why they chose to vote now, at least none that seems more likely than yours. But as for the two other parties, you have to consider their recent "no" in light of that they are the ONLY parties who have opposed this law all the way through the process. Maybe they really didn't want the law passed?
  • ^_^ (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Cynic.AU (1205120) on Thursday June 19, 2008 @12:23AM (#23850899)
    Gunpowder, treason and plot, my friend.

    There will be a resurgence of the anarchist movement. Only violent upheaval can stop this ongoing bloodletting of freedom and privacy.

    (Hello ECHELON)
  • Re:Wha? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by init100 (915886) on Thursday June 19, 2008 @12:25AM (#23850917)

    Oh right, the old "the social democrats started it!" excuse. Some of the right-wing politicians who passed this law actually used that one as a reason for not opposing it. While the observation is factually correct, it is not a valid reason to pass bad laws.

    You obviously misunderstood my point. I did not excuse passing bad laws because the current opposition created it, I just observed that this bill would likely have been passed regardless of administration, simply because it was supported by both the alliance and the social democrats.

    And as for your statement that "The opposition (the previous administration) used a law that enabled them to defer a decision for one year", that was done by the green party + the left party + the christian democrats.

    I read in several articles that this was done by the social democrats, the left and the greens. If I was wrong, I'm sorry for that.

  • by Bega (684994) on Thursday June 19, 2008 @03:23AM (#23851941) Homepage Journal
    Interestingly, I'd like to know how this affects things over here in Finland, since a huge portion of our internet traffic is coming through Sweden.
  • by tertrures (1238098) on Thursday June 19, 2008 @10:45AM (#23858143)
    So... what's the best way to install email encryption support in gmail?

    Preferably a tutorial for non-geeks that i could pass along to everybody i know.
  • by chris_7d0h (216090) on Thursday June 19, 2008 @11:55AM (#23859799) Journal
    An entire additional nation now needs to be able to post information to Slashdot without risk of reprisals from the government or corporate interests. As such I would like to emplore the Slashdot administrators to enable SSL as an alternative to un-encrypted HTTP traffic for reading and posting to this site.

    I am fully aware that SSL will increase the resource use of the site, but if you make it a feature that must be enabled in a user's profile, it wouldn't be a default and thus the performance impact should be manageable. As we all know, anything requiring "opt in" will mean only a fraction of the total population will use it.

    If you can spare the CPU-cycles, a good service would be something akin to Google's, where you enable SSL for certain (surveiled) IP-ranges where as Google uses it to "i18n" their pages.

"Anyone attempting to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin." -- John Von Neumann

Working...