Britain's top counter-terrorism official has revealed how the government is sidestepping the need for individual search warrants to spy on British Facebook and Google users.
Under UK law, "internal" communications between residents within the UK may only be intercepted with a specific warrant, issued only when there is suspicion of unlawful activity – a legal safeguard previously believed to extend to all British users, says The Guardian.
But Charles Farr, the director general of the Office for Security and Counter Terrorism, has said interception without a warrant is permitted under law when communications go through services based in the United States or other foreign nations because they are deemed "external".
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
This includes "almost all" communications via Facebook and other social networking sites such as Twitter and YouTube, as well as webmail services Hotmail and Yahoo and web searches via Google, say campaigners at Privacy International.
"External" communications may be intercepted indiscriminately, even where there are no grounds to suspect any wrongdoing. The government is therefore able to search through, read, listen to and look at any communications between people in Britain through social networks based abroad, even when no wrongdoing is suspected, says Privacy International.
The only restriction on intercepting "external" communications is a ban on making a search using keywords or terms that mention a specific British person or residence, says the Daily Telegraph.
Michael Bochenek, senior director of international law and policy, at Amnesty International said: "British citizens will be alarmed to see their government justifying industrial-scale intrusion into their communications. The public should demand an end to this wholesale violation of their right to privacy."
Farr's statement was published as part of the government's defence against a legal challenge brought by Privacy International, Liberty, Amnesty International and other civil liberties organisations. The case, which was brought following disclosures by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, will be heard by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal next month.
-
How will the new Repayment Assistance Plan for student loans work?the explainer The Repayment Assistance Plan (RAP) will replace existing income-driven repayment plans
-
In the Spotlight Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has been at odds with US forces
-
Music reviews: Ethel Cain, Amaarae, and The Black KeysFeature "Willoughby Tucker, I'll Always Love You," "Black Star," and "No Rain, No Flowers"
-
Social media: How 'content' replaced friendshipFeature Facebook has shifted from connecting with friends to competing with entertainment companies
-
Meta on trial: What will become of Mark Zuckerberg's social media empire?Today's Big Question Despite the CEO's attempt to ingratiate himself with Trump, Meta is on trial, accused by the U.S. government of breaking antitrust law
-
What does an ex-executive's new memoir reveal about Meta's free speech pivot?Today's Big Question 'Careless People' says Facebook was ready to do China censorship
-
What's Mark Zuckerberg's net worth?In Depth The Meta magnate's products are a part of billions of lives
-
Is the AI bubble deflating?Today's Big Question Growing skepticism and high costs prompt reconsideration
-
How social media is limiting political contentThe Explainer Critics say Meta's 'extraordinary move' to have less politics in users' feeds could be 'actively muzzling civic action'
-
Twitter's year of Elon Musk: what happens next?In the Spotlight 'Your platform is dying', says one commentator, but new CEO is aiming for profitability next year
-
Turns out Facebook isn't as polarizing as previously thoughtTalking Point New studies show that, contrary to prior belief, the algorithm has little effect on driving polarization
