We are anonymous, we are legion

More Debate on UID Project Needed

praskrishna — 2011-04-02T11:13:43Z

A press conference on UID was held at the Press Club in Bangalore on 26 July, 2010. It was co-organised by Citizen's Action Forum, Alternate Law Forum and the Centre for Internet and Society. Mathew Thomas and Vinay Baindur spoke about the UID. Proceedings from the conference was covered in the Hindu on 27 July, 2010.

More Debate on UID

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/debate-on-uid

MongoDB startup hired by Aadhaar got funds from CIA VC arm

praskrishna — 2013-12-13T11:53:32Z

Two weeks ago, Max Schireson, chief executive of MongoDB, a New York-based technology startup, was in New Delhi to sew up a very important contract for his company — with the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).

The article by Lison Joseph was published in the Economic Times on December 3, 2013. Sunil Abraham is quoted.

The contract is yet to be announced but what could raise eyebrows is the fact that MongoDB is part-funded by the US' Central Intelligence Agency.

The company is expected to help in capturing and analysing data related to the ambitious plan to issue a unique identity number — Aadhaar — to over a billion citizens.

MongoDB, which makes software that helps manage large databases, especially unstructured data, has raised $231 million (Rs1,400 crore) since being founded in 2007. Some of its funding is from In-Q-Tel, the not-for-profit venture capital arm of CIA.

While MongoDB lists In-Q-Tel as one of its investors on its website, the company has not disclosed the quantum of funding received from it. The fund's stated mission is to identify, adapt and deliver innovative technology solutions to support the missions of CIA and the broader US intelligence community.

Besides CIA, In-Q-Tel works with National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency and Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate.

"Once an investment is made, IQT (the fund) works with the company and the intelligence community partner agency to complete a work program and facilitate solution delivery," the fund's website said. The quote describes IQT's relationship with any company in which it invests in and is not specific to MongoDB.

Neither UIDAI nor MongoDB responded to queries from ET on whether the CIA link was considered before entering into a partnership. UIDAI Chairman Nandan Nilekani did not respond to emails, messages and phone calls.

A senior UIDAI official confirmed the agency has entered into an agreement with MongoDB and that the company's database software is already being used for analysing the pace at which registration of new beneficiaries is taking place.

It is not clear if MongoDB's vendor relationship would be with UID directly or with one of the system integrators that UID works with. Schireson, the CEO, was also one of the national co-chairs for Technology for Obama, an interest group that campaigned for the reelection of President Barack Obama after his first term.

There is no evidence in the public domain that the firm is controlled or significantly influenced by the CIA in any manner.

But the revelations of Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor-turned-whistleblower that US intelligence agencies routinely intercepted communication in Europe and Asia, including in India has raised concerns. Experts said the UID's centralised design could pose a risk, where even a single mistake can make the whole system disproportionately vulnerable.

"The risk exposure because of CIA involvement (could be that) if MongoDB is a data controller, then secret courts and secret court orders could be used to get access to the UID data," said Sunil Abraham, executive director at the Centre for Internet and Society.

He added that even if UIDAI is only using the source code without getting into a commercial relationship with MongoDB, they should audit the source code to check if CIA has introduced any back doors. "This is because Snowden has told us that the army of mathematicians working for the US government has compromised some standards even though they were developed in an open, participatory and transparent fashion." MongoDB, whose name is a play on the word humongous, competes with Oracle, IBM and Microsoft. It has around 320 employees and some 600 customers. At its latest round of $150 million in fund-raising in October, the company was valued at about $1.2 billion, according to Bloomberg. Other investors include Intel Capital, Salesforce-.com, Red Hat and Sequoia.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/economic-times-december-30-2013-lison-joseph-mongo-db-startup-hired-by-aadhar-got-funds-from-cia-vc-arm

Moldova Online: An Interview with Victor Diaconu

Sudha Rajagopalan — 2012-03-21T10:10:38Z

In this interview for Russian Cyberspace, set up with the help of Sunil Abraham (Executive Director at the Centre for Internet and Society in Bangalore, India), computer software professional Victor Diaconu explains the nature of Internet use, state control and the development of blogging and social media platforms in Moldova. Victor works at Computaris in Chisinau. He is Moldova educated, and has travelled to several western countries (including lengthy stays to US, UK) to learn about and understand what there is to be done in Moldova. Sudha Rajagopalan interviewed Victor Diaconu.

SR: After the 2009 elections, there was some talk of reform in Moldova and greater transparency, but now one also hears contradictory reports of increasing authoritarian tendencies. Is this ambivalence evident in the way the internet is regulated and used here?

VD: I would not say the tendencies are authoritarian. The constitution says that the President should be voted in by a majority of 61 out of 101 members of the Parliament. If not, Parliament should be dissolved and re-elected. Well, this should happen twice a year at the most, and as such, after a second failed attempt to vote the President the authority of the Parliament and Government is somewhat questionable. The current Parliament has tried to change the rules of voting in the President - to make it by popular vote, for instance, but this is met with resistance from the Communist Party.

As to transparency - I would say it has improved. Though, one should not expect too many changes from a Government with questionable authority and with so many systemic flaws inherited from the previous government. At the moment we've got a coalition government. As such, there are frictions and these are indeed visible. This gives a sense of comfort and truthfulness since it is normal to have frictions in any human endeavour. While the communist party was ruling - everything was "nice and dandy" both in media and in political affairs and one could not get anything but "fake" - fake news, fake results, fake improvements.

Internet control and filtering do not happen. In fact, we did have a "small revolt" on April 7, 2009, when it seemed the communist party had tried to steal the vote for the parliament. At that moment a few .md sites were blocked by the national Telecom operator, but most other sites were still available. In fact, news about the event was best available on twitter (might still be available under "pman" tags). There also were a few attempts to stifle free speech when authorities requested names/IP addresses of commenters on some forums. However, this is no longer conceivable ...

SR: Given that the press and television are largely in the hands of the state and criticism of the state is considered defamation (and leads to the arrest of press people), does the internet play a special role as a space for alternative media and political blogs? Are these prevalent and influential?

VD: Yes, national TV is largely state owned and it was worse before the change in power. Now it seems to have improved. There are a series of smaller TV stations but these have reduced coverage - mostly in bigger cities. I understand that they've started rolling out IP TV with packages of 50+ TV channels - local and international. The national Telecoms operator provides very good Internet coverage. Dial-up Internet at reasonable prices is available everywhere in the country. Broadband availability even in rural areas is very good. And it's not too expensive. As to the role of Internet - indeed its influence is increasing. A series of media portals are frequented by many, including me. http://unimedia.md/; http://m.protv.md/; http://jurnaltv.md/; http://forum.md/to mention a few. The news here is conveyed tersely but I do my own editorializing if need be. Also, I can read the comments if I want to get a feeling about how others feel about some specific event.

SR: Can you tell us about some of the popular bloggers and blogging platforms in Moldova? Live Journal is popular in Russia; can the same be said of Moldova?

VD: I'm not aware of any significant blogger, more so, political blogger. I'd say we still need to wait for someone whose commentary is mature enough for people to care about him or her... As to the platform - those blogging attempts that I've seen were indeed on major blogging portals like Live Journal.

SR: What can you tell us about the presence of social media in Moldova? Does Moldova prefer its own versions of global digital platforms, or are FB, My Space, Twitter popular here? What is the role of the diaspora in this space?

VD: Global platforms are widely used. There are a few Russian popular platforms in wide use too, such as odnoklassniki.ru. We have up to 1 million Moldovans working in European countries, Russia and other places, since the pay is significantly higher over there. These people left a few years back and most of them intend to return. And they, indeed, rely on the available platforms to relate back to relatives and friends.

SR: Lastly, can you tell us about the linguistic landscape of Moldovan new media; I imagine the most widely used language on the internet is Moldovan/Romanian. Is Russian prevalent or is new media here a platform to assert their exclusive Moldovan identity?

VD: The rules for language are that media should have at least 60-70% of content in "state" language and the law was often changed so that sometimes 'state language’ included Russian too. In fact, in Moldova we are very comfortable with the Russian language, at least those a bit older (30+ years) since we were supposed to speak it well in the Soviet era.

SR (with many thanks to Victor Diaconu and Sunil Abraham)

About Sudha Rajagopalan

Sudha Rajagopalan is the deputy editor of Digital Icons: Studies in Russian, Eurasian and Central European New Media and co-blogger at Russian Cyberspace. Sudha is also a Research Affiliate with the Media Studies Group at the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands. Her current research is on audience and fan communities on Runet (the Russian-language internet), with a special interest in identity, performativity and affect in online practices. Sudha obtained her PhD in Russian History from Indiana University, Bloomington (2005). She is the author of 'Leave Disco Dancer Alone: Indian Cinema and Soviet Movie-going after Stalin,' Yoda Press, 2008 ('Indian Films in Soviet Cinemas: The Culture of Movie-going after Stalin,' Indiana University Press, 2009).

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/moldova-online

Modi's Valley hug sparks swadeshi talk

praskrishna — 2015-10-11T05:33:55Z

His warm hug of Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg will perhaps be the most abiding image of Narendra Modi's visit to the Silicon Valley.

But that embrace, and what it conveyed, is now becoming the subject for an intense debate among techies here. Is Modi giving in too much to the Googles and Facebooks of the world, when there is so much technology talent within India? Is he taking the easy way out by handing out critical pieces of his Digital India vision to global incumbents rather than build domestic capabilities?

"When the government wanted to build a citizen engagement platform earlier this year, they depended on Google. Now when they want Wi-Fi in railway stations, it's again Google. These are things that can be done by our companies, otherwise we will not be able to create our own digital industry. Remember, we are the people who built Aadhaar," said an industry veteran who did not want to be named.

Nitin Pai, co-founder of Takshashila, an independent policy research and advocacy body that provides services for government agencies, NGOs and corporations, said Modi's team should make a careful distinction between national interest and MNCs' commercial interest. "Many MNCs have come forward to participate in Digital India initiatives. The government will have to look at offering sufficient incentives for innovation to domestic tech companies, many of whom are coming with innovative business models," he said.

Speaking to a cross-section of tech companies here, two sets of concerns emerge. One relates to the concessions that will work in favour of global incumbents and against newcomers - the latter is likely to add more value in the long term. This includes the issue of net neutrality , on which the government is seen to be waffling, and the guidelines issued by the Indian Patent Office declaring that software is patentable in India.

The new guidelines will make it easier for companies to file for software patents in India. But software patenting has become hugely controversial globally , because innova tions in the area are often just incremental, and come on top of other software programs.Besides, patenting is expensive and is often the subject of litigation, both of which work against small ventures with little resources. Companies like Google have spent billions of dollars to buy patents.

Venkatesh Hariharan, member of software product think-tank iSpirt, said the new guidelines would make it easier for bigger companies to file software patents, but for smaller firms and startups, the move could be detrimental."They could end up fighting patent litigations. In the US, 37% of patent litigation is around software and business patents," he said.

Sunil Abraham, executive director in research organization Centre for Internet and Society , fears litigation could kill local innovation. He cited a recent example where a Delhi high court order asked Indian handset manufacturer Micromax to pay 1.25%-2% of the selling price of its devices to Ericsson that had claimed infringement of patents.

The other set of issues relates to certain rules and regulations in India that place significant obstacles before small technology ventures. This is resulting in many ventures shifting their registered offices to Singapore or the US.

Albinder Dindsa's on-demand delivery service Gro fers is among the latest to create a holding company in Singapore. "It is challenging to do business in India. Even opening a bank account took time. We thought it would be easier to do an IPO if we are in Singapore," he said.

A senior industry analyst who did not want to be named said that till last year, two out of four ventures were moving out of India, but now that figure is three out of four. "I would expect the government to do something about it. In fact, the finance minister did say in June that the issues would be addressed within 30 days. But nothing has happened."

Also, it is expensive for angel investors overseas to invest in Indian startups.

India disallows startups from offering stock options to foreign nationals, which makes it difficult for them to access seasoned mentors.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/the-times-of-india-sujit-john-and-shilpa-phadnis-october-6-2015-modi-valley-hug-sparks-swadeshi-talk

Modi Govt compromising privacy of individuals: Cong

Admin — 2018-04-18T01:10:42Z

Charging the Narendra Modi Governemt with compromising the privacy of individuals by leaking user information on the Narendra Modi app, the Congress on Monday said the counter allegations by the BJP that the Opposition party was indulging in 'data theft' were an attempt to divert attention from the issue.

This was published by United News of India on March 26, 2018.

Talking to reporters here, AICC spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi said, 'we have said repeatedly that the biggest assault on individual privacy has occurred under the watch of the Narendra Modi Government. Not only people’s money, but people’s privacy is also in question.

Even as startling revelations that the Narendra Modi app, run by the BJP is sharing data of millions of users with American companies emerge, the Modi Government mocks and flouts the ‘Right to Privacy’ with brazen impunity. While the Prime Minister’s Office, PMO India app, asks users to voluntarily part with their identity on 14 data points, the NaMo app asks for a sweeping access to 22 data points. The NaMo app records audio, video, contacts of your friends and family and even tracks your location via GPS. No wonder, Modi ji is like the ‘Bigg Boss’ who with brazenness likes to spy on Indians. The BJP whose IT (Identity Theft?) Minister does daily press conferences on the issue of data security and democracy, has much to answer to the people of India on the unscrupulous means by which Shri Narendra Modi’s personal app is accessing data and passing on data of more than 50 lakh Indians,' he alleged.

Describing the BJP allegations that the Congress was indulging in 'data theft' through its mobile app, Mr Singhvi said. 'the Modi Government is resorting to deflectionary and diversionary tactics. The Congress application had just 15,000 downloads against the 50 lakh Indians who downloaded the NaMo app. Also, the Congress application was discontinued as most of the users wanted to register offline.'

Accusing Mr Modi of misusing the Prime Minister’s position to build personal database with data on millions of Indians via the NaMo app promoted by the government, Mr Singhvi said, 'Why does Mr Modi, in his own book ‘Exam Warriors’ urge you to download the NaMo app. Is he now planning to snoop in on minors? Mr Modi is misusing the Prime Minister’s position to build personal database with data on millions of Indians via the NaMo app promoted by Government. If as PM he wants to use tech to communicate with India, there is no problem in that. But use the official PMO app for it, not the NaMo app. This data belongs to India, not to Mr Modi.

Shockingly, data of atleast 13 lakh NCC cadets which include personal mobile phone numbers and email ID’s are being given to the Prime Minister’s Office for an interaction.'

Citing in this regard the report of a committee of experts appointed by the government on the issue of data protection, Mr Singhvi said, 'importantly, a Government appointed Committee of Experts (CoE) to look into a framework for data protection, headed by Justice (retd) BN Srikrishna has made scathing observations in a paper released in November 2017, against the Government and has shockingly implied (according to the media reports) that the Modi Government is collecting personal data illegally. The committee, which is currently in the process of conducting consultations, has also considered the SC judgment on privacy, says in its paper “The public and private sector are collecting and using personal data on an unprecedented scale. While data can be put to beneficial use, unregulated and arbitrary use of data, especially personal data, raise concerns relating to centralisation of databases, profiling of individuals, increased surveillance and a consequent erosion of individual autonomy.”

Alleging that under the Modi Government, not only the personal data of citizens was under serious threat, but there were multiple reports of data breaches in banks, Mr Singhvi said, 'astonishingly, under the Modi Government, not only the personal data of citizens is under serious threat, but multiple breaches in the banks. In an atmosphere where every single day there has been a bank fraud worth thousands of crores of rupees being reported, have resulted in one single question - how safe is our money in banks?

Banks and PSU’s have reported multiple breaches in recent past. A newspaper report on Monday said two online security experts have claimed that the Aadhaar database of two public-sector enterprises leaked select data and the vulnerability was fixed only a month after attention was drawn to it. This exposes their names, the 12-digit Aadhaar number and information of the services they have linked their Aadhaar card to. These services include bank details, policy details and other private information. This was corroborated by the UIDAI statement released on Sunday.

“It was left up there for more than a month — even though it had been reported to them directly,” claim the security experts. On February 23, 2018 a report had claimed that there was a data breach which had hit the the Punjab National Bank, whereby sensitive credit, debit card details of 10,000 customers were leaked. Quick Heal, a reputed software company in October 2017 had also claimed that there was a massive data breach in 6,000 government offices including banks. Earlier in 2016, as per media reports -- 32 lakh debit/credit cards of various Indian banks were compromised. The worst-hit was the State Bank of India along with certain private banks.'

He also charged the present Government of breach of Aadhaar data of individuals.

'In April 2014, the then Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi had attacked Aadhaar and the UPA Government on its possible ‘security threat’. Life has now come full circle for the BJP. Just like numerous other issues, their blatant hypocrisy on Aadhaar is exposed. In January, this year, when a reputed newspaper in a sting exposed how 1 crore Aadhaar details can be accessed in just 10 minutes, by paying just Rs 500 in Chandigarh, the UIDAI had then filed an FIR against the reporter. Now the editor of the reputed media house has also been replaced.

We have seen it in May 4, 2017, when the Modi Government is on record in Supreme Court, accepting data breach in the Aadhaar scheme. Now the Attorney General in Supreme Court, while arguing that Aadhaar data remains safe and secure, says that the Aadhaar data remains secure behind a complex that has 13-ft high and five-feet thick walls, which is laughable and ludicrous, to say the least. On November 20, 2017, the UIDAI had accepted on record that –“More than 210 central and state government websites publicly displayed details such as names and addresses of Aadhaar beneficiaries”. Earlier too, ‘Centre for Internet and Society’, a Bengaluru-based organisation (CIS) in a study published on May 1, 2017, had found that data of more than 130 million Aadhaar card holders has been leaked from just four government websites. Therefore this is a serious issue. Clearly, neither our money, nor our Aadhaar details or our personal details are secure under the Modi Government.'

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/united-news-of-india-march-26-2018-modi-govt-compromising-privacy-of-individuals-congress

Models for Surveillance and Interception of Communications Worldwide

bedaavyasa — 2014-07-10T07:50:08Z

This is an evaluation of laws and practices governing surveillance and interception of communications in 9 countries. The countries evaluated represent a diverse spectrum not only in terms of their global economic standing but also their intrusive surveillance capabilities. The analysis is limited to the procedural standards followed by these countries for authorising surveillance and provisions for resolving interception related disputes.

Sl. No.	Country	Legislation	Model
1.	Australia	Telecommunications (Interceptions and Access) Act, 1979 Governs interception of communications Relevant provisions: S. 3, 7, 6A, 34, 46 Surveillance Devices Act, 2004 Establishes procedure for obtaining warrants and for use of surveillance devices Relevant Provisions: S.13, 14	Authorisation for surveillance is granted in the form of a warrant from a Judge or a nominated member of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal The warrant issuing authority must be satisfied that information obtained through interception shall assist in the investigation of a serious crime The Acts provide a list of prescribed offences for which interception of communication may be authorized The Acts also specify certain federal and state law enforcement agencies that may undertake surveillance
2.	Brazil	Federal Law No. 9,296, 1996: Regulates wiretapping	Authorisation for interception is granted on a Judge’s order for a period of 15 days at a time Interception is only allowed for investigations into serious offences like drug smuggling, corruption murder and kidnapping
3.	Canada	Criminal Code, 1985 Governs general rules of criminal procedure including search and seizure protocols Relevant Provision: §§ 184.2, 184.4	Grants power to intercept communication by obtaining authorisation from a provincial court judge or a judge of the superior court Before granting his authorisation, the judge must be satisfied that either the originator of the communication or the recipient thereof has given his/her consent to the interception Under exceptional circumstances, however, a police officer owing to the exigency of the situation may intercept communication without prior authorisation
4.	France	*Loi d'orientation et de programmation pour la performance de la sécurité intérieure* (LOPPSI 2), 2011: Authorises use of video surveillance and interception of communications Relevant Provisions: Article 36 *Loi de Programmation Militaire* (LPM), 2013: Authorises surveillance for protection of national security and prevention of terrorism	Interception of communication under LOPPSI 2 requires previous authorization from an investigating Judge after consultation with the Public Prosecutor Such authorization is granted for a period of 4 months which is further extendable by another 4 months Interception of communication under LPM does not require prior sanction from an investigating judge and is instead provided by the Prime Minister’s office Information that can be intercepted under LPM includes not only metadata but also content and geolocation services
5.	Germany	Gesetz zur Beschränkung des Brief-, Post und Fernmeldegeheimnisses (G10 Act), 2001 Imposes restrictions on the right to privacy and authorizes surveillance for protecting freedom and democratic order, preventing terrorism and illegal drug trade Relevant Provisions: §3 The German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO), 2002 Lays down search and seizure protocol and authorizes interception of telecommunications for criminal prosecutions Relevant Provisions: §§ 97, 100a	Authorises warrantless surveillance by specific German agencies like the Bundesnachrichtendienst (Federal Intelligence Service) Lays down procedure that must be followed while undertaking surveillance and intercepting communications Authorises sharing of intercepted intelligence for criminal prosecutions Mandates ex post notification to persons whose privacy has been violated but no judicial remedies are available to such persons The Code of Criminal Procedure authorises interception of communication of a person suspected of being involved in a serious offence only on the order of a court upon application by the public prosecution office
6.	Pakistan	Pakistan Telecommunications Reorganisation Act, 1996: Controls the flow of false and fabricated information and protects national security Relevant Provisions: § 54 Investigation for Fair Trial Act, 2013: Regulates the powers of law enforcement and intelligence agencies regarding covert surveillance and interception of communications Relevant Provisions: §§ 6,7, 8, 9	Authorisation for interception is provided by the federal government. No formal legal structure to monitor surveillance exists Interception can be authorized in the interest of national security and on the apprehension of any offence Requests for filtering and blocking of content are routed through the Inter-Ministerial Committee for the Evaluation of Websites, a confidential regulatory body Under the Fair Trial Act, interception can only be authorised on application to the Fedral Minister for Interior who shall then permit the application to be placed before a High Court Judge The warrant shall be issued by a judge only on his satisfaction that interception will aid in the collection of evidence and that a reasonable threat of the commission of a scheduled offence exists
7.	South Africa	The Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication-related Information Act, 2002 Regulates and authorizes monitoring and interception of telecommunications services Relevant Provisions: §§ 16, 22	Warrant for intercepting communications and installing surveillance devices is granted by a designated judge The warrant is issued on satisfaction of the judge that the investigation relates to a serious offence or that the information gathering is vital to public health or safety, national security or compelling national economic interests
8.	United Kingdom	Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, 2000: Authorises interception of communications and surveillance Relevant Provisions: §§ 5, 6, 65	Authorisation for interception is granted in the form of a warrant by the Secretary of State or in certain special cases by a ‘senior officer’ Communications can be intercepted only it is necessary to do so in the interest of national security or for the purpose of preventing and detecting serious crimes Complaints of alleged illegal surveillance are heard by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal
9.	United States	Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 1986 (Title III, Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act) Governs authorisation for wiretapping and interception Relevant Provisions: §18	Authorisation for interception can be granted by a district court or federal appeals court on application by a law enforcement officer duly signed by the attorney general Application mandates obtaining the information through a service provider before invading upon individual’s privacy

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/models-for-surveillance-and-interception-of-communications-worldwide

Mobilising support for freedom on the Web

praskrishna — 2012-04-25T11:02:58Z

A motion in the Rajya Sabha has sought annulment of the IT intermediary guidelines, writes Deepa Kurup in this article published in the Hindu on April 22, 2012.

A research, or a sting operation, conducted by researchers at the Centre for Internet and Society in October 2011 — a few months after the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines) Rules were notified — revealed some inherent flaws in the guidelines laid down by the Indian government. The results of the study made news, particularly after Union Minister for IT, Kapil Sibal, asked Internet companies and Web service providers to screen content.

The study revealed that companies were only too eager to comply with take-down notices or requests, in order to avoid further hassles, particularly legal ones.

Rishab Dara, a researcher who was part of this ‘sting', pointed out that unless the content was commercial, or had potential commercial interest, companies preferred to err on the side of caution.

Addressing an audience at a panel discussion, titled ‘Resisting Internet censorship: strategies for furthering freedom of expression in India', held at the Bangalore International Centre, Mr. Dara pointed out that search engines did not invest enough resources to check how valid the claims were, before taking down over 2,000 URLs related to a random complaint or take-down notice sent by them. His study underlined the need for debate and discussion on the intermediary guidelines, locating this in the larger context of freedom on the Web.

The discussion, organised by the Centre for Internet and Society, was moderated by the former journalist and academic, Paranjoy Guha Thakurta. The audience and the panel comprised a diverse lot: from students, netizens and academics to those who were directly involved in the business of publishing content or hosting Web content. While a substantial part of the discussion dealt with the legal aspects of the notified rules, and how it may contradict the constitutional rights of citizens, a section of the debate also delved into whether the Web as a medium needed to be policed at all.

If panellist Mahesh Murthy, Chief Executive Officer of Pinstorm, argued vociferously for unfettered freedom on the Web and accused the government of being threatened by movements such as the anti-corruption campaign led by Anna Hazare (which he said was largely mobilised on the Web), another panellist Na. Vijayshankar, Cyber Law College, who claimed he was among those instrumental in bringing down the pornographic cartoon portal Savitabhabhi.com, argued that though these rules need to be withdrawn, there are “boundaries” to what can be posted and said on the Web.

Another section of the audience brought up the issues of hate speech on the Web, and pointed out that in some cases there was a need to pin liability on those who generate content that incites hatred.

Sudhir Krishnaswamy, Centre for Law and Policy Research, pointed out that currently the way the issue was being played out in court, the discourse was more about companies.

“The debate is not about users today. Companies are trying to duck liabilities, rather than deal with substantive issues of free speech,” he said, pointing to the complexities in locating liability for content.

Speaking from the publisher's perspective, B.G. Mahesh, OneIndia.in, an online news and entertainment portal, spoke of specific cases where his portal had been targeted by the Chennai Cybercrime cell for hosting a news story (syndicated from a news agency) that was declared defamatory. “We took it down, but there was no answer from them when we asked for an explanation,” he said, adding that in such cases there is tremendous pressure and harassment from authorities, leaving publishers with no choice but to comply.

Though the IT intermediary rules were notified in April 2011, the issue made headlines when Union Minister for Information and Communication Technology Kapil Sibal asked private companies or Web service providers to pre-screen content, a statement which he later withdrew.

Also discussed in detail were the complexities posed by a medium like the World Wide Web, and what were the reasonable restrictions to free speech on the Web. Does one need a separate legal dispensation to deal with this medium, Mr. Thakurta asked. While emphasising that the solution does not lie in “knee-jerk reactions”, such as the rules that have been proposed, he pointed out that the bid to control flow of information was a simple manifestation of the utter helplessness and inability of the government — and governments worldwide — to control the Web. Be it in West Bengal, where a professor is held for sharing a cartoon, or with the Union government that beckons corporates to pre-screen the Web, these acts are a manifestation of a “combination of arrogance and stupidity”, he said.

Subsequently, in February, Rajya Sabha member from Kerala, P. Rajeeve, moved a statutory motion in the Rajya Sabha seeking that these guidelines be annulled on the grounds that it allowed intermediaries protection from legal liability in return for trading away freedom of expression of users.

In the Parliamentary session that will start next week, this is likely to come up for discussion, and across the country, rights activists are mobilising support and lobbying with legislators to garner support for this annulment.

Read the original here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/mobilising-support-for-freedom-on-web

Mobile, Trust and Privacy

praskrishna — 2014-10-05T09:21:15Z

Sunil Abraham was a speaker at the event organized by GSM Association on September 4, 2014.

More consumers now use their mobiles to go online to access information and services. Mobile plays a central role in driving economic growth and social opportunities. However, it is important that people can interact and access services in a trusted and secure environment that protects their online privacy.
Increasingly, mobile ecosystems acquire consumers’ data by default, while smartphones broadcast data by default. These ‘default’ positions challenge current data protection and privacy legal frameworks, and consumers’ ability to manage their privacy and online identities.
A key ingredient for strengthening trust in a mobile connected world is a user-centred privacy framework that applies to all digital and identity services whether in retail, healthcare, government, banking or any other sector.
The GSMA recently published global research showing trust matters and that mobile users want better transparency and choice over how their personal data are used. They also expect all companies accessing their data to treat their privacy consistently.
This workshop aims to bring together leading representatives from a broad spectrum of stakeholder groups to discuss privacy-related issues and ways to enhance mobile users’ trust.
Questions to address include:

How can citizens – in both developed and developing countries – benefit from the responsible use of mobile-derived data?
What are the key emerging issues and challenges of a mobile hyper-connected world?
How can we ensure secure and trusted identities online?
eds to be done to ensure consumers are able to access services in private, trusted and secure ways?
What are the respective roles of law and industry self-regulation in enhancing trust?

For full details see the IGF website.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/mobile-trust-and-privacy

Mobile Tech 4 Social Change

radha — 2011-04-05T04:32:26Z

Mobile Tech 4 Social Change, Bangalore camp is a one-day event and is an exploration of mobile technology to advance social development and social change goals.

Mobile Tech 4 Social Change Camps are local events for people passionate about using mobile technology for social impact and to make the world a better place.

Mobile Tech 4 Social Change Camp in Bangalore includes:

interactive discussions about mobile tech for social good,
hands-on-demos of mobile apps and tools,
collaborations about ways to use, deploy, develop and promote mobile technology in health, advocacy, economic development, environment, human rights, and citizen media

Participants for Mobile Tech 4 Social Change barcamps include nonprofits, mobile application developers, researchers, donors, intermediary organizations, and mobile operators.

In short, Mobile Tech 4 Social Change Bangalore Camp is:

A one-day event in Bangalore on September 4, 2009
An exploration of mobile technology to advance social development and social change goals
Participatory and interactive
Open to anyone with passion and interest in the topic

Participants

YOU - register today!

Cost

Mobile Tech 4 Social Change camps are grassroots events. We are charging a small fee for this event that is used to offset costs for breakfast and lunch as well as supplies for the camp. If this cost constitutes a huge barrier for you attending, please be in touch so that we can work something out!

Planners and Sponsors

Mobile Tech 4 Social Change Bangalore is organized by the following organizations. We are very grateful for this collaboration and support.

India

If you want to be an angel and sponsor this community-supported event, we would love to hear from you!

videos

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/events/mobile-tech-4-social-change

Mobile net ban during peaceful protest leaves farmers confused

Shruti Jain — 2018-01-19T15:20:14Z

Strap: Administration says it was done to prevent rumours from spreading, protesters insist they needed internet to fight it.

In Sikar district, about 15,000 farmers had staged a protest at Krishi Upaj Mandi on 1 September 2017 under the banner of All India Kisan Sabha. Their major demands were farm loan waiver, pension for farmers and implementation of the recommendations of the Swaminathan Commission. The protest had the support of students, traders' associations, anganwadi workers, transport unions and a few other organisations. About 100,000 people joined farmers in a solidarity march during the next 13 days.

The demonstrations continued and when talks with the government failed, thousands of farmers set out to lay siege to the district collector's office and block highways on September 11.

Accordingly, the district administration clamped prohibitory orders under Section 144 of Criminal Procedure Code, restricting assembly of five or more people, and blocked mobile internet in the district.

Kishan Pareek, district secretary of Communist Party of India (Marxist) which took part in the protest, contended that though the government says the ban was enforced to check the spread of violence, the actual motive was something else. He says the administration was vying to stifle their movement but couldn’t use force as the protesters were peaceful.

"So, they resorted to spreading rumours to provoke us to commit any violent activity. If internet was working that time, we could have easily denied those [rumours],” he says.

According to Pareek, the rumours that circulated that day included: the protest has turned violent at some location, police have fired bullets/charged baton at the protesters, additional force has been called in from Jaipur etc. As broadband was operational, the organisers managed to counter falsehood with facts and the misinformation didn't spread outside Sikar. Pareek says whichever protest-spot the rumours portrayed as violence-ridden, their social media team shared videos from there on Facebook to counter them.

Pictures above: Thousands of farmers held a protest at Krishi Upaj Mandi, Sikar in September 2017.

Nevertheless, in the absence of mobile internet, farmers’ teams that had gathered at various highways to block roads had difficulty processing the false information that was trickling in. Though it created much confusion among them, it failed to instigate them.

Rajpal Singh, a Sikar-based member of CPI(M)'s social media wing, informed that the mainstream media didn't give much attention to the protest. He says it were local websites and newspapers that covered the event, which is why the administration banned internet, hoping restriction on the flow of information would throw a spanner in the works. Apart from local news websites, local Facebook pages -- Sikar Aapno, Sikar Sandesh, We love CPIM- Dhod and CPIM Sikar, etc. -- were giving minute-by-minute updates of the farmers' protest.

The internet services were resumed in Sikar a day later as the protest did not get violent and the protesters were not found circulating any provocative content.

A former CPI(M) MLA, president of All India Kisan Sabha and leader of the farmers' agitation, Amara Ram, told 101Reporters that one of the very reasons their movement enjoyed humongous public support was its peaceful nature. He says as their movement unfolded, people from Sikar and outside realised this protest would not turn violent and it’s a cause that needed support.

As cautious as the government might have been about the September 11 protest, police presence indicated that the law-enforcement agency did not perceive it as a threat. One of the protesters, Nemichand, says only 50-odd policemen had been deputed for the protest march of 15,000+ farmers to the district collectorate. He claimed that the number of men in khaki dwindled to 20 by the afternoon.

He alleged that the real reason for internet shutdown was stopping the dissemination of news about their protest as it exposes the Modi government's inconsiderate approach towards farmers.

“Everybody in Sikar was talking about the internet ban. Since there was no legitimate reason for the ban, the government couldn’t continue with it, fearing how they will justify,” he says.

	The administration confirmed that the ban was imposed fearing threat to law and order in the district due to the gathering of thousands. “Though they were protesting peacefully the initial ten days at the mahapadav, they had planned to block the district collectorate on September 11 in thousands. To restrict their movement, internet was suspended in Sikar. During such situations, no one writes positive about the administration. We didn’t want to provide them a platform for spreading rumours that could have made the protestors violent. If there had been no internet ban that day, something big would have happened,” Jai Prakash Narayan, additional district collector and additional district magistrate, told 101reporters. “Broadband was made working during the internet ban so that the private and government offices were not affected. While giving order for internet ban, it is made sure that normal call and broadband facilities are not debarred. General masses are affected but internet shutdown is the only option we have,” he added. “While their blockade continued for three days, we restricted internet services only for first 24 hours as the protest had gained stability till then.” Even three months after the high-powered ministerial committee was formed to look into the farmers’ demand, nothing has been done. Now, they plan to stage a protest in February 2018 when the state assembly will be in function. Former CPI(M) MLA Pema Ram says, “Preparation for February protest has already begun. Kisan Sansads are being organised in Sikar, where active farmers from each village participate to raise demands regarding implementation of the recommendations of the Swaminathan Commission report, a solution to the menace of stray cattle, complete farm loan waiver and pension for farmers. They then discuss it with other farmers in their villages.”

The administration confirmed that the ban was imposed fearing threat to law and order in the district due to the gathering of thousands. “Though they were protesting peacefully the initial ten days at the mahapadav, they had planned to block the district collectorate on September 11 in thousands. To restrict their movement, internet was suspended in Sikar. During such situations, no one writes positive about the administration. We didn’t want to provide them a platform for spreading rumours that could have made the protestors violent. If there had been no internet ban that day, something big would have happened,” Jai Prakash Narayan, additional district collector and additional district magistrate, told 101reporters.

“Broadband was made working during the internet ban so that the private and government offices were not affected. While giving order for internet ban, it is made sure that normal call and broadband facilities are not debarred. General masses are affected but internet shutdown is the only option we have,” he added. “While their blockade continued for three days, we restricted internet services only for first 24 hours as the protest had gained stability till then.”

Even three months after the high-powered ministerial committee was formed to look into the farmers’ demand, nothing has been done. Now, they plan to stage a protest in February 2018 when the state assembly will be in function.

Former CPI(M) MLA Pema Ram says, “Preparation for February protest has already begun. Kisan Sansads are being organised in Sikar, where active farmers from each village participate to raise demands regarding implementation of the recommendations of the Swaminathan Commission report, a solution to the menace of stray cattle, complete farm loan waiver and pension for farmers. They then discuss it with other farmers in their villages.”

Pictures above: Apart from local news websites, local Facebook pages - Sikar Aapno, Sikar Sandesh, We love CPIM- Dhod and CPIM Sikar, etc. - were giving minute-by-minute updates of the farmers' protest. Pictures courtesy: Shruti Jain

(Shruti Jain is a Jaipur-based journalist and a member of 101Reporters.com, a pan-India network of grassroots reporters.)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/mobile-net-ban-during-peaceful-protest-leaves-farmers-confused

Mobile India 2016

praskrishna — 2016-01-13T14:26:50Z

COMSNETS in association with Department of Electronics and Information Technology, Digital India, et.al. organized the event in Bangalore from January 5 to 9, 2016. Sunil Abraham participated as a speaker in Session 4: Law, regulation and policy of App Economy.

Mobile India 2016 is one of the first premier events and will be the curtain raiser for the App Economy revolution in the country. It is associated with The Eighth International Conference on COMmunication Systems NETworkS (COMSNETS), the world's premier international conference on networking and communications technology innovation.

Theme: App Economy: Interplay between Telcos and OTTs

The App Economy in India has been jumpstarted by the new age start-ups, commonly referred to as “Over The Top (OTT)” players. Compass (2015) upgraded Bengaluru from #19 to #15 in its Global Start-up Ecosystem Ranking, much to the delight of all of us. The app economy and the traditional economy are overlapping to a greater extent. Apps are being integrated into many traditional activities ranging from grocery shopping to calling a cab, a trend that is rapidly spilling revenue from almost every industry in the higher revenue traditional economy into the app economy. It is expected that the spill-overs are greater in emerging countries such as India where there are substantial inefficiencies in the traditional industries. This has also caught the attention of funding agencies. While more than $4 billion was invested in start-ups in India in 2014, the meter is up to $1.5 billion in Q1 of 2015, indicative of the promise of this sector of the economy.

Simultaneously, the telecom, mobile and Internet infrastructure backbone that is required for the app economy is also gearing up. Nationwide 3G mobile service is available and year 2016 is expected to be the “Year of 4G mobile”. Mobile broadband subscriber base is touching 100 Million and continues to grow at a quarterly growth rate of more than 15%.

Hence the interplay between telcos and OTTs are very important to bolster the app economy. Meanwhile, the “Net Neutrality” debate is also peaking with the world watching our policy steps on this issue closely.

Mobile India 2016 will explore opportunities and challenges of the App Economy and the interplay between Telcos and OTTs in four sessions with all stakeholders in the ecosystem. For more info, click here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/mobile-india-2016

Mobile education comes to villages

praskrishna — 2011-05-30T05:49:27Z

PEOPLE living in remote villages, trekking many miles to schools and colleges before dropping out, can now look forward to a tech option — mobile education. Education over mobile phones is vital in India, where the literacy rate according to 2011 census is 74.04 per cent, observers note. This article by Shayan Ghosh was published in Mail Today on May 27, 2011.

India has 791 million mobile subscribers according to regulatory body TRAI with a significant share in villages. That is the target group several start- ups and educational institutions are looking at.

Indira Gandhi National Open University ( IGNOU) based in New Delhi, is taking a lead in the matter. “ The technology is pretty new in India and we are planning to implement things like SMS alerts to students and coursespecific databases,” K. R. Srivathsan, pro vice- chancellor, IGNOU, said.

"It will definitely change the scenario of education in rural India," noted Srivathsan.

"All possible components required in a learning cycle including auditory, visual, reading, writing, collaboration, interaction, recording and computing," Amit Zaveri, CEO, EnableM, a company that delivers education through mobile devices, said.

"In rural areas the challenges for delivery of learning content & services are many including physical distances ( to institutes etc.), lack of teachers, no or limited access to standardised & branded content, time & cost constraints, limited capability for peer assessments, lack of skills development facilities for employability," Zaveri added.

Mig33, a Singapore- based mobile social network is hopeful that the mobile revolution could actually mean impart education to all.

"Mobile phones have moved from being phone devices to communication devices. With the advent of 3G, this is going to become bigger and better.

Also tablets are expected to play very effective role in this," Mohit Gundecha, India operations head, Mig33, said.

"With 3G the video clips can help educate, smart apps can help people learn, good sms apps can engage audiences about education concepts. We already see a host of companies coming in to take care of the hardware aspects and digital content to match the need," Gundecha explained.

According to Vikram Nagaich, director and founder, InnovateEdu, on one side, with mobile phones the content the reach of the content could be very wide. However, the efficacy would have to be delivered through extremely innovative and sophisticated content.

"Mobiles can penetrate better as they have things in favour like better battery life and people do not need any training to operate it. This gives it an upper hand over computers," Sunil Abraham, ED, Center for Internet and Society, said.

The Tech Option

Education over mobile phones is vital in India, where the literacy rate according to the 2011 census is 74.04 per cent, observers note.

With a significant share in villages, this is the target group several start- ups and educational institutions are looking at Indira Gandhi National Open University ( IGNOU) based in New Delhi, is taking a lead in the matter.

In rural areas, challenges regarding delivery of learning content & services are many and include physical distances, lack of teachers, limited access to standardised content.

Mobile phones have moved from being phone devices to communication devices. With 3G, this is going to become better.

Read the original story here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/mobile-education-villages

Mobile Broadband: Leveraging for Business Transformation

praskrishna — 2013-01-15T08:40:21Z

Mobile India 2013 is being held at the Chancery Pavillion, Bangalore on 9 January 2013. Sunil Abraham is speaking at this event.

Mobile India 2013 is the one of the first premier conferences and will be the curtain raiser for Mobile Broadband revolution in the country. It is associated with The Fifth International Conference on COMmunication Systems NETworkS (COMSNETS), the world’s premier international conference on networking and communications technology innovation.

Keynote Speeches

Keynote - 1: Prof. Bhaskar Ramamurthi , Director, IIT Madras will deliver the joint keynote speech for COMSNETS 2013 and Mobile India 2013.
Keynote - 2 : Sanjay Nayak , Chief Executive Officer & Managing Director, Tejas Networks. Tejas Networks.

Mobile India 2013 will try to unravel the mysteries in the following sessions.

Session 1: Enterprises on the move

"For a preview, read http://yourstory.in/2012/12/enterprises-on-the-move/ "

Enterprises are exploring ways to leverage the power of smart devices, the cloud, and broadband to be agile, flexible, and productive. The IT managers in organizations are challenged to support variety of devices (viz. BYOD) within the organization, at the same time providing the required organizational security and performance support to the employees. This session will deliberate on the challenges and opportunities of today's networked world for enterprises on the move.

Panelists: Ashvin Vellody , Director - Management Consulting, KPMG India; Dr. K.K. Ramakrishnan , Distinguished Member of the Technical Staff, AT&T Labs Research, USA; Puneet Gupta , AVP and Head of Mobility Research, Infosys SET Labs; Sai Pratyush, Head-Enterprise Products, Tata Teleservices; E. Manikandan , Head-Channels and Alliances, Ramco Systems; Umesh Sachdev , Co-founder and CEO, Uniphore ; Yathish, L, N. , CTO, Huawei Technologies

Moderator: Swami Krishnan , VP and Head-Marketing, Sasken Communication Technologies

Session 2: Massively Open Online Education

"For a preview, read http://yourstory.in/2012/12/massively-open-online-education/ ".

Online and Internet based education has permeated in to schools and colleges today. Massively Open On-line Course (MOOC) initiatives such as National Programme on Technology Enhanced Learning (NPTEL) in India and those by leading institutions such as MIT and Stanford in the US are democratizing education and making it available globally over the Internet. In India, the Government has been an early adopter and both academia and industry have begun taking this initiative further. However, limited access to wired broadband and computers have restricted reach for providing online education. Can the ubiquitous mobile solve this problem?
In this session, experts will deliberate in detail on the opportunities and challenges in providing education through mobile networks and wireless devices. Are these scalable and monetizable? What are the implications for traditional educational methodologies? What are the transformations this will bring to the publishing industry?

Panelists: Dr. Gautam Shroff , VP and Chief Scientist, TCS; Srikanth B. Iyer , COO, Pearson Education Services; Rohit Kumar , MD, Elsevier India; Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, Centre for Internet and Civil Society; Arun Prabhudesai , CTO, myopencourses.com

Moderator: Prof. D. Manjunath , Professor, IIT Bombay

Session 3: Innovation Workshop

In the concluding session of the day, a workshop on mobile innovations will be conducted wherein several start-up firms will show case their unique innovations in the mobile space and share their experiences on ideation, fund mobilization, monetization models, and scale-up for sustainability.

Panelists: MintM ( Sachin Garg , Founder); Robots Alive ( Abheek Bose , Founder); Twaang
( Vishnu Raned , Founder); JanaCare , ( Sidhant Jena , Co-founder), AstralPad (Rahul Singh)
Moderator: Madanmohan Rao , Director-Research, Yourstory.in

Event Chairs

Dr. V. Sridhar (sridhar.varadharajan@sasken.com), Sasken Communication Technologies, India
S.R. Raja (rajaraghavan.setlur@sasken.com)

Register here for Mobile India 2013

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/mobile-india-2013

MLATs and the proposed Amendments to the US Electronic Communications Privacy Act

Vipul Kharbanda and Elonnai Hickok — 2016-12-28T01:09:34Z

In continuance of our blog post on mutual legal assistance treaties (MLATs), we examine a new approach to international bilateral cooperation being suggested in the United States, by creating a mechanism for certain foreign governments to directly approach the data controllers.

Published under Creative Commons License CC BY-SA. Anyone can distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon this document, even for commercial purposes, as long as they credit the creator of this document and license their new creations under the terms identical to the license governing this document.

In the previous article on MLATs we discussed, in some detail, what MLATs are and why they are needed. One area which was briefly focused upon in that article was the limitations and criticisms of the MLAT mechanism, of which one of the main criticisms being the problems caused due to different legal standards in various jurisdictions as well as the time taken to process a request for information sent from one country to another. Talking specifically about the United States, where most internet companies are headquartered and hold large amounts of data, it typically takes months to process requests under MLATs and foreign governments often struggle to comprehend and comply with the legal standards in the United States for obtaining data for use in their investigations.[1] The requirement that a foreign government should take permission from, and comply with the requirements of a foreign government simply because the data needed happens to be controlled by a service provider based in a foreign country strikes many foreign law enforcement officials as damaging to security and law enforcement efforts, especially when they are requesting data pertaining to a crime between two of their own citizens that primarily took place on their soil.[2]

These inefficiencies of the MLAT process lead to further problems of foreign governments attempting to apply their search and surveillance laws in an extraterritorial manner for example in 2014 the UK passed the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act, 2014 with gives the government the power to directly access data from foreign service providers if sought for specific purposes and the request is approved by the Secretary of State or other specified executive branch official.[3] Another response that may occur is if, frustrated by such inefficiencies of the existing systems, courts in foreign states start assuming extra territorial jurisdiction, as happened when a District Court in Vishakhapatnam restrained Google from complying with a subpoena issued by the Superior Court of California, ordering Google to share the password of the Gmail account belonging to an Indian citizen residing in Vishakhapatnam.[4]

Solution proposed in the United States

In order to overcome these inefficiencies, at least in the American context, the Department of Justice has proposed a legislation which seeks to make the process of foreign governments getting information from US based entities more streamlined by amending the provisions of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) of the United States (the “Amendment”). These amendments have been proposed primarily for the US and UK to effectuate a proposed bilateral agreement whereby the UK government will be able to approach US companies directly with requests for information without going through the MLAT process or getting an order from a US court.

The Amendment seeks to ensure that requests from foreign governments for information from US entities get answered in a smooth manner by including those requests in the process for seeking information under the ECPA itself. This move would no doubt, make it easier for foreign governments to access data in the US, but such a move can be criticized on the ground that it would then allow all states, irrespective of their legal standards of privacy, etc. to get access to such information. This problem has been overcome in the amendment by adding a new section to Title 18 which would allow the Attorney General, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State to certify to the Congress that the legal standards in the contracting state which is being given access to the mechanism under the ECPA satisfies certain requirements specified in the chapter (and discussed below). Only after such a certification has been received by the Congress, a contracting state would be able to receive the benefits sought to be granted under the Amendment.

It is important to note that the US administration is looking to use the US-UK Agreement as a standard to be followed for similar potential agreements with a number of other countries wherein the agencies in those countries could request information from US based entities through court orders through a properly specified legal framework. Though to our knowledge India has not been formally approached by the US government to enter into such an agreement, it is important to ask the question viz. if approached:

Does India's present legal system meet the standards laid down in the amendment to the ECPA?
And if they do, should India also seek to enter into such an Agreement with the United States?
And if India does, what could be the implications for citizens and for countries in a similar position as India?

We hope to be able to answer the above three questions, or at least throw some light on them, in the conclusion of this paper by relying upon the discussions contained herein.

Criticisms of the Amendment

While such a mechanism may be very effective in addressing the needs of security agencies in investigation and prevention of criminal activities, one cannot accept such an overarching change in cross border enforcement without analyzing the consequences that such a proposal will have on the right to privacy. Some of these consequences have been highlighted by experts responding to the amendment:

Lack of Judicial Authorisation: The Amendment requires that the foreign governments have a process whereby a person could seek post-disclosure review by an independent entity instead of a warrant by a court.[5] Although a court order is not the norm for interception even in Indian law, however under American law such protection is given to data held by American companies even though the data may belong to Indian citizens and this protection will no longer be available if the Amendment is passed.

Vague Standard for requests: Under the domestic law of any state there is usually a large amount of jurisprudence regarding when search orders can be issued, such as the “probable cause” standard that is followed in the United States or similar standards that may be followed in other jurisdictions. This ensures that even when the wording of the law is not precise, which it cannot be for such a subjective issue, there is still some amount of clarity around when and under what circumstances such warrants may be issued. In contrast, the Amendment requires that the orders be based on “requirements for a reasonable justification based on articulable and credible facts, particularity, legality, and severity regarding the conduct under investigation.” Although the language here may seem reasonable but in the absence of any jurisprudence backing it, it becomes very vague and susceptible to misuse. Disclosure without a Warrant: Under the current MLAT process as followed in the United States, a judge in the U.S. must issue a warrant based on probable cause in order for a U.S. company to turn over content to a foreign government. This requirement protects individuals abroad by requiring their governments to meet certain standards when seeking information held by U.S. companies. The Amendment seeks to remove this essential safeguard for a judicial warrant. The Amendment does not require requests from foreign governments to be based on a prior judicial authorization, since a large number of countries (including India) do not always require judicial orders for such orders.[6]

Allows Real Time Surveillance by Foreign Governments: American privacy rights activists have raised the concern that the Amendment would allow foreign governments to conduct ongoing surveillance by asking American companies to turn over data in real time. The requirements that the foreign governments would have to fulfill to execute such an order are less stringent than those which have to be fulfilled by the American security agencies if they want to indulge in similar activities. When the U.S. government wants to conduct real-time surveillance, it must comply with the Wiretap Act, which imposes heightened privacy protections.[7] The court orders for this purpose also require minimization of irrelevant information, are strictly time-limited, only available for certain serious crimes, etc.[8] In Indian law any such request, apart from being time limited and being available only for certain specified purposes, also has to satisfy that interception is the only reasonable option to acquire such information.

Process to determine which countries can make demands is not credible: Under the Amendment, the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, would decide whether the laws and practices of the foreign government adequately meet the standards set forth in the legislation for entering into a bilateral agreement. Their decisions would not be liable to be reviewed by a court or in any administrative procedure. They could make their determinations based on information which is not available to the public and the criteria for making the decision are vague and flexible. Further these criteria have been described as “factors” and not “requirements”[9] so that even if some of them are not satisfied, the certification process can still be completed.

Companies do not have the resources to determine if a request complies with the terms of the agreement: The Amendment does not provide any oversight to ensure that technology companies are only turning over information permitted in a specific bilateral agreement. For example, a bilateral agreement may permit disclosure of information only in response to orders that do not discriminate on the basis of religion, however, it may not be possible for the companies receiving the request to determine whether a particular request complies with that condition or not. The Amendment does not require that individual companies put in place requisite processes to weed out requests that may be non compliant with the provisions of the agreement; nor are there periodic audits to ensure that companies are properly responding to foreign government information requests.[10]

Non compliance with Human Rights Standards: Under international human rights law, governments are allowed to conduct surveillance only based on individualized and sufficient suspicion; authorized by an independent and impartial decision-maker; necessary and proportionate to achieve a legitimate aim, including by being the least intrusive means possible.[11] However the mechanism proposed by the Amendment falls woefully short of these standards.[12]

One must not lose sight of the fact that most of the criticisms of the proposal that have been discussed above have been made in the context of, and based on the standards of privacy protection that are available to American citizens. If we look at it from an Indian perspective most of those protections are not available to Indian citizens in any case since independent judicial oversight is not a sine qua non for access to information by the security agencies in India. Although the Amendment leaves open the question of how a request would be made by the foreign government to the individual Agreements, it may be safe to assume that were India to enter into such an Agreement with the United States, it would require the orders for access to comply with the standards laid down under Indian law before the relevant authorities send the request to the US based data controllers. At the least, this would ensure that the rights of Indian citizens currently guaranteed under Indian law, howsoever flawed they might be, would in all likelihood be safeguarded as per Indian law.

Certification from the Attorney General to the US Congress

In the above background if India were to enter into the agreement with the U.S Government apart from actually negotiating and signing that Agreement, the Indian government will also have to ensure (if the Amendment is passed) that the Attorney General of the United States, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State gives a certificate to the Congress that Indian law satisfies the requirements set forth in the proposed section XXXX of Title 18.

It must be kept in mind that if the negotiations between India and the United States in this regard reach such a mature stage that the certification from the Attorney General is required, then that would mean that there is enough political will on both sides to ensure that such an arrangement actually comes to fruition. In this context it would not be unfair to assume that the Attorney General may have a slight bias towards opining that Indian laws do conform to the requirements of the Amendment, as the Attorney General would want to support the decision taken by the administration, and our analysis shall have a similar bias in order to be more contextual.

The certification would, inter alia, contain the determination of the Attorney General:

That the domestic law of India affords robust substantive and procedural protections for privacy and civil liberties in light of the data collection and activities of the Indian government that will be subject to the agreement.It should be noted that the Amendment specifies various factors that should be taken into account to reach such a determination, which include whether the Indian government:

(i) has adequate substantive and procedural laws on cybercrime and electronic evidence, as demonstrated through accession to the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, or through domestic laws that are consistent with definitions and the requirements set forth in Chapters I and II of that Convention; Although India is not a signatory to the Budapest Convention the Information Technology Act, 2000 (which is the main legislation dealing with cybercrime) has penal provisions which have borrowed heavily from the provisions of the Budapest Convention.

demonstrates respect for the rule of law and principles of nondiscrimination;

The provisions of Article 14 as well as Article 21 of the Constitution of India demonstrates that the legal regime in India is committed to the rule of law and principles of non discrimination.

adheres to applicable international human rights obligations and commitments or demonstrates respect for international universal human rights (including but not limited to protection from arbitrary and unlawful interference with privacy; fair trial rights; freedoms of expression, association and peaceful assembly; prohibitions on arbitrary arrest and detention; and prohibitions against torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment);

India is a signatory to a number of international human rights conventions and treaties, it has acceded to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 1966, ratified the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), 1965, with certain reservations, signed the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), 1979 with certain reservations, Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 1989 and signed the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), 1984. Further the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution takes within its fold a number of human rights such as the right to privacy. Freedom of expression, right to fair trial, freedom of assembly, right against arbitrary arrest and detention are all fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India.

has clear legal mandates and procedures governing those entities of the foreign government that are authorized to seek data under the executive agreement, including procedures through which those authorities collect, retain, use, and share data, and effective of oversight of these activities;

India has a number of legislations which govern the interception and request for information such as the Information Technology Act, 2000, the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, etc. which put in place mechanisms governing the authorities and entities which can ask for information.

has sufficient mechanisms to provide accountability and appropriate transparency regarding the government’s collection and use of electronic data; and

The Right to Information Act, 2005 provides the citizens the right to access any public document unless access to the same is prohibited due to the specific exemptions provided in the Act. It may be noted here that the provisions of the Right to Information Act are often frustrated by the bureaucracy by using exceptions such as “national security”, but for the purposes of this write up we are already assuming a bias towards fulfillment of these factors/conditions and therefore as long as there is even some evidence of compliance, the conditions will be considered as fulfilled by the Attorney General for the purposes of his certificate.

demonstrates a commitment to promote and protect the global free flow of information and the open, distributed, and interconnected nature of the Internet.

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, which regulates telecom services in India has also issued the Prohibition of Discriminatory Tariffs for Data Services Regulations, 2016 which prohibits service providers from charging discriminatory tariffs for data services on the basis of content.

Other than Indian law, the certificate from the Attorney General will also have to certify certain issues which would have to be addressed in the bilateral agreement itself, viz.:

That the Indian government has adopted appropriate procedures to minimize the acquisition, retention, and dissemination of information concerning United States persons subject to the agreement.
That the agreement requires the following with respect to orders subject to the agreement:

(i) The Indian government may not intentionally target a United States person or a person located in the United States, and must adopt targeting procedures designed to meet this requirement;

(ii) The Indian government may not target a non–United States person located outside the United States if the purpose is to obtain information concerning a United States person or a person located in the United States;

(iii) The Indian government may not issue an order at the request of or to obtain information to provide to the United States government or a third-party government, nor shall the Indian government be required to share any information produced with the United States government or a third-party government;

(iv) Orders issued by the Indian government must be for the purpose of obtaining information relating to the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of serious crime, including terrorism;

(v) Orders issued by the Indian government must identify a specific person, account, address, or personal device, or any other specific identifier as the object of the Order;

(vi) Orders issued by the Indian government must be in compliance with the domestic laws of India, and any obligation for a provider of an electronic communications service or a remote computing service to produce data shall derive solely from Indian law;

(vii) Orders issued by the Indian government must be based on requirements for a reasonable justification based on articulable and credible facts, particularity, legality, and severity regarding the conduct under investigation;

(viii) Orders issued by the Indian government must be subject to review or oversight by a court, judge, magistrate, or other independent authority;

(ix) Orders issued by the Indian government for the interception of wire or electronic communications, and any extensions thereof, must be for a fixed, limited duration; interception may last no longer than is reasonably necessary to accomplish the approved purposes of the order; and orders may only be issued where that same information could not reasonably be obtained by another less intrusive method;

(x) Orders issued by the Indian government may not be used to infringe freedom of speech;

(xi) The Indian government must promptly review all material collected pursuant to the agreement and store any unreviewed communications on a secure system accessible only to those trained in applicable procedures;

(xii) The Indian government must segregate, seal, or delete, and not disseminate material found not to be information that is, or is necessary to understand or assess the importance of information that is, relevant to the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of serious crime, including terrorism, or necessary to protect against a threat of death or seriously bodily harm to any person;

(xiii) The Indian government may not disseminate the content of a communication of a U.S. person to U.S. authorities unless the communication (a) may be disseminated pursuant to Section 4(a)(3)(xii) and (b) relates to significant harm, or the threat thereof, to the United States or U.S. persons, including but not limited to crimes involving national security such as terrorism, significant violent crime, child exploitation, transnational organized crime, or significant financial fraud;

(xiv) The Indian government must afford reciprocal rights of data access to the United States government;

(xv) The Indian government must agree to periodic review of its compliance with the terms of the agreement by the United States government; and

(xvi) The United States government must reserve the right to render the agreement inapplicable as to any order for which it concludes the agreement may not properly be invoked.

Conclusion

It is clear from the discussion above that the proposed Amendment is a controversial piece of legislation which will affect the way law enforcement is carried out in the internet. While there is no doubt that proposing an alternate mechanism to the existing inefficient MLAT structure is definitely the need of the hour, whether the mechanism proposed in the proposed Amendment, with all the negative implications on privacy, is the right way forward is far from certain.

As for the three questions that we had sought out to answer in the beginning of this paper, we would not like to say that Indian law definitely conforms to all the requirements listed in the Amendments, but it can safely be said that it appears that if the governments of India and the United States so wish, it would not be difficult for the Attorney General of the United States to be able to give a certification to the Congress as required in the proposed Amendment.

The other two questions as to whether India should try to opt for such an arrangement if given a chance and what would be the consequence for its people are somewhat related, in the sense that it is only by examining the consequences on its citizens that we will arrive at an answer as to whether India should opt for such an arrangement or not. The level of protections offered to Indian citizens under India law in terms of protection of their private data from government surveillance is lower than that which is offered to American citizens under American law. The growing influence of the internet is changing the citizen-state dynamic giving rise to increasing incidents where the government has to approach private actors for permission in order to carry out their governmental functions of providing security. This is because more and more private data of individual citizens is being uploaded on to the internet and controlled by private actors such as telecom companies, social media sites, etc. and the governments have to approach these private actors in case they want access to this information. The fact that the government has to approach private actors to get access to data gives private citizens some leverage to ask for better privacy protections in the context of state surveillance.

Although this proposed Amendment may not affect the local surveillance laws in India, however it would definitely have an effect on the way that citizens’ data is protected and accessed by the government.

[1] Explanation by the Assistant Attorney General attached to the proposed Amendment.

[2] https://www.justsecurity.org/24145/u-s-u-k-data-sharing-treaty/

[3] https://www.justsecurity.org/24145/u-s-u-k-data-sharing-treaty/

[4] http://spicyip.com/2012/04/clash-of-courts-indian-district-court.html

[5] https://www.justsecurity.org/32529/foreign-governments-tech-companies-data-response-jennifer-daskal-andrew-woods/

[6] https://www.aclu.org/letter/aclu-amnesty-international-usa-and-hrw-letter-opposing-doj-proposal-cross-border-data-sharing

[7] https://www.aclu.org/letter/aclu-amnesty-international-usa-and-hrw-letter-opposing-doj-proposal-cross-border-data-sharing

[8] https://www.justsecurity.org/32529/foreign-governments-tech-companies-data-response-jennifer-daskal-andrew-woods/

[9] https://www.justsecurity.org/32529/foreign-governments-tech-companies-data-response-jennifer-daskal-andrew-woods/

[10] https://www.aclu.org/letter/aclu-amnesty-international-usa-and-hrw-letter-opposing-doj-proposal-cross-border-data-sharing

[11] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 17, Dec. 19, 1966, U.N.T.S 999, cf. https://www.aclu.org/letter/aclu-amnesty-international-usa-and-hrw-letter-opposing-doj-proposal-cross-border-data-sharing

[12] https://www.aclu.org/letter/aclu-amnesty-international-usa-and-hrw-letter-opposing-doj-proposal-cross-border-data-sharing

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/mlats-and-the-proposed-amendments-to-the-us-electronic-communications-privacy-act

Mixed signals? Supreme Court notices to states on Facebook arrests

praskrishna — 2013-08-28T08:42:56Z

In wake of the recent arrests of UP-based scholar Kanwal Bharti and Andhra-based PUCL activist Jaya Vindhyala over their Facebook posts, NDTV aired a discussion on the grey areas of the IT Act. Pranesh Prakash, Shreya Singhal and Faizal Farooqui

The video was published by NDTV on August 16, 2013. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.

The NDTV anchor asked Pranesh that this notice — the indicator coming from the government is that nobody seems to really know what section 66A is all about...and at the end of the day we are going to make a case by case decision.

Pranesh said that:

"This not just about 66A. This is actually about rule of law. We see that the arrest of Kanwal Bharti is actually a legal arrest. It goes against a judgment of the Allahabad High Court saying that routine arrests shouldn't be made in cases where the imprisonment term is less than 7 years. He actually hasn't been charged under 66A, he was charged under the IPC. It is not just about Internet censorship. It also very much about the rule of law and that completely breaking down in India and ... people's persectives and government's perspectives many times are withering away when it comes offensive content or what they deem offensive or communal content being posted online...and if something like what Kanwal Bharti posted is actually deemed to be illegal under those provisions then lots of statements that the Prime Minister of India has said should also be deemed to be equally illegal."

Watch the full video below:

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/ndtv-the-social-network-mixed-signals-supreme-court-notices-to-states-on-facebook-arrests