We are anonymous, we are legion

If you thought India is a country where freedom of speech and expression are fundamental rights, think twice!

praskrishna — 2015-04-04T15:52:42Z

Having contributed significantly in growing pollution and corruption indices, there's one place where India seems to hold the top spot is: imposing restrictions on social media contents. There have been over 5,800 restriction requests recorded in the second half of 2014, as per Facebook's Government Requests Report.

The article was published in Business Insider on March 17, 2015. Pranesh Prakash was quoted.

Economic Times has reported that data and content restrictions across the globe are on the rise and India seems to have topped the list. The content restrictions from India have been constantly on the rise—it rose to 5,832 from 4,960 in the first half.

Things are not any different across the globe. "The amount of content restricted for violating local law increased by 11% over the previous half, to 9,707 pieces of content restricted, up from 8,774," said Monika Bickert, Facebook's head of global policy management, and Chris Sonderby, deputy general counsel, in a statement on the social networking website.

Other countries from where Facebook has observed an increased number of content restrictions requests are Turkey and Russia. Surprisingly, FET reported that the number of content restriction requests from Pakistan came down to 54 in the second half of 2014 from 1,773 in the first half.

It is worth noting that India is the second largest market for Facebook, with 112 million users until last year, second only to the United States. While these figures are alarming, counsel for the Software Freedom Law Centre told ET , "...it would have been better if Facebook had also given us more information on the kind of data that was being asked for. Now we only have consolidated figures. So what kind of data was asked for, that would have been more useful."

Pranesh Prakash, policy director at the Centre for Internet and Society, on the other hand, feels that the number of content restriction requests is not only high on an absolute number, but even on a per-user basis.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/business-insider-march-17-2015-if-you-thought-india-is-a-country-where-freedom-of-speech-and-expression-are-fundamental-rights-think-twice

India tops list of content restrictions requests, says Facebook

praskrishna — 2015-04-03T17:01:53Z

India has again topped the list of content restriction requests in the second half of 2014 with over 5,800 requests recorded in Facebook's Government Requests Report released on Sunday.

The article by Neha Alawadhi was published in the Economic Times on March 17, 2015. Pranesh Prakash gave his inputs.

"Overall, we continue to see an increase in government requests for data and content restrictions. The amount of content restricted for violating local law increased by 11% over the previous half, to 9,707 pieces of content restricted, up from 8,774," said Monika Bickert, Facebook's head of global policy management, and Chris Sonderby, deputy general counsel, in a statement on the social networking website.

Facebook saw a rise in content restriction requests from countries like Turkey and Russia, while requests from countries like Pakistan came down. The number of content restriction requests from Pakistan came down to 54 in the second half of 2014 from 1,773 in the first half. The number of content restriction requests from India rose to 5,832 from 4,960 in the first half.

India has been the top requestor for content restrictions in the past one and a half years, and the number of these requests and for user account data from the country have consistently been on the rise.

Facebook said that while the number of government requests for user account data remained relatively flat in the six-month period, there was an increase in data requests from "governments such as India, and decline in requests from countries such as the United States and Germany".

India made 5,473 requests for user account data in the six months ending December 2014, second only to the United States, which made 14,274 requests in the same period. About 45% of the requests made by India led to Facebook producing some data, according to the report, while 79% of the requests made by the US were complied with.

"Of course, the figures are alarming... But it would have been better if Facebook had also given us more information on the kind of data that was being asked for. Now we only have consolidated figures. So what kind of data was asked for, that would have been more useful," said counsel for the Software Freedom Law Centre.

India is the second largest market for Facebook, with 112 million users until last year, second only to the United States. According to Pranesh Prakash, policy director at the Centre for Internet and Society, "the number of content restriction requests are not only high on an absolute number, but even on a per-user basis".

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/economic-times-march-17-2015-neha-alawadhi-india-tops-list-of-content-restrictions-requests-says-facebook

What Does Facebook's Transparency Report Tell Us About the Indian Government's Record on Free Expression & Privacy?

pranesh — 2015-04-05T05:08:37Z

Given India's online population, the number of user data requests made by the Indian government aren't very high, but the number of content restriction requests are not only high on an absolute number, but even on a per-user basis.

Further, Facebook's data shows that India is more successful at getting Facebook to share user data than France or Germany. Yet, our government complains far more about Facebook's lack of cooperation with Indian authorities than either of those countries do. I think it unfair for any government to raise such complaints unless that government independently shows to its citizens that it is making legally legitimate requests.

Since the Prime Minister of India Shri Narendra Modi has stated that "transparency and accountability are the two cornerstones of any pro-people government", the government ought to publish a transparency report about the requests it makes to Internet companies, and which must, importantly, provide details about how many user data requests actually ended up being used in a criminal case before a court, as well as details of all their content removal requests and the laws under which each request was made.

At the same time, Facebook's Global Government Requests Report implicitly showcases governments as the main causes of censorship and surveillance. This is far from the truth, and it behoves Facebook to also provide more information about private censorship requests that it accedes to, including its blocking of BitTorrent links, it's banning of pseudonymity, and the surveillance it carries out for its advertisers.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/what-does-facebook-transparency-report-tell-us-about-indian-government-record-on-free-expression-and-privacy

Roundtable on ICANN Accountability

praskrishna — 2015-04-03T16:54:41Z

The roundtable was organised by the Department of Electronics and Information Technology (DeitY), National Internet Exchange of India and Centre for Communication Governance, National Law University, Delhi at the Indian International Centre, New Delhi on 13 March 2015. Geetha Hariharan participated in the roundtable.

Timings	Programme
10.00 10.30	Welcome Address by Chimayi Arun, Research Director, Centre for Communication Governance at National Law University, Delhi
10.30 10.40	Introductory Remarks by Dr. Ajay Kumar (IAS) Joint Secretary, DeitY
10.45 11.15	Session I: NTIA IANA Functions' Stewardship Transition
13.15 14.30	Lunch
14.30 16.30	Session II: Accountability and Transparency at ICANN
16.30	Tea

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/roundtable-on-icann-accountability

Cybersecurity and the Internet of Things

praskrishna — 2015-03-13T02:14:59Z

US Consulate Chennai formally Invite you for a talk by David F.Heyman on March 19, 2015 in Hotel Atria, Palace Road, Bangalore. The event is being organized by the US Consulate, Chennai, Cyber Security & Privacy Foundation (CSPF) and the Centre for Internet & Society (CIS).

Note: Please register to come to the event, if you are not attending please inform us.

David Heyman, former Assistant Secretary for Policy at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and retired Software Engineer Reimagining and Transforming Cities, Governments, and Lives with the Internet of Things For the first time in human history more people live in cities than anywhere else.

By 2050 three-fourths of the world’s population will live in cities. As more and more people move to cities, more of the world’s challenges, from emerging infectious diseases, crime, economic growth, and environmental degradation, will be concentrated in cities. Citizens will expect and demand more from their leaders; and governments will face greater pressure to provide services better, faster, cheaper to more and more, potentially with less and less resources.

More than any other force driving change over the horizon, the Internet of Things (IoT) holds the potential to connect and infuse devices, business assets, infrastructures, and other elements of a city with greater intelligence and efficiencies to drive a new era of innovation and performance. And yet, this potential is juxtaposed against a backdrop of an explosion in cybercrimes and threats facilitated by the increased linkages between the physical and cyber world that is at the heart of IoT, and which affords malicious actors anywhere in the world the potential to disrupt services and lives on a far more consequential level than ever before.

In his remarks, David Heyman, former Assistant Secretary for Policy at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and retired software engineer, will discuss the extraordinary potential of the IoT, the barriers to adoption, and how governments and businesses can navigate this new frontier, work together, and re-imagine and transform cities—and nations—for tomorrow.

David F. Heyman

David F. Heyman has over two decades of experience as a leader in spurring innovation, risk management, and strategy development in the public and private sector. He is a leading expert in national security and international affairs, counterterrorism, cybersecurity, building resilience, and critical infrastructure protection, with broad experience in the U.S., Europe, Middle East and Asia. Heyman’s career includes service at the highest levels of the U.S. government, working in senior positions at the White House, the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, as well as in the private sector.

Most recently, Heyman concluded five years of service as Assistant Secretary of Policy (operating as an Under Secretary equivalent) at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). As a member of the senior management team at DHS, Heyman was responsible for the Department’s strategic planning, risk and decision analysis, policy development, and thought leadership across all five departmental mission areas: counterterrorism, border security, immigration,
cybersecurity, and building resilience to disasters. During his tenure, Heyman helped transform the Department from a budget-driven to a strategydriven organization, and instituted an enterprise risk-management architecture for managing the Department’s $60 billion budget. He oversaw and initiated the Department’s largest expansion in global engagement, and in this role, led efforts to build new strategic partnerships with the World Customs Organization, the World Economic Forum, and some of the most consequential and complicated geopolitical relationships facing the United Stated today, including China, India, the European Union, and others. Heyman designed and launched multiple domestic, bilateral, and global initiatives to bolster U.S. security and prosperity. He was the chief architect of the nation’s first National Strategy for Homeland Security—the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review—which elevated and established cyber security and building national resilience as core homeland security missions. He led efforts around five Presidential Initiatives
to: empower communities to counter violent extremism; strengthen global supply chain security; expand travel and tourism to the United States; streamline and modernize the U.S. import and export system; and develop and implement a new perimeter approach to North American Security which resulted in the Beyond the Border Initiative signed by President Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Carper.

He led the creation of the Resilient STARTM program and the Rick Rescorla National Award for Resilience, and is wellknown for drafting the policy to eliminate the color-code Homeland Security Advisory System and replace it with a more disciplined National Terrorism Advisory System, now used by the U.S. government. Previously, Heyman founded and directed the Homeland Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), one of the nation’s leading and most influential think tanks in international security and taught security studies and science and technology policy as an adjunct professor at Georgetown University. Heyman also served as a senior advisor to Energy Secretary Bill Richardson and oversaw development and implementation of a number of energy, infrastructure and technology initiatives, including leading and establishing a new portfolio approach to manage DOE’s $7 billion in research and development (R&D) investments.

Earlier in his career, Heyman was a senior policy advisor in national security and international affairs at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), and was responsible for providing science, technology, and foreign policy advice to the President’s Science Advisor and the Vice President’s National Security Advisor. Before entering government, Heyman worked for nearly a decade as a computer systems software engineer, and head of international operations for a firm developing and deploying industrial automation, robotics, and supply-chain management systems for Fortune 100 companies. Heyman holds a Bachelor’s degree in biology from Brandeis University and a Master’s in international relations and economics from the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, where he graduated with the highest level of distinction. He is currently a member of the Aspen Homeland Security Strategy Group, Aspen’s U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue, and serves as co-chair of its Cyber Task Force.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/events/talk-on-cybersecurity-and-internet-of-things

Uploaded and blocked, a daylong battle rages on the web over BBC documentary

praskrishna — 2015-03-10T02:37:04Z

It was a daylong tussle between uploads and takedowns. Netizens kept uploading the controversial BBC documentary, 'India's Daughter', on video-sharing websites even as several of them were blocked within hours on Thursday. By 9pm, the hour-long film had been removed from at least four locations on YouTube. One of them had already gathered over 1.04 lakh views by then. The documentary which deals with the December 16 Nirbhaya rape case was still available on another video-sharing website, dailymotion.com, where two of three such uploads even had an advertisement preceding the video. It could also be seen on vimeo.com, another video-sharing service.

The article by Kim Arora was published in the Times of India on March 6, 2015. Rohini Lakshane is quoted.

Around 4.30pm, the video on the channel "Game Pundits" titled 'India's Daughter: Indian rapist BBC Documentary Delhi Nirbhaya Full HD' was removed by YouTube. It instead carried the message: "This content is not available on this country domain due to a court order." The video here had gathered over 3,500 views.

By late evening, the video uploaded from an account by the name of Robin Kankerwal was taken down, displaying the same message. On channels "7thave" and "Kate Bevan" the videos were taken down over a copyright violation claim by BBC itself.

A YouTube spokesperson told TOI over email: "While we believe that access to information is the foundation of a free society, and that services like YouTube help people express themselves and share different points of view, we continue to remove content that is illegal or violates our community guidelines, once notified."

With the rising crescendo of the debate around the documentary, experts point to what is known as the "Streisand effect" on the internet, which is, the attempt at censoring or hiding something leading to increased discussion and exposure of the subject. #IndiasDaughter was among the top trends on both Facebook and Twitter on Thursday.

"My research shows that such content is virulently shared online and offline—through peer-to-peer sharing networks, popular messaging services such as WhatApp, through DVDs, through video-sharing and file-sharing websites. Even when it is taken down from the place where it was first posted, it stays on in assorted web archives and caches. The usual methods of weeding out web search results and directing ISPs to block URLs are mostly ineffectual. There is an indelible digital footprint," says Rohini Lakshane, a researcher at Bangalore-based Center for Internet Society.

The online discussion around the film centered along three threads. There were those who wanted it made freely available and the rapists publicly shamed, those who wanted it to not be aired for fear of giving a rapist an international platform, and others who pointed to the complex legal problems associated with the convicted rapist's interview since his appeal is still pending before the SC.

The top rated comment on Bevan's YouTube video was by one Tushar Lall, who wrote: "I'm from India...They've banned this documentary. I'm sure this will get taken down really soon. I might not be able to watch it again. But thanks to you, [name withheld]'s story is out there." Dhirajj Kumar wrote: "I don't kno y dis documentary is ban on air. India hav right to know, wat rapist think abt girl. thanks bbc (sic)."

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/times-of-india-march-6-2015-uploaded-and-blocked-a-daylong-battle-rages-on-web-over-bbc-documentary

Vox Pol Workshop on the Role of Social Media and Internet Companies in Responding to Violent Online Extremism

praskrishna — 2015-04-03T15:51:08Z

On March 5-6, 2015, the VOX-Pol network convened a workshop at Central European University in Budapest on the role of social media and internet companies in responding to violent online political extremism and the impacts on freedom of expression.

Elonnai Hickok attended the workshop. More details can be accessed here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/vox-pol-workshop-on-the-role-of-social-media-and-internet-companies-in-responding-to-violent-online-extremism-5-6-march-budapest

CONNECTing the Dots: Options for Future Action

praskrishna — 2015-04-01T15:31:45Z

Conference on UNESCO’s Internet Study: access, free expression, privacy and ethics.

Elonnai Hickok participated in the conference organized by UNESCO on 3 and 4 March 2015 in Paris. The programme focused on topics like:

Freedom of Expression
Access and Ethics
Privacy and Ethics
Access and Freedom of Expression
Access and Privacy
The Internet Ecosystem and UNESCO's role - which options for future action?

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/connecting-the-dots-options-for-future-action

[···]

kaeru — 2025-11-19T17:19:28Z

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

SC reserves judgement in cases against Section 66A

praskrishna — 2015-03-08T15:08:00Z

The verdict will have far reaching consequences on civil liberties and right to freedom of speech on the Internet.

The article by Shreeja Sen was published in Livemint on February 26, 2015. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.

The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its judgment in cases involving multiple challenges to certain provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and so-called guidelines for intermediaries.

The verdict will have far reaching consequences on civil liberties and right to freedom of speech on the Internet. One of the cases is a public interest litigation filed by Shreya Singhal, after two Mumbai-based girls were arrested for criticising on a social media platform the city’s shutdown following the death of Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray.

A bench of justices J. Chelameswar and Rohinton F. Nariman has heard 10 cases in all that challenge Section 66A (which punishes sending offensive messages through a communication service), intermediary guidelines under Section 79 of the IT Act, and Section 69A, which allows the central government to block “information” for “public access” over a “computer resource” if the same is “in the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India, defence of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign states or public order or for preventing incitement”.

In the court, the government, which made it clear it was not taking an adversarial position, said through additional solicitor general Tushar Mehta that the laws had to interpreted in a way so that they would serve the purpose it was meant for without jeopardising free speech. Some of the petitioners claimed that Section 66A definitely infringes on the right to free speech. “I can’t presume to know the minds of the judges and I will not do so.

But I find it very disappointing that the Narendra Modi government with ministers like Arun Jaitley, who had argued against Section 66A and the intermediary guidelines under Section 79, are now defending them,” said Pranesh Prakash, policy director at think-tank Centre for Internet Society.

“Second, that given the line of questioning the court has taken, the arguments adduced in court and based on our research on 66A, 69A and intermediary guideline rules under 79, which ought to be called Internet censorship rules according to me, it is amply clear that these provisions are unconstitutional.” Ideally, Prakash said, the government should redraft the law, with inputs from legal experts, academics, civil society organizations and technologists.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/livemint-shreeja-sen-february-26-2015-sc-reserves-judgment-in-cases-against-section-66a

Delhi government in consultation with Centre to block Uber's Internet address

praskrishna — 2015-03-09T02:12:15Z

The Delhi transport department has started consultation with the central government to block the internet address of taxi hailing app Uber if the San Francisco-based startup does not obtain a radio taxi licence to ply its cabs in the national capital.

The article by Harsimran Julka was published in the Economic Times on February 25, 2015. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.

Blocking Uber's IP will mean the company's website and mobile phone application will no longer be accessible in India, effectively shutting down operations in a country which the startup estimates is its largest market outside the United States.

Uber has operations across 10 cities in India with over 10,000 cabs registered on its platform."We have initiated a process with the central government to block (Uber's) IP address in India if the company doesn't abide by law," said a senior official in the Delhi transport department.

Uber and other taxi app companies were banned from operating in Delhi after the alleged rape of a passenger by a driver on the Uber network in December 2014. Subsequently, the transport department modified radio taxi laws and directed Uber and rivals OlaCabs and Taxiforsure to obtain licences to operate legally in the city. While Ola has obtained a licence, Uber, which terms itself as a technology company and not a transport provider, has been demanding that it be regulated under the Information Technology Act. "There has to be an end to the matter somewhere," said the official quoted above. The department has given Uber time until February 25 to submit a revised application for a radio taxi licence.

"We are waiting to see if they comply and apply for a licence before issuing a written request (to block the IP address),' said a second official who confirmed that the transport department had already begun discussions with the department of IT. Zubeda Begum, the standing counsel for the Delhi government is likely to submit an affidavit on Wednesday in the Delhi High Court on the method to be adopted to block the IP address.

The court, which is hearing the case of the alleged rape, had raised the issue of banning IP addresses of taxi app companies after the state government complained that the companies continued to ply in the national despite the ban.

"It is the central government which will have to block the website. The Delhi government just has to make a request," Begum told ET.

Pawan Duggal, cyber law expert and a Supreme Court advocate, said that the blocking of websites in India can be done under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act but the rules to get them unblocked are unclear.

"A court order may be needed to get it unblocked," said Duggal.

A spokeswoman for Uber said the company will continue to work with the authorities and is "evaluating the perceived deficiencies in the time period provided to us by the government."

This is not the first time that the website of a foreign company will be banned in India. Last December, about 32 websites including SourceForge, Archive, Vimeo, Dailymotion were banned on grounds of national security. Uber itself has had its IP address blocked in countries such as Spain. Last December, a Madrid Court ordered Spain's telcos to block access to Uber.

"Any state government department can request the designated authority to block a website. The authority has to then forward the request to a committee, which takes the decision," said Pranesh Prakash, at the Centre for Internet and Society in Bengaluru.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/economic-times-harsimran-julka-february-25-2015-delhi-government-in-consultation-with-centre-to-block-ubers-internet-address

Hacking of SIM card by spy agencies raises fears of sensitive documents being leaked

praskrishna — 2015-03-09T01:31:39Z

The hacking of SIM-card and digital security services provider Gemalto by American and British spy agencies has raised fears that sensitive communications, by the Indian government and hundreds of domestic companies, may have been at the risk of being spied on.

The article by PK Jayadevan and Neha Alawadhi was published in the Economic Times on February 25, 2015. Pranesh Prakash and Sunil Abraham were quoted.

The Netherlands-based Gemalto was jointly hacked by the US National Security Agency and Britain's Government Communications Headquarters, and encryption keys were stolen to monitor mobile communications, according to a news report published last week.

India's largest telecom vendors including Airtel, Vodafone and Idea Cellular use SIM cards supplied by Gemalto, the world's biggest maker of mobile-phone chips and provider of secure devices such as smart cards and tokens. Online publisher The Intercept in its report named Idea Cellular as one of the networks from which the spy agencies accessed encryption keys.

"Phone calls and text messages by military, government, diplomats, spy corporations and by ordinary citizen of India - all of those get affected by this hack," said Pranesh Prakash, Policy Director at research and advocacy firm Centre for Internet and Society.

The Intercept, which accessed top secret documents provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, said American and British spies dug into the private communications of Gemalto engineers and other employees to steal encryption keys.

Gemalto provides security services such as two-factor authentication and access management, and has hundreds of clients in India. The company in 2012 said it provided 25 million e-driver's licences and vehicle registration certificates in India that let the government "consolidate driver and vehicle registration information across the population in a central repository".

"We believe that the biggest risk stands for the large number of Vodafone users in the country as the company has deployed Gemalto's Near Field Communication services solutions to provide secure and convenient 'wave and pay' contactless transactions via mobile phone," said Sanchit Vir Gogia, Chief Analyst and Group CEO, Greyhound Research.

"We have no further details of these allegations, which are industry-wide in nature and are not focused on any one mobile operator. We will support industry bodies and Gemalto in their investigations," said a Vodafone spokesperson in an email response.

Emails to Idea and Airtel were unanswered till the time of going to Press.

"Indian operators typically go for cheaper Chinese vendors that are anyway low on security. Among the European SIM vendors, Gemalto has the largest share in India," said a senior mobile services executive, requesting anonymity.

The report on the hack comes at a time when Gemalto was looking to tap the Indian market, including e-governance initiatives. The company in a recent email to ET said it had plans to expand its center of excellence in India to develop multiple products, offer tech support and provide security solutions for the domestic market.

"We take this (breach) very seriously and will devote all resources necessary to fully investigate and understand the scope of such highly sophisticated attacks to obtain SIM card data," a Gemalto spokesperson said. "The target was not Gemalto, per se - it was an attempt to try and cast the widest net possible to reach as many mobile phones as possible."

Initial investigations indicate that SIM products as well as banking cards, passports and other products and platforms are secure, the company said. Gemalto is expected to announce the results of its investigation on Wednesday. British and US spy agencies have been under fire for hacking and spying on citizens after Snowden in mid-2013 began leaking documents that revealed massive surveillance programmes by the two governments. At the time, the Indian government said the NSA was only collecting meta-data and had no access to the actual contents of phone calls or text messages.

Experts suggest a multinational consensus or treaty that strikes a balance between national security concerns and privacy.

"Governments will have to debate this in the United Nations and some kind of rules for surveillance, maybe treaties, are relevant in the future," said Kamlesh Bajaj, Chief Executive at Data Security Council of India. "They shall have to have some kind of a limit to surveillance. They can't be vacuuming all data in the name of finding a needle in the haystack."

Sunil Abraham, Executive Director at Center for Internet and Society, suggested the Indian government should replace proprietary operating systems and Android on phones with pure free software projects, use of virtual private network on phones to carry voice and data traffic, and encrypt voice and data payloads separately.

"When it comes to all the other services provided by Gemalto, the India government should insist that they will do key management on their own. This will also mitigate the compromise of Gemalto's enterprise networks by the NSA," he said.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/economic-times-jayadevan-pk-neha-alawadhi-february-25-2015-hacking-of-sim-card-by-spy-agencies-raises-fears-of-sensitive-documents-being-leaked

Right to Information (RTI) Requests to BSNL and MTNL Regarding Security Equipment

maria — 2015-02-25T15:04:56Z

As part of research, on July 2, 2013, the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) had sent Right to Information (RTI) requests to two of the largest internet service providers (ISPs) in India: Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL) and Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) requesting answers to some questions.

Answers to the following questions were requested:

Please list the companies from which MTNL/BSNL has bought all its security equipment.
What type of security equipment does MTNL/BSNL use to assist Indian law enforcement agencies in detecting and preventing crime, terrorism and all other illegal activity? Please provide the certification for all such equipment.
What malware does MTNL/BSNL test for? What does MTNL/BSNL use for testing malware in its networks?
Which proxy server does MTNL/BSNL use and is it used for filtering data? If so, what type of data is being filtered and for what purpose? Is authorisation required and if so, by whom?
Does MTNL/BSNL use FinFly ISP? If so, who authorises its use and under what conditions?

M. K. Sheda, the appellate authority of MTNL, responded to the above questions on August 3, 2013 with the following answers:

MTNL procures all its equipment through an open competitive bidding process and the details of all past tenders are available on the MTNL website. Equipment from multiple vendors are operational in GSM MTNL Packet-Core Network and specific names cannot be given due to security reasons.
MTNL uses the security equipment by the Department of Telecommunications, Government of India, to assist Indian law enforcement agencies. The details cannot be disclosed as the information is classified as "secret" as per MTNL IT Policy Revision 2.0 and also comes under Section -8 (1) (a) and (d) of the RTI Act 2005.
MTNL GSM Packet Core equipment for data access uses MTNL ISP as its interface with external entities. Thus information is pertaining to MTNL ISP and hence a reply may please be taken from the GM (Broadband) unit.
Same answer as "3" above.
Same answer as "3" above.

BSNL has still not responded to the above questions.

Click below to download the respective files:

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/rti-requests-to-bsnl-mtnl-regarding-security-equipment

Reply to RTI Applications filed with respect to Foreign Contractors and Vendors of IT and Telecommunication Enterprises

Lovisha Aggarwal — 2015-02-25T14:13:52Z

An RTI application was filed by the Sh. Matthew Thomas on August 06, 2014 enquiring about the details of the foreign contractors and vendors of certain Information Technology and Telecommunication enterprises. Mr. Mathews in his application asked some specific questions.

Information sought in the RTI Application

The specific questions asked are as follows:

1. Names, addresses in India and abroad of all their contractors and vendors who are foreign firms, even if they have registered offices in India.

2. Permission to inspect files pertaining to subject matter.

3. Details of the orders placed in each of the past 3 or more years on each of their contractors and details of the orders placed in each of the past 3 or more years on each of their contractors where the amount is for Rs. 50 crore or more.

Enterprises to which the RTI Application was addressed

The application was sent to the following enterprises:

1. Department of Electronics & Information Technology, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, Government of India

2. Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, Government of India

3. Information Technology Branch, Department of Food, Supplies & Consumer Affairs, Government of NCT of Delhi

4. Centre for Development of Telematics (C-DOT) - an Indian Government owned telecommunications technology development centre which designs and develops digital exchanges and intelligent computer software applications.

5. Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC) - a research and development organization under the Department of Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India.

6. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (BSNL) - an Indian state-owned telecommunications company. It is India's oldest and largest communication service provider.

Reply to the RTI Application

The reply to the information sought in the RTI application by these enterprises is as follows:

1. Department of Electronics & Information Technology, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, Government of India

The RTI application was addressed to the Deputy Director of the department who forwarded the application to the Joint Director directing him to provide the requisite information directly to the applicant or transfer the application to the concerned Central Public Information Officers (CPIOs) if the subject matter did not pertain to his division. In response, the Joint Director of the Department of Electronics & Information Technology said that the information on the subject matter was NIL as far as Engineering/BM section, Fire, Security and Protocol Sections of Department of Electronics and Information Technology is concerned.

2. Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, Government of India

The RTI application was forwarded by the Deputy Secretary & Nodal Officer (RTI) of the Department of Telecommunications to the following divisions for providing the requisite information directly to the applicant or transferring the application to the concerned Central Public Information Officers (CPIOs) if the subject matter did not pertain to their division and their replies are as under:-

a. Investment Promotion Cell: The Director (IP Cell) & CPIO said that no information was available as the subject matter of the application did not pertain to IP Cell.

b. Access Services-I Division: Director (AS-I) & CPIO asked to treat the information as NIL.

c. Licensing Finance - II Branch: Director (IF-II) & CPIO asked to treat the information as NIL as the matter did not pertain to that branch.

d. Licensing Finance - III Branch: Director (IF-III) & CPIO asked to treat the information as NIL as the matter did not pertain to that branch.

e. Deputy Wireless Adviser: CPIO & Deputy Wireless Adviser to the Govt of India of WPC Wing, SACFA Sectt. said that the information sought was not available with that PlO.

3. Information Technology Branch, Department of Food, Supplies & Consumer Affairs, Government of NCT of Delhi

The Public Information Officer (HQ) of the Information Technology Branch of Department of Food, Supplies & Consumer Affairs forwarded the RTI application to Assistant Commissioner (Policy), Food and Supplies Department and Public Information Officer (HQ), Food and Supplies Department to provide the Para wise information directly to the applicant in accordance with section 5(4) of RTI Act as the record related to the information sought was said to be available with their office. Section 5(4) of RTI Act reads, "The Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, may seek the assistance of any other officer as he or she considers it necessary for the proper discharge of his or her duties." However, a reply hasn't been received from the Assistant Commissioner (Policy), Food and Supplies Department and Public Information Officer (HQ), Food and Supplies Department yet.

4. The Centre for Development of Telematics

Referring the information sought in the RTI application as vague, the Centre for Development of Telematics asked the applicant to clearly define the information requirements and the period for which it required. The Centre claimed that the information sought at present would lead to handing over of a large amount of data which would require application of significant resources of public authority, since the number of the vendors and contractors could be more than seven hundred in numbers of different categories, namely, component vendors, equipment suppliers, administrative service contractors, etc. The reply was in consistency with section 7(9) of the Right to Information Act which reads, "An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question."

5. Centre for Development of Advanced Computing

The Centre for Development of Advanced Computing disregarded the information sought by the applicant and observed that theinformation sought was vague in nature, not specific and open ended, therefore, could not be termed as Information under the RTI Act without providing any further explanation in this regard.

6. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (BSNL), Government of India Enterprise

The RTI application was referred to the MM cell of BSNL by the AdditionaI General Manager (MIS) & CPIO of BSNL (RTI Cell) who replied that no information with respect to the names, addresses in India and abroad of all their contractors and vendors who are foreign firms, even if they have registered offices in India was available. As far as the third question regarding details of the orders placed in each of the past 3 or more years on each of their contractors and details of the orders placed in each of the past 3 or more years on each of their contractors where the amount was for Rs. 50 crore or more was concerned, the AGM of MM cell said that the information could be provided for specific contractor.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/reply-to-rti-applications-with-respect-to-foreign-contractors-and-vendors-of-it-and-telecommunication-enterprises

Google's war on nude photos goes against user rights

praskrishna — 2015-03-09T01:57:59Z

Yesterday, Google announced that starting March 23, 2015 users will be unable to share sexually explicit content on its blogging platform -- Blogger.

The article by Sahil Mohan Gupta published by India Today on February 25, 2015 quotes Sunil Abraham.

In a country like India, such content generally causes a 'storm in teacup' this move might be welcomed, however, experts say that it goes against the tenets of free speech.

Interestingly, Google is not alone, but all the major Internet players indulge in such draconian practices. Facebook cracks down on sexually explicit content on its platform while Apple also does not allow any app that has anything close to pornography on its iOS app store.

The bigger issue is that these companies allow anything when they are in the process of attracting users, but turn turtle the moment they attain a level of stickiness with their user-base. Their U-turns are often on frivolous grounds, which go against the very tenets of freedom of speech and human rights.

Sunil Abraham, the executive director of The Center of Internet and Society tells IndiaToday.in that legally big Internet companies like Google are well within their rights to make such modifications.

"According to US and Indian law they 'can' censor as per their own terms of use which is based on contract law," explains Abraham.

"Unfortunately, most of the networked public sphere has been privatized by near monopolies. They are able to use contract law to clamp down on human rights," he adds.

There, however, is light at the end of the tunnel. According to Abraham, the only way states can guarantee human rights is by treating these intermediaries like utilities with narrow exceptions through regulations.

That said, this approach is not without risks and advises extreme caution. "Unfortunately, this will reduce the agile innovation that these near-monopolies contribute to our information society," says Abraham.

Alternatively, increased competition and amendments to contract law will also help in curtailing the ability of companies like Google, Facebook, Apple, and Microsoft to deny user rights.

In the past, Apple notoriously blocked Pulitzer Prize winner Mark Fiore's app on the App Store. It was reportedly making editorial calls on the content of the app.

"We've reviewed NewsToons and determined that we cannot post this version of your iPhone application to the App Store because it contains content that ridicules public figures and is in violation of Section 3.3.14 from the iPhone Developer Program License Agreement which states:

Applications may be rejected if they contain content or materials of any kind (text, graphics, images, photographs, sounds, etc.) that in Apple's reasonable judgment may be found objectionable, for example, materials that may be considered obscene, pornographic, or defamatory," replied an Apple iPhone developer program representative to Fiore while rejecting his app.

The Electronic Frontier Federation (EFF), which is a non-profit organization that helps defend digital rights feels Apple's App store policies are outrageous and bad for both developer and users alike. Due to this, it has not even released an iOS app.

Google for its part right now claims, " We'll still allow nudity if the content offers a substantial public benefit, for example in artistic, educational, documentary, or scientific contexts." However, there is no reason why it could not have a change of heart.

The new rules also mean that now Google will not only act as a platform owner but also an entity that will decide what is art and what is good public taste.

Facebook, the dominant force in the sphere of social networking, has been for years criticized for its draconian policies regarding terms of use. It is also known to clampdown on freedom of speech.

Last year, even Twitter cracked down on explicit sexual Vines. Though Twitter allows users to share explicit content if they properly mark such content as sensitive.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/india-today-february-25-2015-sahil-mohan-gupta-google-war-on-nude-photos-goes-against-user-rights