Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by johndhi 15 days ago
This is such a dumb topic to me - and I work closely to this issue. The blog post talks about criminal surveillance and gag order possibilities - but has no examples of these being meaningfully applied. Eu govt also spies on citizens.

Obviously the true political point is the geopolitical security risk of depending on another country. There's some truth there but really all countries depend on all others and the way to balance it is to use and grow the trading leverage you do have, not trying to shore up your weaknesses.
1 comments
pacaro 15 days ago
The EU's "E-Evidence framework" allows authorities in any member state to compel entities doing business in any part of the EU to produce and/or preserve communications data, completely by-passing cross-border barriers.

_e.g._ Victor Orban could have wiretapped any communication within the EU. Supporter by an EU directive

link
traceroute66 15 days ago
> Victor Orban could have wiretapped any communication within the EU. Supporter by an EU directive

Don't spread such bullshit FUD.

The E‑Evidence package contains multiple legal and procedural safeguards:

    1. Judicial authorisation
    2. Scope limits
    3. Proportionality and necessity tests
    4. Channels for challenge and review
    5. Data-protection rules
    6. Natinoal enforcements and remedies
Cross-border orders must be issued as European Production Order (EPO) or European Preservation Order (EPO‑PR).

The Regulation defines what can be optained and when. And wiretapping (i.e. content and traffic) is striclty limited to serious offences. Blanket mass surveillance is EXPLICITLY NOT POSSIBLE.

A judge is required for sensitive categories, e.g. wiretapping. And factual grounds must be provided demonstrating necessity.

The Regulation EXPLICITLY requires that orders be necessary and proportionate for criminal investigation

The member state where the service provider (or its EU representative) is established is notified when an EPO/EPO‑PR is sent, giving an additional oversight channel and the enforcing authority a role in examining objections.

The CJEU remains a backstop on top of national authorities.

link