You are here  Software Security Software

Big Brother's accomplice

Thursday 28 June 2001 04:20
EU trading partners could shun the UK over its role in the Echelon monitoring system

W hen I first wrote about the disquieting report on political control prepared by the Omega Foundation and presented to the European Parliament's Scientific and Technical Options Assessment panel two years ago, one of the most disconcerting revelations was the likely existence of the global monitoring network called Echelon.

Since then, much has happened - not least because many others have been disturbed by what the report revealed and further hinted at. Indeed, many politicians within the European Union - outside the UK, of course, since the UK is deeply implicated in the Echelon system - have called for more information on this top-secret activity and measures to limit its effect on EU citizens.

This has led to the preparation of an official report by the European Parliament's Temporary Committee on the Echelon Interception System. For an interim version click here. It is a fascinating document, and should be read by anyone involved with online security issues - in other words, all those conducting business over the Internet.

Although it is only tangentially about the interception of Net-based communications, it provides an excellent primer on this and other kinds of eavesdropping. One of its chief values lies in establishing beyond doubt the existence of the Echelon system - something that the US government to this day still has the effrontery to deny.

The report is also valuable because it puts fears about total monitoring systems in a sensible and well-researched context. It emphasises two important points.

First, it seems likely that the current Echelon system is already overloaded in terms of routine searches for suspicious terms - "bomb", "drugs" etc - and hence is vulnerable to the systematic use of random noise words in messages to overwhelm its automatic keyword detection systems. The regular use of even low-grade encryption will further blunt the power of this approach.

The second point brought out by the report is that the US authorities can spy on European data networks at an acceptable cost only with the connivance of European governments.

What makes this relevant is the UK's Regulation of Investigatory Powers (RIP) Act, which was passed last year. As I reported at the time, this basically grants the UK Government disproportionate powers to eavesdrop on data transmissions in the UK. Combined with the routine swapping of confidential information between Echelon spying partners, a further pernicious aspect of the RIP Act emerges: it essentially provides Echelon with just the foothold in Europe that it needs to spy on those in the UK.

This affects not only UK nationals. Any data passing through the UK will be vulnerable to US analysis thanks to Echelon. Ironically, this may prove the downfall of the Echelon system in its present form. The European Union is rightly concerned about information about European nationals being passed to the US spy masters.

There seem likely to be two important consequences. First, the UK will become even more of an e-pariah: European companies will naturally be reluctant to set up subsidiaries here if their data flows will be vulnerable and potentially subject to US analysis.

More importantly, the EU is likely to demand that the UK decides exactly whom it regards as its main working partners. It is not possible for the UK Government to deliver up confidential commercial information about its European trading partners to the US authorities and still be regarded as part of the core European club.

The current political context, where issues of European integration are well to the fore, means that the appearance of this report, even in its provisional form, is an important event. Whatever happens on the European front, it seems certain that the old-boy spy network known as Echelon will never be the same again.


Glyn Moody