{"id":8679,"date":"2018-09-22T12:00:02","date_gmt":"2018-09-22T19:00:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/?p=8679"},"modified":"2020-08-06T10:43:00","modified_gmt":"2020-08-06T10:43:00","slug":"big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/","title":{"rendered":"Top court rules UK mass interception of fiber-optic cable traffic violates the right to privacy: a victory, but how big?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Five years have passed since Edward Snowden\u2019s revelations<\/a> about the scale of surveillance by the US and UK shocked the world. Things have gone rather quiet on that front now, partly because there have been few new releases of documents from the Snowden hoard. But in the background, many privacy groups have been quietly working away, using the information released by Snowden to hold governments to account. One of those efforts has just come to fruition: the European Court of Human Rights<\/a> has ruled that the UK\u2019s use of mass surveillance, as revealed by Snowden, violates the fundamental right to privacy.<\/p>\n

The case concerned some of the earliest documents from the Snowden leaks. They disclosed that the UK was routinely tapping into a large proportion of the fiber-optic cables<\/a> that criss-cross the world carrying data traffic. With refreshing honesty, Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), the UK\u2019s equivalent of the US NSA, named these surveillance programs \u201cMastering the Internet\u201d and \u201cGlobal Telecoms Exploitation\u201d.<\/p>\n

According to The Guardian article that broke the story: \u201cEach of the cables carries data at a rate of 10 gigabits per second, so the tapped cables had the capacity, in theory, to deliver more than 21 petabytes a day\u201d. GCHQ was able to spy on around a quarter of the world\u2019s cables carrying Internet traffic<\/a>, much of it from the US. Back in 2013, the Guardian reported that 300 analysts from GCHQ, and 250 from the NSA, had been assigned to sift through the flood of data. Once intercepted, the UK government uses \u201cselectors\u201d and \u201csearch criteria\u201d to filter the content and \u2013 even more problematically \u2013 metadata it collects. These searches typically include finding all traffic to and from a particular location; Google search queries; purchases on Amazon; location data; and IP addresses.<\/p>\n

All the intercepted data was placed in a single, massive database<\/a>, code-named \u201cKarma Police\u201d. As The Intercept reported in 2015, drawing on other documents from Snowden:<\/p>\n

One system builds profiles showing people\u2019s web browsing histories. Another analyzes instant messenger communications, emails, Skype calls, text messages, cellphone locations, and social media interactions. Separate programs were built to keep tabs on \u201csuspicious\u201d Google searches and usage of Google Maps.<\/p>\n

The surveillance is underpinned by an opaque legal regime that has authorized GCHQ to sift through huge archives of metadata about the private phone calls, emails, and internet browsing logs of Brits, Americans, and any other citizens \u2014 all without a court order or judicial warrant.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The initial legal challenge to this warrantless \u201cbulk interception\u201d \u2013 that is, mass surveillance \u2013 was made in July 2013 at the UK Investigatory Powers Tribunal<\/a> (IPT). The IPT is \u201ca court which investigates and determines complaints which allege that [UK] public authorities or law enforcement agencies have unlawfully used covert techniques and infringed our right to privacy, as well as claims against the security and intelligence agencies for conduct which breaches a wider range of our human rights.\u201d The complaint was made by human rights organization Privacy International, along with nine other non-governmental organizations from around the world, including the American Civil Liberties Union.<\/p>\n

However, in December 2014, the IPT held that both UK bulk interception and UK access to US bulk surveillance were lawful in principle. As a result, the ten human rights organizations filed an application to the European Court of Human Rights<\/a> (ECtHR) challenging both of these decisions. The ECtHR has now issued its judgment, which is long and detailed<\/a>. Privacy International has provided a good summary of the key points<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The ECtHR ruled that mass surveillance is not in itself a breach of human rights: it falls within a state\u2019s \u201cmargin of appreciation in choosing how best to achieve the legitimate aim of protecting national security\u201d. However, the lack of adequate oversight for GCHQ\u2019s tapping of fiber-optic cables and analysis of the data it gathered, was<\/i> a breach of human rights. The ECtHR was \u201cnot persuaded that the safeguards governing the selection of bearers [fiber-optic calbes] for interception and the selection of intercepted material for examination are sufficiently robust to provide adequate guarantees against abuse.\u201d It also emphasised that what was \u201cOf greatest concern, however, is the absence of robust independent oversight of the selectors and search criteria used to filter intercepted communications.\u201d<\/p>\n

Importantly, the court recognized that metadata can be even more revealing about our private lives than content, and criticized the lack of safeguards for its gathering and use by GCHQ. These flaws in the UK mass interception law led the judges to conclude it \u201cis incapable of keeping the \u2018interference\u2019 [with privacy] to which is \u2018necessary in a democratic society\u2019.\u201d<\/p>\n

The ECtHR went on to criticize the lack of safeguards when intercepting and searching journalistic material. As a result, the Court said a blanket power to interfere with journalists\u2019 communications, including with their sources, could have a broader \u201cchilling effect \u2026 on the freedom of the press.\u201d However, on one point the court sided with the UK government. It ruled that the intelligence sharing between the US and UK was compliant with the right to privacy.<\/p>\n

The judgment concerned the UK\u2019s Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, which was replaced by the Investigatory Powers Act 2016, as Privacy News Online reported at the time<\/a>. However, the two laws have much in common, and legal commentators believe that many of the points made by the ECtHR would also apply to the later law, which will need to be revised to comply with the ruling. Similarly, it\u2019s worth noting that this judgment is not just about the UK: it also provides interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights<\/a> for the 47 member States of the Council of Europe, all of which are parties to the Convention. This means that they should all be reviewing their surveillance laws to ensure they are compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.<\/p>\n

Although the ruling does not affect US citizens directly, the fact that GCHQ has been gathering Internet traffic worldwide, and sharing it with the NSA, means that there should in the future be greater oversight of such surveillance, and thus better privacy protection when people in the US go online.<\/p>\n

All of these are welcome consequences of the ruling by the ECtHR. However, in an analysis of the latest decision<\/a>, Theodore Christakis, Professor of International Law at the University Grenoble Alpes, cautions: \u201cThis was undoubtedly a victory for NGOs, but it was probably not a \u201cgreat\u201d one; in fact, it may even prove to be a pyrrhic victory.\u201d The problem is that for all its unequivocal criticisms of GCHQ\u2019s actions, the ECtHR explicitly accepts mass surveillance as a valid government activity: \u201cIt is clear that bulk interception is a valuable means to achieve the legitimate aims pursued, particularly given the current threat level from both global terrorism and serious crime.\u201d<\/p>\n

As Christakis points out, that is in stark contrast to the EU\u2019s top court, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), which has ruled against<\/i> the idea of mass surveillance. For example, in the 2015 decision that struck down the \u201cSafe Harbor\u201d agreement<\/a> regulating data flows of personal information across the Atlantic, the CJEU declared: \u201clegislation permitting the public authorities to have access on a generalised basis to the content of electronic communications must be regarded as compromising the essence of the fundamental right to respect for private life.\u201d<\/p>\n

The clash between the rulings of the top human rights court in Europe, and the CJEU means that the status of mass surveillance in the EU is now somewhat unclear. That\u2019s another good reason for human rights organizations to bring legal challenges to the practice wherever it is being deployed, in order to ensure that \u201cbulk interception\u201d is always subject to laws with meaningful oversight, and that privacy is not being undermined in secret.<\/p>\n

Featured image by TeleGeography<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Five years have passed since Edward Snowden\u2019s revelations about the scale of surveillance by the US and UK shocked the world. Things have gone rather quiet on that front now, partly because there have been few new releases of documents from the Snowden hoard. But in the background, many privacy groups have been quietly working … Continue reading “Top court rules UK mass interception of fiber-optic cable traffic violates the right to privacy: a victory, but how big?”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":20,"featured_media":8680,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_stopmodifiedupdate":false,"_modified_date":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1,130],"tags":[544,200,159,182,125,611,537],"class_list":["post-8679","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","category-governments","tag-cjeu","tag-eu","tag-gchq","tag-mass-surveillance","tag-metadata","tag-safe-harbor","tag-snowden"],"yoast_head":"\nTop court rules UK mass interception of fiber-optic cable traffic violates the right to privacy: a victory, but how big?<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Five years have passed since Edward Snowden's revelations about the scale of surveillance by the US and UK shocked the world. Things have gone rather\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Top court rules UK mass interception of fiber-optic cable traffic violates the right to privacy: a victory, but how big?\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Five years have passed since Edward Snowden's revelations about the scale of surveillance by the US and UK shocked the world. Things have gone rather\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"PIA\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/privateinternetaccess\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-09-22T19:00:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-08-06T10:43:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/sub-cables.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1303\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"685\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Glyn Moody\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@http:\/\/twitter.com\/glynmoody\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@buyvpnservice\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Glyn Moody\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Glyn Moody\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/99ba810662cdf92245f61106c0c29775\"},\"headline\":\"Top court rules UK mass interception of fiber-optic cable traffic violates the right to privacy: a victory, but how big?\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-09-22T19:00:02+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-08-06T10:43:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/\"},\"wordCount\":1311,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/sub-cables.png\",\"keywords\":[\"cjeu\",\"EU\",\"gchq\",\"mass surveillance\",\"metadata\",\"Safe Harbor\",\"snowden\"],\"articleSection\":[\"General Privacy News\",\"Governments\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/\",\"name\":\"Top court rules UK mass interception of fiber-optic cable traffic violates the right to privacy: a victory, but how big?\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/sub-cables.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-09-22T19:00:02+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-08-06T10:43:00+00:00\",\"description\":\"Five years have passed since Edward Snowden's revelations about the scale of surveillance by the US and UK shocked the world. Things have gone rather\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/sub-cables.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/sub-cables.png\",\"width\":1303,\"height\":685},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Top court rules UK mass interception of fiber-optic cable traffic violates the right to privacy: a victory, but how big?\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"PIA\",\"description\":\"Online privacy news from around the world.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Private Internet Access\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/pialogowhitekglogo.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/pialogowhitekglogo.png\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":1200,\"caption\":\"Private Internet Access\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/privateinternetaccess\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/buyvpnservice\",\"https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/piavpn\/\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UClyJZ47Rizb1xnwuKXDI0_w\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/99ba810662cdf92245f61106c0c29775\",\"name\":\"Glyn Moody\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/220b7317aa40ea679b23b79c368761eb6fd45039d978354b06dc7683a812d2fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/220b7317aa40ea679b23b79c368761eb6fd45039d978354b06dc7683a812d2fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Glyn Moody\"},\"description\":\"Glyn Moody is a freelance journalist who writes and speaks about privacy, surveillance, digital rights, open source, copyright, patents and general policy issues involving digital technology. He started covering the business use of the Internet in 1994, and wrote the first mainstream feature about Linux, which appeared in Wired in August 1997. His book, \\\"Rebel Code,\\\" is the first and only detailed history of the rise of open source, while his subsequent work, \\\"The Digital Code of Life,\\\" explores bioinformatics - the intersection of computing with genomics.\",\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/opendotdotdot.blogspot.com\/\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/in\/glynmoody\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/http:\/\/twitter.com\/glynmoody\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/author\/glynmoody\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Top court rules UK mass interception of fiber-optic cable traffic violates the right to privacy: a victory, but how big?","description":"Five years have passed since Edward Snowden's revelations about the scale of surveillance by the US and UK shocked the world. Things have gone rather","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Top court rules UK mass interception of fiber-optic cable traffic violates the right to privacy: a victory, but how big?","og_description":"Five years have passed since Edward Snowden's revelations about the scale of surveillance by the US and UK shocked the world. Things have gone rather","og_url":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/","og_site_name":"PIA","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/privateinternetaccess\/","article_published_time":"2018-09-22T19:00:02+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-08-06T10:43:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1303,"height":685,"url":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/sub-cables.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Glyn Moody","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@http:\/\/twitter.com\/glynmoody","twitter_site":"@buyvpnservice","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Glyn Moody","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/"},"author":{"name":"Glyn Moody","@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/99ba810662cdf92245f61106c0c29775"},"headline":"Top court rules UK mass interception of fiber-optic cable traffic violates the right to privacy: a victory, but how big?","datePublished":"2018-09-22T19:00:02+00:00","dateModified":"2020-08-06T10:43:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/"},"wordCount":1311,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/sub-cables.png","keywords":["cjeu","EU","gchq","mass surveillance","metadata","Safe Harbor","snowden"],"articleSection":["General Privacy News","Governments"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/","url":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/","name":"Top court rules UK mass interception of fiber-optic cable traffic violates the right to privacy: a victory, but how big?","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/sub-cables.png","datePublished":"2018-09-22T19:00:02+00:00","dateModified":"2020-08-06T10:43:00+00:00","description":"Five years have passed since Edward Snowden's revelations about the scale of surveillance by the US and UK shocked the world. Things have gone rather","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/sub-cables.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/sub-cables.png","width":1303,"height":685},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/big-win-top-court-rules-uk-mass-interception-violates-the-right-to-privacy\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Top court rules UK mass interception of fiber-optic cable traffic violates the right to privacy: a victory, but how big?"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/","name":"PIA","description":"Online privacy news from around the world.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#organization","name":"Private Internet Access","url":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/pialogowhitekglogo.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/pialogowhitekglogo.png","width":1200,"height":1200,"caption":"Private Internet Access"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/privateinternetaccess\/","https:\/\/x.com\/buyvpnservice","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/piavpn\/","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UClyJZ47Rizb1xnwuKXDI0_w"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/99ba810662cdf92245f61106c0c29775","name":"Glyn Moody","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/220b7317aa40ea679b23b79c368761eb6fd45039d978354b06dc7683a812d2fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/220b7317aa40ea679b23b79c368761eb6fd45039d978354b06dc7683a812d2fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Glyn Moody"},"description":"Glyn Moody is a freelance journalist who writes and speaks about privacy, surveillance, digital rights, open source, copyright, patents and general policy issues involving digital technology. He started covering the business use of the Internet in 1994, and wrote the first mainstream feature about Linux, which appeared in Wired in August 1997. His book, \"Rebel Code,\" is the first and only detailed history of the rise of open source, while his subsequent work, \"The Digital Code of Life,\" explores bioinformatics - the intersection of computing with genomics.","sameAs":["http:\/\/opendotdotdot.blogspot.com\/","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/in\/glynmoody\/","https:\/\/x.com\/http:\/\/twitter.com\/glynmoody"],"url":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/author\/glynmoody\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8679","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/20"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8679"}],"version-history":[{"count":21,"href":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8679\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":29232,"href":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8679\/revisions\/29232"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/8680"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8679"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8679"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.privateinternetaccess.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8679"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}