The following are excerpts from an article by Helene Fouquet and Marie Mawad, dated 24 February 2019, under the headline "Huawei Frightens Europe's Data Protectors. America Does, Too." (Begin excerpts) A foreign power with possible unbridled access to Europe’s data is causing alarm in the region. No, it’s not China. It’s the U.S. As the U.S. pushes ahead with the “Cloud Act” it enacted about a year ago, Europe is scrambling to curb its reach. Under the act, all U.S. cloud service providers from Microsoft and IBM to Amazon -- when ordered -- have to provide American authorities data stored on their servers regardless of where it’s housed. With those providers controlling much of the cloud market in Europe, the act could potentially give the U.S. the right to access information on large swaths of the region’s people and companies. The U.S. says the act is aimed at aiding investigations. Some people are drawing parallels between the legislation and the National Intelligence Law that China put in place in 2017 requiring all its organizations and citizens to assist authorities with access to information. The Chinese law, which the U.S. says is a tool for espionage, is cited by President Donald Trump’s administration as a reason to avoid doing business with companies like Huawei Technologies Co. “I don’t mean to compare U.S. and Chinese laws, because obviously they aren’t the same, but what we see is that on both sides, Chinese and American, there is clearly a push to have extraterritorial access to data,” Laure de la Raudiere, a French lawmaker who co-heads a parliamentary cyber-security and sovereignty group, said in an interview. “This must be a wake up call for Europe to accelerate its own, sovereign offer in the data sector.”.... The Cloud Act (or the “Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act”) addresses an issue that came up when Microsoft in 2013 refused to provide the FBI access to a server in Ireland in a drug-trafficking investigation, saying it couldn’t be compelled to produce data stored outside the U.S. The act’s extraterritoriality spooks the European Union -- an issue that’s become more acute as trans-Atlantic relations fray and the bloc sees the U.S. under Trump as an increasingly unreliable ally.... A Dutch lawmaker at the European Parliament, Sophie in ’t Veld, recently expressed frustration at what she called the EU’s “enormous weakness” in the face of the U.S.’s “unlimited data hunger.” “Because of the Cloud Act, the long arm of the American authorities reaches European citizens, contradicting all EU law,” she said. “Would the Americans accept it if the EU would grant itself extraterritorial jurisdiction on U.S. soil? And would the Commission also propose negotiations with Russia or China, if they would adopt their own Russian or Chinese Cloud Act?".... The Cloud Act was enacted just weeks ahead of Europe’s data-protection law, the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, which states that all businesses that collect data from EU citizens have to follow the bloc’s rules, which could put the two laws at odds.... “The more we dig into the Cloud Act, the more worrying it is,” said ANSSI chief Guillaume Poupard. “It’s a way for the U.S. to enter into negotiations... but it has an immediate extraterritorial effect that’s unbearable.”... “No one can accept that a foreign government, even the American one, can come fetch data on companies stored by a U.S. company, without warning and without us being able to respond,” Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said in a speech on Feb. 18. France has been more vociferous in its opposition to the Cloud Act because its companies have borne the brunt of other extraterritorial U.S. laws. In 2014, BNP was slapped with an $8.97 billion U.S. fine for transactions with countries facing American sanctions. French oil company Total SA walked away from a $4.8 billion project in Iran after Trump pulled out of its nuclear deal. One consequence of the Cloud Act is that European companies and organizations will start looking for local alternatives. Europe’s phone operators, many of whom are already being steered away from Huawei, see the act making providers from the U.S. a threat, too.... (End excerpts) Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ens-europe-s-data-protectors-america-does-too
Well, at least this should mean we stop hearing Progressives and Europeans stop talking about Trump and his weariness of China.
That's according to the US. According to the EU, it's citizens are protected by the GDPR law. And them companies can be fined when they share their data up to 4% of their world wide turnover. Being hacked is no excuse even.
Well, our intelligence agencies were misused against Trump, which means they can be misused against anyone, and Huawei is really a threat. COMMUNIST FRONT CORPORATION: How Microsoft found a Huawei driver that opened systems to attack. Given Huawei’s track record, the really interesting part of the story might be what Microsoft didn’t find, and what Huawei didn’t then “fix.”
Like most of these types of laws, I can see how its reasoning is valid. Like most of these types of laws, I can see how easily it could be abused. The only way I can see around this that could make both sides happy is to set up a mechanism for US authorities to bring their warrant to the country in question to quickly and secretly compel the data they are looking for. This method still gives the US access to the data, and gives Europeans an added layer of security to prevent abuses.
i dont think using the across the pond warrant is going to work since as another poster stated, europe is moving towards more private data policy. i believe this is headed to big court case.
Oh yes they were. And if they can misuse them against Trump, they can misuse them against you and me. This needs to be drug out into the open and the guilty among them held to account at the fullest extent of the law. They spied on the Trump Campaign for at least 2 years and maybe more. Dirty Bob Mueller, once push came to shove has been forced to admit that there was no criminal collusion and I'm sure he knew that within weeks of taking over the FBI investigation. By the time Mueller was appointed on May 17, 2017, the FBI had been trying unsuccessfully for nearly a year to corroborate the phony dossier’s allegations and top bureau officials admitted under oath to congressional investigators that they were never able to do so – even though by the time of Mueller’s appointment, the Justice Department and FBI had relied on the dossier three times, in what they labeled “VERIFIED” applications, to obtain warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. In each and every application, after describing the hacking operations carried out by Russian operatives, the Justice Department asserted: The FBI believes that the Russian Government’s efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election were being coordinated with Page and perhaps other individuals associated with [Donald Trump’s] campaign. The Corrupt Justice Department Holdovers continued to make that allegation to the secret federal court for months after Trump was sworn in as president. In June 2017, about a month after Mueller took over the investigation, while he was still getting his bearings, the Corrupt Justice Department and the FBI Holdovers repeated these lies for a 4th time for a 4th illegal FISA warrant, using the same unverified information, swearing for a 4th time that it was verified, corroborated and completely trustworthy. For yet a 4th time they withheld from the court the fact that this information was generated by the Crooked Hillary campaign; that the Crooked Hillary campaign was peddling it to the media at the same time the FBI was providing it to the court; and that Christopher Steele, the informant on whom they were so heavily relying, had openly lied to the bureau about his media contacts. By August 2017, Dirty Bob Mueller had removed the lead investigator, Scummy Snarling Peter Strzok over the rabidly anti-Trump texts he’d exchanged with "Happy Horndog" Page, a top FBI lawyer who served as McCabe’s counsel. Happy Horndog Page resigned in May. The FBI reassigned its top counsel, James Baker (who later resigned); and the bureau’s inspection division referred Lying Jim McCabe to the Justice Department’s inspector general for leaking investigative information and then lying about it (Lying Jim McCabe was later fired and referred to the Justice Department for possible prosecution). So, but the fall of 2017 when it would have been time to go back to the court and reaffirm the phoney dossier’s lies of a Trump-Russia espionage conspiracy, the major FBI officials involved in placing those unverified allegations before the court had been sidelined and/or summarily fired for misconduct. Now fully up to speed after four months of running the investigation, Mueller decided not to renew these allegations, and we both know why. He wasn't going to put his name to this blizzard of lies and commit a fraud on the FISA court like our counter-intelligence agencies had 4 times previously. Dirty Bob Mueller by this time surely knew that there was NOTHING to this blizzard of lies. Once the fourth warrant lapsed in September, investigators made no new claims of a Trump-Russia conspiracy to the court. The collusion case was built on Crooked Hillary Campaign’s Steele dossier, and by the fall of 2017, the investigators now in charge of the Trump-Russia investigation were unwilling to stand behind it. The 4 FISA warrant applications all falsely swore that there was probable cause to believe former Trump adviser Carter Page was an agent of Russia. Under FISA law, that requires swearing that he was knowingly involved in clandestine activity on behalf of Russia, and that this clandestine activity involved probable violations of American criminal law – offenses such as espionage. 4 times our counter-intelligence swore this false oath backed up by separately sworn “verified” applications that were in no sense verified. Dirty Bob Mueller never charged Page with a crime – not espionage, not false statements, nothing. Dirty Bob Mueller has known for at least a year and half that there was zero collusion case. He has known for at least a year and half that there was no probable cause to believe that the Trump Campaign had engaged in a criminal conspiracy with the Kremlin. Yet this rotten bastard made no announcement, no interim finding of no collusion, as Trump detractors continued to claim that a sitting American president might be a tool of the Putin regime. For month after month, the president was forced to govern under a cloud of suspicion. WHY? No Nads Nadler and Shiftless Schiff are calling for Dirty Bob to testify under oath before Congress, I join them in these calls. Dirty Bob has some explaining to do.
Nope. Collusion was and remains a real concern based on the available facts. Where are the lies you say were involved? The only lies I see are those emanating from Trump on a regular basis, and of course from members of his campaign (and they've been getting convicted and/or entering into plea deals for telling those lies).
