V

viewpoints

DOI: 10.1145/1461928.1461940

Privacy and Security
international
communications Surveillance

Aren’t we all foreigners when our Internet traffic transits through other countries and is subject to regional intelligence-gathering policies?

When yoU SenD email, do you know through which countries your communication will be routed? In a world where countries use the Internet to gather intelligence from communications traffic that transits local facilities, this question has become increasingly im-

for intelligence gathering seems obvious. This surveillance is constantly being expanded—to the detriment of communications privacy. Countries are increasingly adopting legislation that provides for preventive surveillance and the massive collection of communications data without either adequate procedural limitations or strict over-

 

portant for Internet users—individuals and businesses alike. Such interception is an established investigative tool of intelligence services and law enforcement agencies all over the world provided for by domestic laws. For governments concerned with national-security threats, the exploitation of all available sources

sight of the activities. In the worst case governments stretch—or even ignore— existing rules in order to facilitate intelligence gathering no matter what.

The fact that Internet traffic is supranational in character offers a promising new avenue for intelligence gathering by targeting international communi-

 

26 CommunICatIons of the aCm | feBRuaRY2009 | vol. 52 | No. 2

cations originating from, terminating in, or simply passing through a given country and subjecting it to the local standards of legal interception. Unlike the public switched telephony network (PSTN), which delivered only the destined traffic to the international gateways, Internet traffic is not confined to the territory of a state and is more likely to cross borders while in transit. Not long ago the overwhelming majority of data flowed through the U.S., where the world’s top Internet backbone providers’ switching equipment was located (the situation has since changed somewhat). The U.S. was therefore in the position of being able to exercise control over most of the world’s information transmitted via the Internet.

In 2005 the U.S. National Security Agency’s warrantless wiretapping, a program authorized by the Bush administration, was disclosed. Afterward the government pursued legislation to expand surveillance powers. The short-lived 2007 Protect America Act and its immediate successor, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act of 2008, permit warrantless interception of international communications during transit through the U.S. and the targeting of non-U.S. persons reasonably believed to be located outside the U.S. Under the latter U.S. act, the highest level of protection is afforded to purely domestic communications, interception of which would require a warrant whereas international communications (with at least one foreign end-

illUstration by celia Johnson