“Evening Bishkek”: Hearing held

Trying to legalize wiretapping phones and establish control over the Internet, lawmakers have forgotten the most important thing – the right of law-abiding citizens to protection from attacks on privacy, the director of the Public Fund “Civil Initiative on Internet Policy” Tattu Mambetalieva.

SORMyazhnaya true

– The first time started talking about legalizing wiretapping?

– In 2008, when the security forces began to establish a special means of communication operators. Immediately, the question arose whether it is legal. Security officers insisted on the need to conduct such monitoring and justify its appearance of new threats such as terrorism and extremism. In response, we raised the question of legalization. It was necessary to define the rights to distribute responsibilities and officially announce the public that henceforth he will listen to.

The then head of intelligence Murat Sutalinov agreed to amend the bill to the Parliament and to legalize the use of mechanisms of wiretapping. But the document did not pass. There have not been respected human rights safeguards to protect the mail. Since then, the issue remains open.

– It is true that over the years wiretapping did not stop for a minute, even during the events of 2010? Everyone remembers when storm flooded dirt on famous politicians.

– In the midst of the events of 2010, discussed the situation, operators decided to unilaterally disable all listening equipment. Intelligence agencies have responded with lightning speed, making all immediately reconnect. The system is still in place, but the question of its legalization is still not resolved.

Today added another problem: the other law enforcement agencies have also decided to connect to the operators. As a compromise, we offer them to agree with each other and create a central point of access to each other no one interfered. If each agency decides to establish its own system of wiretapping, the load on operators will increase enormously.

Should consider the economic side of the issue. Equipment with the consent of parliament has already been purchased and installed SCNS. Does it make sense to spend money again? Budget and so bursting at the seams. Therefore it is necessary to agree on the primary role of the National Security Committee as the key body to ensure national security and the fight against terrorism and extremism. It is time to stop the infighting among security agencies and begin the process of coordination and collaboration with the National Security Committee.

– In discussing the notion of tapping threads SORM. What does it mean?

– Abbreviation SORM is used only on the post-Soviet space, and stands as a “system of search operations.” In fact, this concept has a narrower meaning and is used to refer to activities with the use of special equipment, hardware and software products. Basically when it comes to wiretapping, interception and monitoring of telephone calls, Internet connections and other types of communication.

– Why is the choice of technology is made in Russia? Is there a political background?

– The explanation is simple: in 2008, Russia in the framework of international organizations, to grant aid to Kyrgyzstan. Was in fact politically motivated or not, I do not presume to argue, but the commercial interest of Russian companies will certainly present. Without specific business lobby, I think there is clearly not done. While the equipment will be used to pay for them will have to update. Domestic production of such systems do not, but you can apply to the local experts on the support for software products and thus reduce costs. Programmers a level we have plenty.

The right to be unheard

– And to whom assigned maintenance costs listening equipment?

– Different countries have different funding mechanisms. The idea is that the money should come from the national budget. But they are known in the state treasury not. So we went in the easiest way, adopting the Russian experience, putting all the costs of operators. Attempts to achieve a business instead of tax credits or allocation success and failed.

I must say that the service equipment – quite expensive, because the technologies and software needs constant updating or, as computer scientists, to upgrade.

Another problem is that all information should be stored somewhere, which also requires a lot of resources. Its volume is growing every day, and with it the size of the repository.

– Who to contact citizens in case of violation of their rights?

– Viewed in the parliament a bill to answer this question does not. The initiator has only one purpose – to give the nod to wiretap.

What is legalization of wiretapping for us? This definition of the law of responsibility and commitment of all participants to ensure confidentiality, and not just the legislative authorization to wiretap.

Control and supervision of the security forces can only be achieved by creating a single pool for tapping – in one law enforcement agency or a single co-ordinated center. By the way, stands for the National Security Committee, this approach, with which I also agree. But here it is necessary to fix a key role for the Attorney General’s Office. That it is to ensure that everything is within the law. According to the Constitution, it is the only body that supervises the rule of law.

But our legislators are fixated on the fact that the wiretap authorization to issue the court, according to the new Constitution, and all the points about the General Prosecutor’s Office of the document was removed. Now it is not clear who to contact people in case of arbitrariness, if the prosecution is neither right nor authority. Again, the court, which has agreed to wiretap?

– Who is responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of information?

– Under current law, the responsibility rests with the operators. That’s the problem. In the discussed the MP would not even consider how these obligations operators can perform. They should have the opportunity to appeal against a court order. Law enforcement officers are not always technically savvy and therefore sometimes give false or unrealistic demands. For example, block the site is not always possible. Internet is so specific that even private site can be made available.

However, the bill does not provide for the responsibility of officials for the privacy, that is responsible for all the operators. But at the same time their own and require law enforcement agencies to provide access to information. I think that it does not guarantee us privacy.

In addition, the law does not determine when it is an intrusion into the personal space of the citizen: when someone hears the contents of a telephone conversation or simply tracks, someone who’s calling? It is very important to establish the degree of responsibility of the participants wiretapping.

Under the hood

– Should a subscriber automatically agree with the fact that it will listen? Or he has the right to require the provision of secret negotiations?

– These questions are not legally regulated. Why is this important? Legalize wiretapping, we, in fact, legitimize daily opportunities to listen to us. Law enforcement authorities or political players there are huge opportunities for abuse of position. To avoid this, you need checks and balances. One of these mechanisms, as I mentioned, can become prosecutors. In the case of giving it the necessary powers she could ask any operative, which is based on an audition. By the way, according to international practice, illegal wiretapping is a criminal offense.

Must be determined and responsible for disseminating the information. If the main thing in this matter will be SNSC, then he should be responsible for what someone talks suddenly be put to public disclosure. This is very important, considering occurs any time draining dirt on famous politicians.

– It turns out that the police can listen to anyone or group of persons is limited somehow?

– In theory, should be clearly spelled out, one on the basis of what, and how long you can listen. According to international standards, a secret listening and recording conversations made against the accused or suspects. The proposed bill is incomprehensible postscript “and others.” Thus, under the supervision of any person can get.

The second disturbing our time – the introduction of the term “control”. Its value is also not solved, so, if you wish, this word can mean anything. It turns out that we are giving a blank check to listen to all and sundry. Most resent the fact that no one member for whom we voted, did not stand up to protect the interests of law-abiding citizens.

Internationally, telecom operator does not produce the content of telephone calls, and represents only the information about who is who and when to call. By the way, it is guaranteed, and our Constitution.

Not resolved the question whether the wiretapping records considered as evidence in court and in what form must be submitted. After all, with the current development of the technology can be faked any voice. And to make an examination of the authenticity in our conditions very difficult.

– Legalization of wiretaps presented so that she can help solve all problems at once, is it really?

– The effectiveness of total interception is not so great. Not always have the technical capabilities to identify the subscriber. Each of us can steal your phone or laptop and a correspondence. If desired, you can hack any device. Not solve the problem and issuing SIM cards to passports. Criminals – people stupid. They will not say in plain text, they want something to blow up, but rather, a veil his message.

More effective wiretapping in a political struggle with the opponents. In the arsenal of security services have mechanisms for intercepting and spoofing of information, when it can not reach its destination or will be delivered in a distorted form. The Internet will replace content at IP-addresses. Foreign blockbusters, which shows how human destroy in one second, blocking all of the data in information systems, is not all that exaggerated.

large ear

In a number of domestic and foreign media was assumed that Russian equipment interception could be used to record conversations Kyrgyz politicians in 2010. Records were merged into the Internet and set a provisional government in a very awkward position, as discussed in the conversations and post distribution of funds. But the scandal did not affect the determination of security officials to develop a national system of tapping on the Russian model.

In the world there are many analogies used in the former Soviet space systems SORM. For example, in the EU system operates RES, and across five countries (USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK) – the global system “Echelon” (Eshelon). Control is the national systems of search operations through communications equipment installed in satellites.

Since the late 90’s of the last century, in addition to “tier”, the U.S. has the domestic system software search operations carried out on the Internet. It was codenamed “carnivore” (Carnivore or DSC-1000).

Maxim Tsoi.