Review of British Espionage Act underlines need for ‘bulk interception’

In a report to test the proposed UK espionage law, the inspector of terror law states that large-scale interception of information has been helpful in the past. There would also be few alternatives, which would make interception necessary.

In the report, which has been compiled on the basis of case studies and internal government documents, Inspector David Anderson says that “bulk interception” is necessary for the performance of the duties of the security service GCHQ in areas such as organized crime, child pornography and child pornography. terror. This power would also already be used by the service and almost fifty percent of the intelligence would derive from this power. However, encryption and anonymization are increasingly causing its value to decrease, according to the inspector.

Anderson also considered the authority to ‘equipment interference’, which refers to the authority to hack devices. Specifically, it’s about ‘bulk equipment interference’, which the GCHQ describes as a way to ‘gain information from devices on a large scale to counter threats to national security’. Anderson says that this power has never been used to date, but that there will be situations in the future where no alternatives can be found. However, very strict rules would be needed to ensure proper use. Targeted hacking of devices would also provide about twenty percent of all GCHQ intelligence.

The new Espionage Act still needs to be approved before it can enter into force. The legislative process has led to much debate, for example because it was argued that encryption should also be removable under the new law. The BBC writes that it is expected that the ‘Investigatory Powers Bill’, as the law is called, will be presented to parliament at the end of this year.