Listan

listan@lists.dfri.se

1 participants
807 discussions

Fwd: [EPFSUG] Free Software and Open Standards in the EP - a 2nd Opinion by Mitopics on DG-ITEC Discharge Report
by Erik Josefsson 25 Nov '13

25 Nov '13

Medveten om risken för att det utbryter ett epidemiskt politikerexem i DFRI vill jag ändå höja exponeringen genom att visa på möjliga (politiska) lösningar som själva grundfrågan "hur sköter man en demokrati?" ställer. //Erik Link to study: http://epfsug.eu/wws/arc/epfsug/2013-11/msg00034/20131031ME-2nd-Opinion-on-… -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [EPFSUG] Free Software and Open Standards in the EP - a 2nd Opinion by Mitopics on DG-ITEC Discharge Report Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 16:21:41 +0000 From: JOSEFSSON Erik <erik.josefsson%europarl.europa.eu(a)epfsug.eu> Reply-To: epfsug(a)epfsug.eu To: Epfsug(a)Epfsug.Eu (epfsug(a)epfsug.eu) <epfsug(a)epfsug.eu> Dear all, Please find attached a "2nd Opinion" by Mitopics on the DG-ITEC Discharge Report commissioned by MEPs Bart Staes and Amelia Andersdotter on behalf of the Greens/EFA. It walks through what has been answered and not answered in response to the 2010 and 2011 Discharge resolutions: /“Requests for the second time, after the first request relating to the discharge procedure was made in 2010, a full report on how Parliament's Free Software projects have developed with regard to use and users in Parliament, citizen interaction and procurement activities; invites for the second time to investigate, in a full study, Parliament's obligations under Rule 103 of its Rules of Procedure with regard to Free Software and Open Standards; regrets that Free Software and Open Source solutions are not more widely used in the Parliament's IT infrastructure;”/ The Opinion says: This resolution contains several questions in two separate categories: * The extent of the development, use, users and procurement of free software; and * how Parliament’s transparency obligations under Rule 103 of its Rules of Procedure translate into obligations to use free software and open standards. Wrt Rule 103 the Opinion states: *Further recommendations * Since the letter by Mr. Schultz indicates that no analysis of the Parliament’s transparency obligations under Rule 103 of its Rules of Procedure vis-à-vis its ICT-policies have taken place, it is recommended that such a study be completed and should at least answer following questions: Given that Rule 103 of the Rules of Procedure touch upon the vital role of the Parliament’s records and proceedings in both democratic participation in its legislative process as well as its legitimacy, the logical conclusion is that the following principles of good electronic government and governance[1] apply to the Parliament’s citizen interactions, records keeping of its proceedings and legislative history: 1. Authenticity: the ability to prove the provenance of Parliamentary information; 2. Integrity: the ability to ascertain that Parliamentary information has not been changed in the meantime; 3. Irrefutability: the ability to use a Parliamentary record as irrefutable proof; 4. Transparency: the ability to detect and analyses changes in the Parliamentary record’s contents; 5. Availability: the availability and accessibility of a document; 6. Flexibility: the extent to which technology can be adapted to future requirements and can avoid obsolescence; 7. Confidentiality: the extent to which Parliamentary records can be kept confidential if warranted. In light of this, any study to the application of Rule 103 to the Parliament’s ICT-infrastructure would require a mapping of all processes that touch upon citizen interactions and the Parliament’s proceedings and legislative process and would analyse the current information flows, the means and software used for them and the digital formats used to process, store and share them. Furthermore, such a study would apply the above principles to these information flows, the software and formats used for them and result in recommendations to what extent the use of FOSS and open standards is critical to adhere to these principles as a whole. [1] H. Franken, Kanttekeningen bij het automatiseren van beschikkingen, in: Beschikken en automatiseren, VAR-reeks 110, Alphen aan den Rijn 1993. I find these points compelling. I think a study on Rule 103 would be very useful. //Erik

2 2

FRA och övervakningssamhället
by David Kronlid 23 Nov '13

23 Nov '13

Intressant debattartikel om att fler ska få tillgång till FRAs data. Visserligen verkar debattörerna lite naiva som tror att det går att stoppa övervakningssamhället på det viset, men det är bra att visa motstånd. http://www.svd.se/opinion/brannpunkt/justitieministern-oppnar-for-total-ove… Jag är med i moderaterna men personligen tycker jag, till skillnad från vissa, inte om att flera staters spionorganisationer läser mejl som detta, men jag anser att man inte kan komma åt problemet genom lagstiftning. Både stater, företag och organisationer kommer att insamla så mycket data de kan på internet. Alla lagliga hinder kommer bara fördröja eller fördyra den oundvikliga utvecklingen som redan påbörjats. Kryptering, säkerhet och viss anonymisering "by default" i program och protokoll på internet tror jag är enda sättet för oss vanliga medborgare att kunna behålla yttrandefrihet, integritet och privatliv på nätet. Därför är stödjande av och användande av viktiga open-source-projekt relaterade till kryptering och/eller anonymitet det bästa motmedlet mot påträngande lagstiftning, påträngande företag. Det enda motmedlet mot fungerande stark kryptering är förbud, men förbud kommer att struntas i "en masse" och precis som fortkörning, gå mot röd gubbe, gräsrökning, fildelning och mycket annat så är det en typ av förbud som kommer bli verkningslöst. Man kan helt enkelt inte bura in halva befolkningen av olika skäl. Jag tror att enda sättet att vinna mot övervakningssamhället är att programmerare (och internetutvecklare av andra slag) ihop med användare helt enkelt gör det för svårt och kostsamt att övervaka vanliga människor, så att de tillslut ger upp med massövervakning av alla av kostnadsskäl. Spridning från vän till vän av "goda" program, appar och operativsystem, samt gåvor i form av pengar eller programmeringstimmar till bra säkerhetsrelaterade open-source-projekt är viktigt. Inga toppolitiker, storföretag eller stater kommer att göra jobbet åt oss, rätten till privatliv på internet kommer bara att skapas av folket själva genom gräsrötternas hårda arbete i konkurrens från de ekonomiskt överlägsna staterna och företagen. Jag har ägnat 15 år åt att säga åt folk hur viktigt det är kryptera sin kommunikation, men väldigt få lyssnar. Kryptering behöver bli standard i framtida kommunikationsprotokoll och nya versioner av befintliga protokoll så att den stora massan börjar skydda sig. Det är där jag tror vårt huvudfokus behöver ligga, som organisation, att bidra till att göra övervakning av hederliga medborgare så svårt att spionage inte lönar sig.

3 4

Vem fattar beslut om svensk öppenhet? Rösta emot 2013/14:KU6 Sekretess i det internationella samarbetet
by Joel Purra 23 Nov '13

23 Nov '13

*Vem fattar beslut om svensk öppenhet?* På barnkonventionens födelsedag den 20 november kommer du att rösta om du kommer att få insyn i förhandlingarna av TTIP - Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. TTIP är ett handelsavtal mellan EU och USA som antagligen kommer att innehålla mer än 20 kapitel, och ett av dem kommer att täcka betydligt mer än ACTA: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip/questions-and-answers/index_… Sveriges målsättning ska vara att internationella förhandlingar sker öppet. Slutna förhandlingsprocesser är ett problem som försvagar demokratin och leder till ryktesbildningar. Tror du att du kommer att få titta på TTIP-utkasten om lagen ändras enligt betänkande 2013/14:KU6? Vi tror inte att du kommer att få titta på, och därmed ha åsikt om, TTIP-utkasten om lagförslaget går igenom. Riksdagens utskott kommer inte att få tillgång till de handlingar som kommer att utgöra grunden för de lagändringar som TTIP kommer att leda till, vad gäller till exempel miljölagstiftning, export, import, upphandling, kryptering på internet och grundläggande medborgerliga fri- och rättigheter. Kommer du ihåg att medlemmarna i riksdagens näringsutskott sa att ACTA inte hade med internet att göra? "Förhandlingarna innehåller heller inget alls som gäller Internet." http://www.newsmill.se/artikel/2009/04/03/vi-jobbar-hart-oppenhet-om-acta-f… Problemen med lagförslaget är dock betydligt mer omfattande än insynen i förhandlingarna om ett handelsavtal. De gäller i grunden synen på vem som fattar besluten om svensk öppenhet. Med den nya lagen flyttas de i praktiken från den svenska riksdagen till olika avtalsförhandlingar. Vi vill att du *röstar emot* betänkande *2013/14:KU6* Sekretess i det internationella samarbetet den 20 november. Med vänlig hälsning Joel Purra DFRI - Föreningen för digitala fri- och rättigheter https://dfri.se/ https://dfri.se/angaende-proposition-2013-14-ku6-sekretess-i-det-internatio…

5 12

Fwd: [EPFSUG] 14 MEPs emails intercepted by a hacker thanks to Microsoft flaws
by Erik Josefsson 21 Nov '13

21 Nov '13

Jo, med anledning av i tidigare mail: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: bug=569668 (annars ingen kryptering...) Det här skulle jag VERKLIGEN behöva hjälp med: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=569668 så är det nån som just visat 14 MEPar som använder MS från EPs att det kanske inte funkade som dom tänkt (se nedan). Om vi kan få DavMail att funka medExchange 2010 så kan vi kanske erbjuda en del-lösning. Vore mycket tacksam om ni som känner folk som känner folk som kan mail kan skicka vidare buggen! mvh //Erik -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [EPFSUG] 14 MEPs emails intercepted by a hacker thanks to Microsoft flaws Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:24:44 +0100 From: Lucile Falgueyrac <lucile.falg(a)fsfe.org> Reply-To: epfsug(a)epfsug.eu To: epfsug(a)epfsug.eu Good morning, The French news paper Mediapart [1] published a long article today, explaining how a hacker got access to private and professional communications of 14 MEPs using basic tech and a flaw in Microsoft « Active Sync ». The whole operation aimed at stressing the lack of awareness about IT security before the European elections, and making it an issue. Mediapart quotes him or her: "On one side we have citizens who know almost nothing of what is happening behind the scene in those institutions, links between political and economical powers.. on the other side, almost omniscient intelligence services can, thanks to their spying, decide the future of a political figure or influence decisions." The hacker said "I have the impression to see puppets, I wanted to shake them, to raise awareness." The second page of the articles is used to talk about security flaws in Microsofts products, unfair tenders in Europe and aggressive lobbying. The last page is about Free Software, with quotes from the two French associations promoting FS: April and Aful. The article finished with quotes from the very pro-Free Software French MP Isabelle Attard, stressing the absolute lack of understanding and interest of MPs for digital issues altogether. I hope this great article will make it into international press Best, Lucile [1] http://www.mediapart.fr/journal/international/211113/les-mails-des-eurodepu… --> mediapart is an investigation online newspaper. Articles are not accessible without subscription. If you are interested by the full text, it seems that I can "offer" you the article thanks to my subscription, please ask. -- Lucile Falgueyrac - Free Software Foundation Europe FSFE, Schönhauser Allee 6/7, 10119 Berlin XMPP : lucile.falg(a)jabber.fsfe.org Support FSFE! https://fsfe.org/

1 0

2013/14:KU6 - Regelverket för minoritetsbordläggning är tillämplig
by Erik Josefsson 21 Nov '13

21 Nov '13

Regelverket för minoritetsbordläggning är tillämplig. En annan tolkning är orimlig. Undantaget för minoritetsbordläggning gäller **inte** förslag till lag som **enbart rör förbud** att röja sådant vars hemlighållande är nödvändigt med hänsyn till något av de intressen som anges i 2 kap. 2 § tryckfrihetsförordningen. Rätten att ta del av allmänna handlingar får begränsas **endast om begränsningen **korrekt balanserar** allmänhetens intresse i offentlighetsprincipen mot intresset att rikets förhållande till annan stat eller mellanfolklig organisation inte skadas. 2013/14:KU6 rör inte *enbart* förbud utan avser reglera betydligt bredare balanserade avvägningar. Se Ante Wessels (FFII) ärende mot Europaparlamentet: http://acta.ffii.org/?p=1956 //Erik

1 0

DLD, Säpo och Maintrac
by Dennis Ljungmark 19 Nov '13

19 Nov '13

Fick just se denna: https://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=83&artikel=5707919 som i kombination med : http://www.mynewsdesk.com/se/pressreleases/utsikt-bredband-tecknar-avtal-me… Blir lite negativ. //D.S.

2 1

Fwd: [US-EU-TTIP] EU and US negotiators determined to transfer sovereignty to companies
by Erik Josefsson 19 Nov '13

19 Nov '13

Här har Ante mer vatten på temat "Riksdagens avskaffande" (se nedan) Vi vet att det tog 8 månader att få ut ett (1/one/ein/uno/yksi) ACTA-dokument. Är det mödan värt att försöka få titta på TTIP? Vad gäller DFRIs intresseområde, här en grov uppskattning av vad USA vill ha in: http://infojustice.org/archives/31243 (skrolla ner till Draconian Enforcement in the Digital Environment). //Erik -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [US-EU-TTIP] EU and US negotiators determined to transfer sovereignty to companies Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 16:15:56 +0100 Negotiators determined to transfer sovereignty to companies http://acta.ffii.org/?p=1963 November 17, 2013 By Ante During a stakeholders meeting on the TTIP / TAFTA trade agreement, EU and US negotiators showed determination to transfer sovereignty to companies. On Friday 15 November, the last day of the second TTIP negotiating round, the EU commission organised a stakeholders meeting. Chief negotiators Dan Mullaney (US) and Ignacio Garcia Bercero (EU) gave a short talk and answered questions. In the stakeholders meeting many topics were discussed, from investor – state dispute settlement, the right to water, the precautionary principle, to consumer safeguards. Here is a (low quality) audio recording, it starts half a minute into the meeting. Sovereignty There were many questions about investor – state dispute settlement (ISDS). Under ISDS companies can sue states if new laws threaten to make expected profits lower. The cases are handled outside national court systems, by tribunals consisting of three investment lawyers. Civil society groups see ISDS as a threat to democracy. ISDS transfers sovereignty in two ways. It gives companies equal standing to states. And it gives investment lawyers the power to decide in conflicts between companies and states. Why on earth would one want to transfer sovereignty to companies and investment lawyers? According to Mr. Garcia Bercero a well designed ISDS system can preserve the right to regulate: "I first want to say, very clear, very firmly, that we certainly do not believe that a well designed investor to state dispute settlement system could compromise the right to regulate. One of the fundamental issues we want to look at very carefully if we decide on any potential investment protection rules in a treaty, as we indeed did in the agreement with Canada, is to make sure that parties have the right to make policies in the public interest." (at 48.20) Mr. Garcia Bercero turns the question around. He takes transferring sovereignty for granted, and then wants to safeguard space for states to regulate. States become the begging parties. That is the world upside down. Furthermore, the commission’s reassurances do not convince. Mr. Garcia Bercero states the commission got it right in the ISDS chapter in the agreement with Canada. However, already months ago Nathalie Bernasconi-Osterwalder showed serious flaws in the (leaked) draft. Moreover, arguments in favour of ISDS on the commission’s Q&A webpage were scrutinized by Corporate Europe Observatory, after which the commission withdrew the statements. A second commission attempt was strongly critisised by Glyn Moody. The commission’s beliefs are firm, but it comes empty handed. Mr. Mullaney talked about a fair, quick and transparent ISDS system that safeguards regulatory space. Nothing would prevent non-discriminatory legitimate policy objectives. He too takes transferring sovereignty for granted, and then wants to safeguard limited space for states to regulate. The policy objectives have to be non-discriminatory and legitimate. What is non-discriminatory and legitimate? The investment lawyers will decide on that. Then someone asked the essential question: why is ISDS needed at all? Both negotiators mentioned protection against discrimination. Mr. Mullaney: "I think it is fair to say that measures in the United States that specifically discriminate against EU [parts?] or EU companies and measures in Europe that discriminate against US property or companies, that would in fact be something you want to avoid in the agreement." (at 1.41.26) The answer doesn’t clarify why ISDS would be needed, as both the EU and US have good courts, and state – state dispute settlement can solve remaining issues. In related news, last week Nobel laureate in economics Joseph Stiglitz wrote an opinion on ISDS. He makes it clear that the instrument is unnecessary: "There is no reason that foreign-owned property should be better protected than property owned by a country’s own citizens. Moreover, if constitutional guarantees are not enough to convince investors (…) foreigners can always avail themselves of expropriation insurance provided by the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (a division of the World Bank) or numerous national organizations providing such insurance." He also explains what is really behind ISDS: "But those supporting the investment agreements are not really concerned about protecting property rights, anyway. The real goal is to restrict governments’ ability to regulate and tax corporations – that is, to restrict their ability to impose responsibilities, not just uphold rights. Corporations are attempting to achieve by stealth – through secretly negotiated trade agreements – what they could not attain in an open political process." A union without clothes In my opinion, the EU is in dire straights. The EU gave us a euro with design flaws, it may soon transfer sovereignty to companies and investment lawyers. The political elite fails. It is time for a wake up call.

2 1

Påminnelse: På torsdag är det kryptoparty!
by Linus Nordberg 18 Nov '13

18 Nov '13

Hej listan! Tre torsdagskvällar i rad, i Stockholm: https://www.dfri.se/cryptoparty-konsthallc/ Lär ju bli bra! -- DFRI-listan är öppen för alla. Listan arkiveras och publiceras öppet på internet. http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.org.user-groups.dfri

1 0

mail till 365 ledamöter: "Riksdagens avskaffande 2013/14:KU6 sekretess i det internationella samarbetet"
by Erik Josefsson 16 Nov '13

16 Nov '13

Här är ett utkast till ett mail till alla riksdagsledamöter: https://dfri.etherpad.mozilla.org/ttip-mass-mail-20131116 //Erik *Utkast massmail till alla riksdagsledamöter* *To: *(n-1)(a)riksdagen.se *Subject: *Riksdagens avskaffande 2013/14:KU6 sekretess i det internationella samarbetet Hej ledamot! På Marina och Pontus namnsdag 20 november kommer du att rösta om du kommer att få insyn i TTIP - Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. TTIP är ett handelsavtal mellan EU och USA som antagligen kommer att innehålla mer än 20 kapitel och ett av dem kommer att täcka betydligt mer änACTA(se http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip/questions-and-answers/index_…). Tror du att du kommer att få titta på TTIP om lagen ändras enligt betänkande 2013/14:KU6? Vi tror inte att du kommer att få titta på TTIP om lagförslaget går igenom. Riksdagens utskott kommer inte att få tillgång till de handlingar som kommer att utgöra grunden för de lagändringar som TTIP kommer att leda till vad gäller t ex miljölagstiftning, upphandling, kryptering på internet och grundläggande medborgerliga fri- och rättigheter. /Kommer du ihåg att medlemmarna i riksdagens näringsutskott sa att ACTA inte hade med internet att göra?/ *"Förhandlingarna innehåller heller inget alls som gäller Internet."* http://www.newsmill.se/artikel/2009/04/03/vi-jobbar-hart-oppenhet-om-acta-f… Problemen med lagförslaget är dock betydligt mer omfattande än insynen i förhandlingarna om ett handelsavtal. De gäller i grunden synen på vem som fattar besluten om svensk öppenhet. Med den nya lagen flyttas de i praktiken från den svenska riksdagen till olika avtalsförhandlingar. Vi vill att du ska *rösta emot *betänkande*2013/14:KU6*Sekretess i det internationella samarbetet. Vi vill inte att du röstar för riksdagens avskaffande 20 november. mvh NN (organisation eller person|er)

1 0

Fwd: [US-EU-TTIP] NGOs call for transparency in EU-US trade talks (ChemicalWatch)
by Erik Josefsson 16 Nov '13

16 Nov '13

Lite spamvarning på mig nu... hoppas det är okej... (annars maila off list och säg till!) //Erik -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [US-EU-TTIP] NGOs call for transparency in EU-US trade talks (ChemicalWatch) Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 10:21:45 +0000 http://chemicalwatch.com/17217/ngos-call-for-transparency-in-eu-us-trade-ta… NGOs call for transparency in EU-US trade talks Deal could weaken REACH in long term 13 November 2013 / Europe,North America NGOs and industry must be allowed to play a greater role in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), argued civil society organisations in Brussels on Monday, underlining that chemicals legislation will be one of the main issues in the talks. There could be "consumer benefits" from the EU-US trade negotiations, which are taking place in Brussels this week (CW 5 November 2013 <http://chemicalwatch.com/17112/eu-and-us-to-pick-up-trade-talks-mid-novembe…>), said Monique Goyens, director general of the European Consumer Organisation (BEUC), during an NGO press briefing on Tuesday. More competitive markets could lead to "lower prices, more consumer choice and less red tape," she said. But equally they could "water down existing consumer legislation" in the EU and in US states such as California that have stricter legislation than that agreed at a national level. To ensure this does not happen, the negotiations have to become more transparent, said Ms Goyens, pointing out that there is no stakeholder engagement between the Commission and industry, civil society or even other EU institutions such as the Council or the European Parliament on the talks. According to her, the Commission has cited "tradition" as the reason for keeping the negotiating texts secret. "We are in the twenty-first century," she countered, pointing out that technology allows documents to be shared easily and that institutions such as the World Health Organization (WHO) publish negotiating texts. Greater openness in the EU was all the more important given that 600 industry advisors have been given access to the negotiating texts in the US, said Ms Goyens. Civil society groups hope to learn by the end of the week whether and how the Commission will allow them to have more engagement in the negotiations."Well before the negotiating rounds we need to be told what is on the agenda and have a briefing session where negotiators listen to us [industry and civil society] and hear what we believe will be the consequences of certain actions," said Ms Goyens. "In a legal text, every comma matters, and it is important that one word is not used instead of another." After each round, there should be a feedback session, she added. "One of the main issues [of the talks] is REACH," said Ms Goyens. "TSCA and REACH are not compatible" (CW 12 November 2013 <http://chemicalwatch.com/17191/ngo-warns-of-us-risk-to-eu-chemical-safeguar…>). Baskut Tuncak, attorney with the Center for International Environmental Law (Ciel), told /Chemical Watch/ that he was particularly concerned about EU calls for a Regulatory Cooperation Council as part of the TTIP. According to a speech made by EU trade commissioner Karel de Gucht last month, this would "bring together the heads of the most important EU and US regulatory agencies". They would "monitor the implementation of commitments made and consider new priorities for regulatory cooperation" and "ask regulators or standards bodies to develop regulations jointly that could then have a good chance of becoming international standards." Mr Tuncak asked what this could mean for future revisions of REACH, given the current lack of compatibility between the EU Regulation and US proposals to reform TSCA, and environmental concerns in general. "Given the challenge of the Commission agreeing on proposals within its own confines, adding US agencies to the mix is a recipe for chilling the process," he said. Further, the final deal is particularly significant because it is likely to be seen as a blueprint for other trade deals. "Any restraint on the EU's progress on chemicals-related issues through TTIP would be of concern for developing countries given the forecasts by the OECD and the UN Environment Programme (Unep) of disproportionate growth rates for chemical production and use in these countries," said Mr Tuncak. The possible impact of any trade deal on "established rights and standards" in the EU such as the precautionary and the polluter pays principles was highlighted by Magda Stoczkiewicz, director of Friends of the Earth in Europe, during the briefing. She also drew attention to concerns about the inclusion of an investor-to-state dispute settlement mechanism (ISDS) in the trade deal. "This is a huge issue for chemicals," said Mr Tuncak. There are a number of cases related to environmental protection under way in the US where corporations are alleging breach of the investor provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)," he said. This could be a precedent for what could happen if such a mechanism were included in the TTIP, for example, with chemical companies fighting stricter US state legislation compared to national provisions. -- Baskut Tuncak Staff Attorney, CIEL (Center for International Environmental Law) 1350 Connecticut Ave. Suite 1100, Washington, D.C. 20036 USA

1 0

← Newer
1
...
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
...
81
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

Listan