How corporations help governments spy on their people
March 4, 2010 7:34 AM   Subscribe

How Nokia helped Iran "persecute and arrest" dissidents is a short article from Ars Technica that neatly summarizes how Nokia allowed Iran to arrest protestors and how corporations become involved in deals like these.
posted by The Devil Tesla (35 comments total) 11 users marked this as a favorite
 
Journalist Hanna Nikkanen quotes Nokia's Lauri Kivinen saying that "there's been this perception internationally that we've supplied them [Iran] with internet surveillance equipment, but this is not true. The statement was made on February 20, 2010, but Nikkanen obtained leaked manuals to the equipment in question and concluded, " The surveillance made possible by the Nokia Lawful Interception Gateway (LIG) extends to mobile internet usage. Either Kivinen was lying or his knowledge of his company's core competence field isn't quite adequate.

"Leaked manuals." C'mon skippy do some investigative journalism. This is no secret. EVERY switch, every gateway has a Lawful Intercept (LI) port built into it. The LI function for mobile communication systems is standardised by ETSI . Every single thing you do over a communications network is accessible to authorities. Get over it.
posted by three blind mice at 7:45 AM on March 4, 2010 [1 favorite]


Every single thing you do over a communications network is accessible to authorities.

Your link is broken and I'd like to see this cited.

Get over it.

Because anything common is morally OK.
posted by DU at 7:48 AM on March 4, 2010 [9 favorites]


The problem here is not Nokia. The problem here is the Iranian government. Lawful intercept technology is used by democratic governments around the world, and has been for years. The difference is it usually requires a warrant, and is usually not done for the purposes of hunting out political dissidents.
posted by modernnomad at 7:48 AM on March 4, 2010 [1 favorite]


"In a country like Iran, where such oversight and judicial protections are limited, some argue that international companies like Nokia Siemens have to be aware that their gear will be used differently than it will in Europe."

My fear isn't that they will use the tech differently in Iran than in the EU and the US, but rather they will use the tech in the EU and the US like they do in Iran. I think between the DMCA and the Patriot Act, the US can pretty much quell any speech it wants to, while listening to pretty much anything they like. Even if laws are broken it's easy to grant immunity after the fact.
posted by cjorgensen at 7:52 AM on March 4, 2010 [4 favorites]


I think between the DMCA and the Patriot Act, the US can pretty much quell any speech it wants to, while listening to pretty much anything they like.

Wait, what? How does the DMCA fit into this?
posted by Pontius Pilate at 7:53 AM on March 4, 2010


modernnomad: " Lawful intercept technology is used by democratic governments around the world, and has been for years. The difference is it usually requires a warrant..."

[nostalgic sigh] Yeah, I remember warrants....
posted by Joe Beese at 7:57 AM on March 4, 2010 [7 favorites]


So, Iranians need some pretty good protection, eh?
posted by klangklangston at 7:59 AM on March 4, 2010


FTA: "Such a system has huge potential for abuse, which is why judicial oversight has always been important."

FBI Illegally Gathered Phone Records And Misused National Security Letters
posted by TheFlamingoKing at 8:01 AM on March 4, 2010 [4 favorites]


Coming soon: Iranian version of The Wire?
posted by fuq at 8:05 AM on March 4, 2010


Because anything common is morally OK.

A communications switch is totally indifferent to the motivations of those who use it. My point is that switches and gateways are purposefully designed to providing third parties with "taps" into your communications. These ports have also been hacked into. You might remember the infamous Greek telephone tapping case from 2004-2005 involving Ericsson gear and Vodafone's network. That one also started with accusations being thrown at both Vodafone and Ericsson.
posted by three blind mice at 8:06 AM on March 4, 2010 [1 favorite]


From the OP's link:
> " Parliament "strongly criticises international companies, in particular Nokia Siemens, for providing the Iranian authorities with the necessary censorship and surveillance technology..."

Turning on the data fire hydrant is easy (as others here have noted: The Lawful Intercept wiretap port is standard equipment), but the data analysis is not necessarily easy.

So it'd be interesting to know who else the EU deemed responsible.
posted by ardgedee at 8:13 AM on March 4, 2010


fuq: "Coming soon: Iranian version of The Wire?"

What's Farsi for "Sheeeeeit" ?
posted by Joe Beese at 8:15 AM on March 4, 2010


The problem here is not Nokia. The problem here is the Iranian government. Lawful intercept technology is used by democratic governments around the world, and has been for years. The difference is it usually requires a warrant,

Not in the U.S.

And is usually not done for the purposes of hunting out political dissidents.

That we know of. But it certainly true that the bush administration did actually use what are called "national security letters", rather then warrants inappropriately. And that's going beyond the entire warrantless wiretapping system put in place to monitor International calls.

Anyway, that's somewhat beside the point. You can't mandate wiretapping technology and then act surprised when authoritarian dictatorships also use those same technologies. Why wouldn't they?

Western governments are much more interested in wiretapping and monitoring their own citizens then they are in preventing foreign governments from doing the same.
posted by delmoi at 8:29 AM on March 4, 2010


The difference is it usually requires a warrant, and is usually not done for the purposes of hunting out political dissidents.

For now. All they have to scare Americans a little bit and they'll totally fold on that, too.
posted by Malor at 8:32 AM on March 4, 2010


Argh... "All they have to do is scare".
posted by Malor at 8:33 AM on March 4, 2010


The problem here is the Iranian government. Lawful intercept technology is used by democratic governments around the world...

Iran has democratic elections, the US has democratic elections
Iran has an unelected supreme judiciary (composed of scholars of religious laws), the US has an unelected supreme judiciary, Iranian society has been unbalanced by a military-industrial complex that is firmly entrenched in it's economy and slowly dominating the government and US society has been unbalanced by a military-industrial complex... wait, which of these societies is undemocratic?
posted by ennui.bz at 9:22 AM on March 4, 2010 [1 favorite]


Well, I'm not American nor was I referring to America. But I stand by the comment that as a general rule in democratic societies, wiretapping requires a warrant.

If you have a beef with the Patriot Act or an executive branch of your government that attempts to avoid oversight of wiretapping and lawful access at all costs then, again, your complaint is with the government in question, be it Iranian or American, not with Nokia.
posted by modernnomad at 9:56 AM on March 4, 2010


>wait, which of these societies is undemocratic?

The one that has a position called the Supreme Leader that holds a majority of the government's power. The one that bans parties and candidates it sees as a threat to the status quo.
posted by damn dirty ape at 10:31 AM on March 4, 2010 [1 favorite]


Oh lets not forget the Council of Guardians. Six guys that vet all laws and ban candidates for any federal office.

That's ignoring the fact that you cant have a real democracy and a theocracy at the same time. Try running for these offices as a Jew there.
posted by damn dirty ape at 10:33 AM on March 4, 2010


FBI Illegally Gathered Phone Records And Misused National Security Letters

Just as the Patriot Act has seemingly eliminated in a few short years many of the rights Americans came to expect for centuries, the Iranian regime may be facing a different kind of green movement going forward.

There are those who would argue, including Frontline's Tehran Bureau that the Green Movement is pushing forward a civil rights agenda, comparable to the American Civil Rights Movement of the late 1950s and 1960s.
posted by netbros at 11:09 AM on March 4, 2010 [1 favorite]


I'll note that PrivateGSM only supports Nokia Symbian phones. Also, Nokia's N900 is the only mobile phone that even theoretically supports any open source ZRTP/SRTP clients.

Afaik, Skype is the only encrypted VoIP client that runs on any non-Nokia mobile phone, but the N900 still boasts better Skype integration than any other phone.

Ideally, you want a dual interface ZRTP/SRTP extension that encrypts the stream normally for SRTP, but then xor's that stream with random noise, and transmits the noise and xor'ed stream over different network interfaces and different servers. So, if you made your calls near wifi, an attacker would need to both hack your SRTP session key and locate your noise stream on a completely separate network.
posted by jeffburdges at 11:29 AM on March 4, 2010 [1 favorite]


Iran has democratic elections, the US has democratic elections
Iran has an unelected supreme judiciary (composed of scholars of religious laws), the US has an unelected supreme judiciary, Iranian society has been unbalanced by a military-industrial complex that is firmly entrenched in it's economy and slowly dominating the government and US society has been unbalanced by a military-industrial complex... wait, which of these societies is undemocratic?


Yeah, the U.S. system where a Supreme Court justice has to first be appointed by a democratically elected President and then second has to be approved by democratically elected Senators before taking his seat on the Supreme Court is totally the same as the Iranian system where an unelected Supreme Leader appoints an unelected head of the judiciary who, in turn, appoints the justices of the Iranian Supreme Court. So both systems are totally the same.
posted by gyc at 11:39 AM on March 4, 2010 [1 favorite]


I think the high road forward would be for Europe and the U.S. to pass a laws saying that telephone companies must seek export approval for sale of lawful intercept technologies, and that dissidents may sue to obstruct the export. Ideally, this'll makes all lawful intercept technologies significantly less profitable for telephone companies, hopefully inspiring minimalistic compliance with legal requirements for their existence. Nokia should lobby for these legal changes given they're the ones who're being burned by the unclear regulatory system.
posted by jeffburdges at 12:03 PM on March 4, 2010


Sorry for any derail, but you see this is precisely why SCOTUS fucked the dog on corporations being allowed to fund political campaigns in the U.S. (even though it poses a problem for most any country). Cozy 'collaboration' and all that, Jesus H. on the cross.
posted by rudster at 1:02 PM on March 4, 2010


THIS ISN'T ABOUT THE U.S.! This about Iran, Nokia, and lawful intercept technology. The repeated attempts by some to score points against the US, and start talking about it just wrecks that which is a valid conversation.
posted by Lord Chancellor at 1:19 PM on March 4, 2010


The repeated attempts by some to score points against the US, and start talking about it just wrecks that which is a valid conversation.

Maybe they've just been sampling too much of the content in the related links section at the bottom of this thread. Doesn't make the US's own record look particularly glowing in this area.

('Specially the one about how the NSA specifically targeted American journalists for surveillance after 9/11.)
posted by saulgoodman at 1:45 PM on March 4, 2010


The problem here is not Nokia. The problem here is the Iranian government. Lawful intercept technology is used by democratic governments around the world, and has been for years. The difference is it usually requires a warrant, and is usually not done for the purposes of hunting out political dissidents.

Telecom corporations like Nokia could decide not to sell their wares in countries that do not subscribe to basic protections of individual rights, and they could still make massive profits. The problem is that all it takes is one company to break that pact to compel all the others break this ethical code. It is profitable to sell to autocratic states like Iran and China, and profits supersede morality, even for the Finns who run Nokia and live in a country that enjoys press freedoms and low corruption rates. Nokia is guilty, and it is right to call them guilty, but they are as guilty as every other corporation selling surveillance gear to oppressive governments.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:02 PM on March 4, 2010


THIS ISN'T ABOUT THE U.S.! This about Iran, Nokia, and lawful intercept technology. The repeated attempts by some to score points against the US, and start talking about it just wrecks that which is a valid conversation.

Huh? It's not important to talk about one of the most major countries that made them put in "Lawful" Intercept technology?
posted by delmoi at 2:21 PM on March 4, 2010


Huh? It's not important to talk about one of the most major countries that made them put in "Lawful" Intercept technology?

Not at the expense of the issue at hand. If this was just a side comment, it would be fine, but we're actually occluding the subject of Iran instead of enhancing it.
posted by Lord Chancellor at 2:33 PM on March 4, 2010


If the U.S. mandated that home appliance manufacturers also produce hand guns, I'd find that rather relevant to gun control in Europe and South America.
posted by jeffburdges at 4:52 PM on March 4, 2010


"Iran has democratic elections, the US has democratic elections"

…yeah, see, when you make a false equivalency that blatant, it just means that I can pretty reasonably dismiss the rest of your comment as moronic garbage. Maybe try again when you have something slightly less stupid to say?

(My first canvass of the day was someone who was still limping from being shot in pro-democracy rallies by Iranian security forces, yet wanted to volunteer to help us get same-sex marriage here in California, so excuse me for thinking that your glib bon mot was probably not worth your effort to type.)
posted by klangklangston at 5:09 PM on March 4, 2010


Yeah, there really is no fair basis for comparing Iranian "Democracy" to ours (hint: ours is flawed but still way Democracy-er). While it's true the USA hasn't been without undemocratic tendencies of its own in recent years, that's not especially relevant in this context.
posted by saulgoodman at 7:17 AM on March 5, 2010


Wait, what? How does the DMCA fit into this?

Because under the DMCA you don't actually have to be infringing anything. There just has to be an accusation of infringement and it's up to you to prove you have the rights to publish or that doing so falls into fair use. Youtube is all the time taking down videos because of a DMCA notice. Hosting companies have killed whole sites because of this.

You can get heavy financial penalties for filing a fraudulent claim, but that takes time and more on the wrong parties part. DMCA stifles free speech.

And this only has anything to do with the original post peripherally. It's because of the unreasonable and unjust demands of the US that these technologies were implemented in the first place.
posted by cjorgensen at 8:27 AM on March 5, 2010 [1 favorite]






« Older World hunger and the locavores   |   Chickens in the Road - farm blog Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments