Content Types

Third party intervention in the Bureau of Investigative Journalism case

On July 8th, CDT submitted a third party intervention (amicus brief) to the European Court of Human Rights in the Bureau of Investigative Journalism and Alice Ross v. United Kingdom case. The journalist applicants challenged the United Kingdom’s Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, Tempora program, and surveillance practices generally. They argued that blanket surveillance had a chilling effect on their profession, and did not satisfy the Court’s standards for compatibility with Articles 8 (privacy) and 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights. CDT drew attention to similarities to US surveillance practices, which undoubtedly fail to satisfy the Court’s standards, and argued that the receipt of US intelligence alone makes the UK’s practices incompatible with the Convention.

Read More Read More

Protecting Broadband Privacy, FCC Reply Comments

The Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) respectfully submits these reply comments in response to the public comments filed as part of the Federal Communications Commission’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding proposed rules to protect the privacy of customers of broadband and other telecommunications services. CDT is a nonprofit public interest organization dedicated to promoting openness, innovation, and freedom online — a mission that closely tracks with the…

Read More Read More

A Deep Dive on the Final CISA Guidelines

The Departments of Homeland Security and Justice have been busy since February. Last week, they issued final guidance mandated by the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 (“CISA”)—the law that provided broad liability protections for private companies that share cyber threat information with the government (or among themselves), which is then disseminated to various government agencies, including entities like the National Security Agency. CDT was critical of the law…

Read More Read More

Correcting the Record: The ECTR “Fix”

Last week, Senators John McCain and John Cornyn proposed an amendment to an appropriations bill that would have permitted the FBI to obtain sensitive information, such as email records and browsing history, without a court order. While the amendment failed to meet the required sixty-vote threshold for moving forward, another vote is expected in the coming days on this proposed massive expansion of the FBI’s authority. Before it does, it is important to dispel several misconceptions that arose during the debate about the FBI’s access to the records at issue, “electronic communication transactional records” (ECTRs).

Read More Read More

Letter Opposing "ECTR Fix"

CDT submitted a letter to US Senators urging them to oppose an amendment to the Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriations Act for FY 2017 that would expand national security letter (“NSL”) authority to permit the acquisition of sensitive electronic communications transactional records without prior court review. Dubbed the “ECTR Fix” amendment, the McCain-Cornyn amendment doesn’t “fix” anything.

Read More Read More

Why CDT Supports the Massie-Lofgren Amendment

The House of Representatives is expected to vote on a bipartisan amendment to the Department of Defense Appropriations Act (H.R. 5293) offered by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Zoe Lofgren (D-CA). CDT strongly supports this amendment, which passed overwhelmingly in the House in 2014 and 2015, because it would protect the privacy of U.S. persons and the cybersecurity of all internet users.

Read More Read More

Workplace Privacy: State Legislation & Future Technology Questions

Digital technology has fundamentally and forever changed the way we share information about ourselves – but has also raised many complicated questions about the definition of privacy generally, and it has diminished our ability to keep separate personas at work and at home, “IRL” versus online. This creates a need for us to define what it means to have privacy in the relationship between employers and their employees, and to create a culture of workplace privacy, which state legislators are now attempting to do.

Read More Read More