Google and Facebook can be legally intercepted: Is the Government reading your messages?

The issue of internet surveillance by national governments is of growing concern around the world as evidenced by the profile of Wikileaks and the former US National Security Agent Edward Snowden. In the UK, many would be surprised to learn that what they consider to be a private message, sent via such platforms as Facebook, Twitter, Hotmail and Yahoo, is available to be read by the British Government.

It was previously believed that the interception of such communications was covered by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. This protected privacy by requiring warrants to be granted before surveillance could take place when an individual is suspected of illegal activity. However, the crucial element is the Government’s distinction between “internal” and “external” communications. Only an individual’s external communications may be intercepted indiscriminately. Government agencies are not required to have “grounds” to suspect wrongdoing in these circumstances. Internal communications, on the other hand, still require a warrant.

Most individuals will assume that their communications with family and friends in the UK, via social media, will fall into the “internal” category. This is not the view of the Government since these online platforms may have servers based abroad. The Government classes these as “external”, allowing any communication sent via them to be accessed. Searches on websites such as Google and YouTube are also accessible in the name of national surveillance.

Although there are restrictions on how the messages can be searched by not allowing reference to a specific person or residence, this external classification allows the Government to read, listen, and look at each message that everyday individuals are sending. The level of information that can be collected in this way is astonishing with an estimated 600 million such events recorded daily.

Charles Farr, Director General of the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism, defended the Government’s position on both the requirement for public protection and on the basis that the vast majority of messages intercepted in this way are not read, and if read, are not recorded. The alternative view taken is that Tempora and the Prism Project (the UK and US government surveillance projects) amount to an unacceptable violation of an individual’s right to privacy. As the debate continues, new revelations will no doubt come to light.