Question for written answer E-8610/2010 to the Commission Rule 117 Cristiana Muscardini (PPE)

Subject: Anonymity on the Web

Sweden has been the first country to take IT measures that allow people to surf the Web in complete anonymity. There has also been a disproportionate increase in software, which is sometimes free, that achieves the same goal, such as Anonymizer, Ultrasurf, Ipredator. Relakks, Tor, etc. At first sight, concealing the identity of users appears to be an excellent idea to protect that privacy which is, apparently, normally infringed by numerous search engines which even sell your personal data to third parties. 'These companies', say the supporters of the Italian , 'destroy citizens' privacy' because through their search engines, email systems and browsers they 'can get to know (and re-use) nearly everything about the lives of their users.' Hence the justification for online anonymity.

This poses another risk, however, which has already been explicitly expressed by MI6, the British secret service, which has criticised the possible adoption of such restrictive Internet measures in the UK, because if more people keep a low profile it will be more difficult for the police to monitor online activities. The need for anonymity is real, as is the need to know who commits crimes through the Internet. How can we balance these two needs, which seem to be at two opposite ends of the spectrum?

1. Does the Commission have an opinion on this matter?

2. Does it believe that the only way to facilitate privacy is to achieve user anonymity?

3. Does it not believe that anonymity gives the green light to organised crime in their use of the Web?

4. In its view, are the two requirements for privacy and security incompatible?

834457.EN PE 451.352