DOCSLIB.ORG

National Cybersecurity and Cyberdefense Policy Snapshots Css

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
National Cybersecurity and Cyberdefense Policy Snapshots Css CSS CYBER DEFENSE PROJECT NATIONAL CYBERSECURITY AND CYBERDEFENSE POLICY SNAPSHOTS Updated Collection 2 Edited by Sean Cordey and Robert S. Dewar Zürich, September 2019 Cyber Defense Project (CDP) Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich National Cyberdefense Policy Snapshots Editors: Sean Cordey and Robert S. Dewar © 2019 Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich Contact: Center for Security Studies Haldeneggsteig 4 ETH Zürich CH-8092 Zürich Switzerland Tel.: +41-44-632 40 25 [email protected] www.css.ethz.ch Analysis prepared by: Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich ETH-CSS project management: Tim Prior, Head of the Risk and Resilience Research Group; Myriam Dunn Cavelty, Deputy Head for Research and Teaching; Andreas Wenger, Director of the CSS. Disclaimer: The opinions presented in this study exclusively reflect the authors’ views. Please cite as: Sean Cordey and Robert S. Dewar, ed. (2019): National Cybersecurity and Cyberdefense Policy Snapshots: Updated Collection 2, 2019, Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich. 2 National Cyberdefense Policy Snapshots Contents Introduction 4 Austria 7 Finland 33 France 53 Germany 69 Italy 89 The Netherlands 109 Singapore 129 The United Kingdom 147 Summary of Findings and Conclusion 164 Contributors 170 3 National Cyberdefense Policy Snapshots – Introduction Introduction Robert S. Dewar Center for Security Studies, ETH Zürich1 1. National Policy Frameworks for Cybersecurity and Cyberdefense The goal of this publication is to understand current cybersecurity policies as a facet of a country’s national security policy, and particularly how cyberdefense is embedded in a state’s cybersecurity posture. In the past decade cyber- conflict has been increasingly discussed at the highest political and military levels. It has also broadened as a concept to include not just cyberattacks on critical infrastructure, but acts of hybrid warfare and state-sponsored campaigns to affect or change public opinion. Cyberspace is therefore increasingly being viewed as both a strategic domain and as a tool to be used in a strategic manner. Cyber-conflict itself has moved towards what Liddell Hart (1965) described as “grand strategy”: all the resources of a nation state – economic, military, diplomatic, social and informational – are being deployed in both peacetime and wartime to ensure that the state and its citizens remain secure in an increasingly digital and connected world. Due to the ever-increasing availability and variety of sophisticated malicious digital tools and the ease with which these tools can be deployed, cybersecurity is now a crucial element of national security. Within this larger context, the concept of cyberdefense, with its implicit military connotation, has also gained significantly more prominence. Defining “cybersecurity” and “cyberdefense” is problematic and presents an ongoing challenge (Kruger, 2012). National policies of the kind analyzed in the snapshots contained in this collection define these concepts very differently. However, in order to conduct an effective examination and analysis of national policy a set of baseline definitions is needed. As working definition, we understand cyberdefense to fall under the purview of a country's national security policy, and therefore is a part of its defense department or ministry, while nevertheless retaining a close a link to the overall policy efforts to improve a country's cybersecurity. As such cyberdefense intersects with cybersecurity. Cybersecurity policies tend to be more holistic and are released into the public domain, with references to ensuring civilian that infrastructures such as banking and personal computer networks are secure and resilient to cyber- intrusions, and setting out measures designed to tackle online criminal activity (cybercrime). Cyberdefense by contrast is more of a closed box. This is due to its close relationship to secret, classified aspects of government policy and activity.2 As such, cyberdefense deserves special attention in studies of national policy such as this collection of analyses and is treated separately in the policy snapshots contained in this collection. Since there is an overall impression that the risks to national security from cyberspace have changed both in terms of quantity (more incidents are occurring) and quality (these incidents are becoming more sophisticated), many states have re-evaluated their previous cybersecurity efforts. In the ten years to 2019 a large number of national policies and strategies have been published specifically addressing cybersecurity and cyberdefense. Although these policies and strategies address similar issues, there is significant variation in approaches given national priorities and conceptualizations of the issues at hand. 2. Purpose of the handbook: What is a “snapshot”? This current edition explores the trends and divergences in these national policies in order to better understand how cyberdefense intersects with cybersecurity policy. In a systematic fashion we take a snapshot of the current national cybersecurity and cyberdefense policies of eight important European and international actors – Austria, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Singapore. The collected analyses examine where these states currently stand from a policy perspective and how they deal with cyber issues. The objective of these snapshots is to provide clear information and insight into important core aspects of cybersecurity and cyberdefense policy at the state level. This is achieved by examining current and former cybersecurity, cyberdefense and national security policy and strategy documents published by countries around the world. 1 Robert S. Dewar is now Head of Cyber Security at the Geneva Centre for Security Policy. 2 It is important to note that these definitions are intended as a baseline or starting point for analysis in order to differentiate core policy documents. They are not indented to supersede or supplant any definitions provided by the national policies under examination. National definitions, where they are provided in the policy literature, are presented in the glossaries of each snapshot. 4 National Cyberdefense Policy Snapshots – Introduction The documents examined to produce these national snapshots are open-source and in the public domain. They are drawn from ministerial sources as well as publically available online repositories of such policies, including those of the European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA)3 and NATO’s Cooperative Cyber Defense Centre of Excellence (CCDCOE).4 Open-source documents were chosen for analysis to ensure that any findings or conclusions could be published and made freely available. All of the snapshots are either compiled or at least validated by national experts. There are two consequences of basing the analysis on published policy documents that are important to note at this point. The first is that that analysis can only examine areas discussed in those documents. As a result, certain questions of interest or importance – such as the impact of new legal norms such as the Tallinn Manual or ongoing activities at European Union – can only be examined if specific mention of them is made in the policy documents. While not discussing these questions may seem like an omission on the part of the researchers and editors, they are in fact restricted by the scope of the documents used for the analysis. It is envisaged that, as the corpus of policy literature expands, so too will the areas and questions of analysis given the priorities and foci of the countries being examined. The second consequence of basing the analysis on open-source policy documents is that that there is a concentration on de jure relationships, responsibilities and actions. De facto situations are too abstract and subjective to be included as part of an analysis and he the de facto jurisdictions of a cybersecurity or cyberdefense agency present different questions to the ones being examined in the snapshots. An example of this can be found in the examination of the United Kingdom’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ). This agency is heavily involved in intelligence-gathering and works closely with the UK’s Ministry of Defence. This is a de facto military relationship given the GCHQ’s work. However, the GCHQ falls under the oversight of the Foreign Office and is therefore a de jure civilian entity. This civilian nature is stated in the policy literature, from which the snapshot analysis is drawn. 3. Structure of the snapshots Each national snapshot contains four sections of analysis. Section 1 provides a timeline of document publication contextualized with major cybersecurity incidents which impacted policy development. Section 2 of each snapshot provides more detailed analysis and understanding of current policy and strategy. It zooms in on specific national security, cybersecurity and cyberdefense policy documents (where such documents exist), examines core themes, fields, tasks and priorities and extrapolates interconnections between the documents. There is a particular focus on any identifiable relationships between cyberdefense and national security policy. Section 3 continues the focused analysis, but concentrates on the organizational structures and frameworks used to develop and implement policy. It sets out any overarching frameworks, and specifies identified relationships between the various national agencies, ministries and bureaux involved in cybersecurity
Load more

Recommended publications
  • From the Editor
    EDITORIAL STAFF From the Editor ELIZABETH SKINNER Editor Happy New Year, everyone. As I write this, we’re a few weeks into 2021 and there ELIZABETH ROBINSON Copy Editor are sparkles of hope here and there that this year may be an improvement over SALLY BAHO Copy Editor the seemingly endless disasters of the last one. Vaccines are finally being deployed against the coronavirus, although how fast and for whom remain big sticky questions. The United States seems to have survived a political crisis that brought EDITORIAL REVIEW BOARD its system of democratic government to the edge of chaos. The endless conflicts VICTOR ASAL in Syria, Libya, Yemen, Iraq, and Afghanistan aren’t over by any means, but they have evolved—devolved?—once again into chronic civil agony instead of multi- University of Albany, SUNY national warfare. CHRISTOPHER C. HARMON 2021 is also the tenth anniversary of the Arab Spring, a moment when the world Marine Corps University held its breath while citizens of countries across North Africa and the Arab Middle East rose up against corrupt authoritarian governments in a bid to end TROELS HENNINGSEN chronic poverty, oppression, and inequality. However, despite the initial burst of Royal Danish Defence College change and hope that swept so many countries, we still see entrenched strong-arm rule, calcified political structures, and stagnant stratified economies. PETER MCCABE And where have all the terrorists gone? Not far, that’s for sure, even if the pan- Joint Special Operations University demic has kept many of them off the streets lately. Closed borders and city-wide curfews may have helped limit the operational scope of ISIS, Lashkar-e-Taiba, IAN RICE al-Qaeda, and the like for the time being, but we know the teeming refugee camps US Army (Ret.) of Syria are busy producing the next generation of violent ideological extremists.
    [Show full text]
  • Geheimdienste
    1 | 2016 Preis: GLOBAL 3,– Euro VIEWUnabhängiges Magazin der Österreichischen Gesellschaft für Außenpolitik und die Vereinten Nationen (ÖGAVN) und des Akademischen Forums für Außenpolitik (AFA) Geheimdienste http://www.globalview.at ISSN: 1992-9889 DVR: 0875538 Nr.1/2016; global view cover 1/2016.indd 1 11.04.16 09:57 Mit einem Beitrag von Rudolf Hundstorfer Bitte gehen Sie wählen! Die Bundespräsidenten Wahl naht und wir möchten an Sie appellieren, von Ihrem Wahl- recht Gebrauch zu machen. Gehen Sie zur Wahl und bestimmen Sie mit, wer die nächsten 6 Jah- re unser Staatsoberhaupt sein soll. Weder das AFA noch die ÖGAVN können aufgrund Ihrer Überparteilichkeit eine Wahlempfehlung abge- ben, aber Sie zumindest bitten, Ihrer demokra- tischen Pflicht nachzukommen und wählen zu gehen. Wir möchten Ihnen hier auch einige Bücher von den Kandidatinnen und Kandidaten bzw. ein Buch, in dem zwei Kandidaten einen Beitrag verfasst haben, präsentieren. Zudem natürlich auch die Bücher unseres amtierenden Staats- oberhaupts und seiner „First Lady“. Liebe Leserin! Lieber Leser! Dear Readers! Jeder kennt ihn, viele begehren ihn, viele fürch- gehrten James-Bond-Filmen, entsprechen ver- ten ihn: Die Rede ist von Mr. Bond, James Bond. mutlich (noch) nicht der Realität, aber dennoch Der wohl bekannteste Geheimagent der Welt ist werfen wir einen Blick auf das Land, in dem ei- zwar nur Fiktion in Ian Flemmings Geschichten, ner der Nobelkarosen unseres Vorzeigeagenten, aber der Stereotyp eines „Geheimdienstlers“ ein BMW, produziert wird, und beleuchten den ist geschaffen. Gut aussehend, charmant, stark Waffenhandel der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. und den Bösewichten immer um einen Schritt Den so wertvollen Treibstoff für diese Autos pro- voraus.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Meddling in Western Elections, 2016-2017: a Preliminary
    RUSSIAN MEDDLING IN WESTERN ELECTIONS, 2016-2017: A PRELIMINARY PROBE By Guillermo Lopez Sanchez A thesis submitted to the Graduate Council of Texas State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts with a Major in International Studies May 2018 Committee Members: Dennis J. Dunn, Chair Ronald Angelo Johnson Sandhya Rao COPYRIGHT by Guillermo Lopez Sanchez 2018 FAIR USE AND AUTHOR’S PERMISSION STATEMENT Fair Use This work is protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States (Public Law 94-553, section 107). Consistent with fair use as defined in the Copyright Laws, brief quotations from this material are allowed with proper acknowledgement. Use of this material for financial gain without the author’s express written permission is not allowed. Duplication Permission As the copyright holder of this work I, Guillermo Lopez Sanchez, authorize duplication of this work, in whole or in part, for educational or scholarly purposes only. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I express my gratitude to Dr. Dennis J. Dunn, Professor of History and Director of the Center for International Studies at Texas State University. His dedication, knowledge, and support since I began the Master of Arts with a major in International Studies were invaluable. In addition, my appreciation is extended to Dr. Ronald Angelo Johnson, Associate Professor in the Department of History; and Dr. Sandhya Rao, Professor in the Department of Mass Communication, for their outstanding advice and assistance. Collectively, they strengthened my resources, asked probing questions that helped me sharpen my focus, and provided valuable insights that benefitted my research. I also wish to express my appreciation to Jeremy Pena, Coordinator of Academic Programs at the Center for International Studies, for his administrative support.
    [Show full text]
  • “Why Protest? I've Got Nothing to Hide” Collective Action Against And
    “Why protest? I’ve got nothing to hide” Collective Action against and Chilling Effects of Internet Mass Surveillance A Master’s Dissertation presented to the Faculty of Politics and International Relations, University of Kent and the Faculty of Social Science and Philosophy, Philipps-Universität Marburg in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in Peace and Conflict Studies (International Double Award) by Dipl.-Psych. Johannes Nau Marburg August 2014 ! “Why protest? I’ve got nothing to hide” - Collective Action against and Chilling Effects of Internet Mass Surveillance A Master’s Dissertation presented to the Faculty of Politics and International Relations, University of Kent and the Faculty of Social Science and Philosophy, Philipps-Universität Marburg in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in Peace and Conflict Studies (International Double Award) Word Count: 14790 Copyright © 2014 Johannes Nau This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution – Non-commercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) The content of this master’s dissertation may be used, shared and copied on the condition that appropriate credit is given to the author, indication of changes are made and the material is used for non-commercial purposes only. The full-length legal code / license can be accessed under: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/legalcode ! Acknowledgments In preparation for this thesis, I have received support from various people whom I would like to thank. First of all I want to give credit to my supervisors from Marburg and Canterbury Prof Dr Wagner and Dr Morgan-Jones for the friendly, competent and reliable supervision and support.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil-Military Capacities for European Security
    Clingendael Report Civil-Military Capacities for European Security Margriet Drent Kees Homan Dick Zandee Civil-Military Capacities for European Security Civil-Military Capacities for European Security Margriet Drent Kees Homan Dick Zandee © Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright holders. Image rights: Drone, Binary Code: © Shutterstock.com Search and Rescue squadron: © David Fowler / Shutterstock.com Design: Textcetera, The Hague Print: Gildeprint, Enschede Clingendael Institute P.O. Box 93080 2509 AB The Hague The Netherlands Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.clingendael.nl/ Content Executive summary 7 Introduction 11 1 The external-internal security gap 13 2 Case study maritime security 25 3 Case study border security 39 4 Case study cyber security 53 5 Conclusions and recommendations 64 List of acronyms 70 5 Executive summary In the last two decades the European Union has created separated policies, institutions and capacities for external and internal security. In the meantime the world’s security environment has changed fundamentally. Today, it is no longer possible to make a clear distinction between security outside and within Europe. Conflicts elsewhere in the world often have direct spill-over effects, not primarily in terms of military threats but by challenges posed by illegal immigration, terrorism, international crime and illegal trade. Lampedusa has become a synonym for tragedy. Crises and instability in Africa, the Middle East and elsewhere in the world provide breeding grounds for extremism, weapons smuggling, drugs trafficking or kidnapping.
    [Show full text]
  • National Programmes for Mass Surveillance of Personal Data in Eu Member States and Their Compatibility with Eu Law
    DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZENS' RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS NATIONAL PROGRAMMES FOR MASS SURVEILLANCE OF PERSONAL DATA IN EU MEMBER STATES AND THEIR COMPATIBILITY WITH EU LAW STUDY Abstract In the wake of the disclosures surrounding PRISM and other US surveillance programmes, this study makes an assessment of the large-scale surveillance practices by a selection of EU member states: the UK, Sweden, France, Germany and the Netherlands. Given the large-scale nature of surveillance practices at stake, which represent a reconfiguration of traditional intelligence gathering, the study contends that an analysis of European surveillance programmes cannot be reduced to a question of balance between data protection versus national security, but has to be framed in terms of collective freedoms and democracy. It finds that four of the five EU member states selected for in-depth examination are engaging in some form of large-scale interception and surveillance of communication data, and identifies parallels and discrepancies between these programmes and the NSA-run operations. The study argues that these surveillance programmes do not stand outside the realm of EU intervention but can be engaged from an EU law perspective via (i) an understanding of national security in a democratic rule of law framework where fundamental human rights standards and judicial oversight constitute key standards; (ii) the risks presented to the internal security of the Union as a whole as well as the privacy of EU citizens as data owners, and (iii) the potential spillover into the activities and responsibilities of EU agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Nationale Programme Zur Massenüberwachung Personenbezogener Daten in Den Eu-Mitgliedstaaten Und Ihre Vereinbarkeit Mit Dem Eu-Recht
    GENERALDIREKTION INTERNE POLITIKBEREICHE FACHABTEILUNG C: BÜRGERRECHTE UND KONSTITUTIONELLE ANGELEGENHEITEN BÜRGERLICHE FREIHEITEN, JUSTIZ UND INNERES NATIONALE PROGRAMME ZUR MASSENÜBERWACHUNG PERSONENBEZOGENER DATEN IN DEN EU-MITGLIEDSTAATEN UND IHRE VEREINBARKEIT MIT DEM EU-RECHT STUDIE Abriss Nach den Enthüllungen rund um PRISM und andere US-Überwachungsprogramme erfolgt mit der vorliegenden Studie eine Bewertung der Praxis der Überwachung in großem Ausmaß seitens einer Auswahl von EU-Mitgliedstaaten: Vereinigtes Königreich, Schweden, Frankreich, Deutschland und die Niederlande. Angesichts des großen Ausmaßes der untersuchten Überwachungspraxis muss man davon ausgehen, dass es sich im Vergleich zum traditionellen Sammeln geheimdienstlicher Daten um eine grundlegende Neuordnung der Überwachungspraxis handelt. Deshalb wird in der Studie die Ansicht vertreten, dass eine Analyse der europäischen Überwachungsprogramme nicht auf die Frage der Balance zwischen Datenschutz und nationaler Sicherheit beschränkt bleiben darf, sondern in den größeren Zusammenhang der kollektiven Freiheitsrechte und der Demokratie gestellt werden muss. Zu den Ergebnissen der Studie gehört, dass in vier von fünf der EU-Mitgliedstaaten, die für eine nähere Untersuchung ausgewählt worden sind, in irgendeiner Form ein Abfangen und Überwachen von Kommunikationsdaten in großem Ausmaß erfolgt. Ferner werden in der Studie Parallelen und Unterschiede zwischen diesen Programmen und den seitens der NSA durchgeführten Operationen ermittelt. Die Verfasser der Studie gelangen
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Democratic Oversight of the Security Services
    Strasbourg, 15 December 2015 CDL-AD(2015)010 Or. Engl. Studies no. 388 / 2006 and no.719/2013 EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) REPORT ON THE DEMOCRATIC OVERSIGHT OF THE SECURITY SERVICES Adopted by the Venice Commission at its 71st Plenary Session (Venice, 1-2 June 2007) On the basis of comments by Mr Iain Cameron (Substitute member, Sweden) Mr Olivier Dutheillet de Lamothe (Substitute member, France) Mr Jan Helgesen (Member, Norway) Mr Valery Zorkin (Member, Russian Federation) Mr Ian Leigh (Expert, United Kingdom) Mr Franz Matscher (Expert, Austria) Updated by the Venice Commission at its 102nd Plenary Session (Venice, 20-21 March 2015) On the basis of comments by Mr Iain Cameron (Member, Sweden) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. http://venice.coe.int CDL-AD(2015)010 - 2 - TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 4 The need to control security services .......................................................................................... 4 Accountability .............................................................................................................................. 4 Parliamentary Accountability ....................................................................................................... 5 Judicial review and authorisation ................................................................................................ 6
    [Show full text]
  • Surveillance by Intelligence Services: Fundamental Rights Safeguards And
    FREEDOMS FRA Surveillance by intelligence services: fundamental rights safeguards and remedies in the EU and remedies safeguards rights fundamental services: intelligence by Surveillance Surveillance by intelligence services: fundamental rights safeguards and remedies in the EU Mapping Member States’ legal frameworks This report addresses matters related to the respect for private and family life (Article 7), the protection of personal data (Article 8) and the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial (Article 47) falling under Titles II ‘Freedoms’ and VI ‘Justice’ of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). Photo (cover & inside): © Shutterstock More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu). FRA – European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights Schwarzenbergplatz 11 – 1040 Vienna – Austria Tel. +43 158030-0 – Fax +43 158030-699 fra.europa.eu – [email protected] Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2015 Paper: 978-92-9239-944-3 10.2811/678798 TK-04-15-577-EN-C PDF: 978-92-9239-943-6 10.2811/40181 TK-04-15-577-EN-N © European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2015 Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged. Printed in Luxembourg Printed on process chlorine-free recycled paper (PCF) Surveillance by intelligence services: fundamental rights safeguards and remedies in the EU Mapping Member States’ legal frameworks Foreword Protecting the public from genuine threats to security and safeguarding fundamental rights involves a delicate bal- ance, and has become a particularly complex challenge in recent years.
    [Show full text]
  • Mass Surveillance of Personal Data by EU Member States and Its
    Mass Surveillance of Personal Data by EU Member States and its Compatibility with EU Law Didier Bigo, Sergio Carrera, Nicholas Hernanz, Julien Jeandesboz, Joanna Parkin, Francesco Ragazzi and Amandine Scherrer No. 62 / November 2013 Abstract In the wake of the disclosures surrounding PRISM and other US surveillance programmes, this paper assesses the large-scale surveillance practices by a selection of EU member states: the UK, Sweden, France, Germany and the Netherlands. Given the large-scale nature of these practices, which represent a reconfiguration of traditional intelligence gathering, the paper contends that an analysis of European surveillance programmes cannot be reduced to a question of the balance between data protection versus national security, but has to be framed in terms of collective freedoms and democracy. It finds that four of the five EU member states selected for in-depth examination are engaging in some form of large-scale interception and surveillance of communication data, and identifies parallels and discrepancies between these programmes and the NSA-run operations. The paper argues that these programmes do not stand outside the realm of EU intervention but can be analysed from an EU law perspective via i) an understanding of national security in a democratic rule of law framework where fundamental human rights and judicial oversight constitute key norms; ii) the risks posed to the internal security of the Union as a whole as well as the privacy of EU citizens as data owners and iii) the potential spillover into the activities and responsibilities of EU agencies. The paper then presents a set of policy recommendations to the European Parliament.
    [Show full text]
  • Anhang A: Übersicht Über Die Wichtigsten Geheimdienste
    Anhang A: Übersicht über die wichtigsten Geheimdienste Afghanistan NDS – National Directorate of Security Ägypten GIS – Jihaz al-Mukhabarat al-Amma Argentinien SIDE – Secretaria de Inteligencia del Estado Australien ASIS – Australian Secret Intelligence Service DSD – Defense Signals Directorate Belgien SGR – Service Generale des Renseingnements Brasilien ABIN – Angecia Brasiliera de Inteligencia Bulgarien NSS – Natsionalja Sluzhba za Sigurnost NIS – Natsionalja Informatsionna Sluzhba Pri Minister- kiya S’vet Chile ANI – Agencia Nacional de Inteligencia China MSS – Guojia Anaquaanbu MID – Zhong Chan Er Bu 3VBA – Zhong Chan San Bu Dänemark FE – Forsvarets Efterretningstjeneste PET – Politiets Efterretningstjeneste Deutschland BND – Bundesnachrichtendienst BfV – Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz MAD – Militärischer Abschirmdienst BSI – Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstech- nik IKTZ der Bundespolizei Das BKA – Bundeskriminalamt und die LKAs – Landeskriminalämter müsste man in Deutschland eigentlich schon mit zu den Diensten zählen. Da unsere verfassungsrechtliche Lage immer stärker aufgeweicht wird von z.B. Politikern wie Wolfgang Schäuble als Minister des Inneren a.D., der das Trennungsgebot von Polizei und Diensten zu umgehen versucht, sehen Kritiker in den Reformen des BKA-Gesetzes eine Aufweichung dieses Grundsatzes, da polizeiliche Maß- nahmen zur Extremismus- und Gefahrenabwehr im Vorfeld exekutiver Maß- nahmen immer stärker den präventiven Beobachtungsauftrag der Verfassungs- schutzbehörden berühren. Hier kann sich das Legalitätsprinzip
    [Show full text]
  • Jahrbuch Netzpolitik 2014
    Jahrbuch Netzpolitik 2014 Jahrbuch Netzpolitik 2014 netzpolitik.org Hrsg. Markus Beckedahl, Anna Biselli und Andre Meister Jahrbuch Netzpolitik 2014 1. Auflage, Buch, Dezember 2014 Herausgeber: Markus Beckedahl, Anna Biselli und Andre Meister Redaktion: Markus Beckedahl, Anna Biselli und Andre Meister Paul Berschick, Susanne Eiswirt, Justin Hanney, Matthias ‘wetterfrosch’ Mehldau, Nadine Schildhauer Titelbild: Melanie Twele Satz: Anna Biselli Verlag: epubli Berlin ISBN: 978-3-7375-1489-7 (E-Book) ISBN: 978-3-7375-1490-3 (Print) URL: https://netzpolitik.org/jahrbuch-2014/ Alle Beiträge – sofern nicht anders deklariert – stehen unter der Creative Commons „Namensnennung – Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen“-Lizenz 3.0 DE. Jeder darf: • Teilen – das Material in jedwedem Format oder Medium vervielfältigen und weiterverbreiten • Bearbeiten – das Material remixen, verändern und darauf aufbauen und zwar für beliebige Zwecke, auch kommerziell. Unter folgenden Bedingungen: Namensnennung: Es müssen angemessene Urheber- und Rechteangaben gemacht, ein Link zur Lizenz beigefügt und angeben werden, ob Änderungen vorgenommen wurden. Diese Angaben dürfen in jeder angemessenen Art und Weise gemacht wer- den, allerdings nicht so, dass der Eindruck entsteht, der Lizenzgeber unterstütze gerade den Lizenznehmer oder seine Nutzung besonders. Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen: Wenn das Material geremixt, verändert oder anderweitig direkt darauf aufgebaut wird, dürfen die Beiträge nur unter der- selben Lizenz wie das Original verbreitet werden. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/de/
    [Show full text]