It’s been 10 years since Edward Snowden holed up in a Hong Kong hotel room and exposed Britain and America’s mass surveillance operations to a group of journalists. His bombshell revelations revealed how the US and UK governments were spying on their citizens, intercepting, processing and storing their data, and sharing this information. Since then, although neither state has lost its appetite for hoovering up huge amounts of personal data, new transparency and oversight constraints, together with the growth of encrypted technology, have tilted the balance towards privacy.
Snowden’s revelations sparked outrage and anger. Bulk interception was being done without a democratic mandate and with few real safeguards. When the scope of this surveillance came to light, officials claimed most of the information was not “read” and therefore its collection did not violate privacy. This was disingenuous; the data could reveal an intimate picture of someone’s life – a fact that was upheld in later legal challenges, which proved the surveillance violated privacy and human rights law.
The technology we know about is a decade old. Have the budgets for these agencies and these projects increased or decreased in this period? The capabilities of last decade, as shocking and abused as they were, probably don't stand to the capabilities in existence and in use today.
righttoprivacy wrote
"new transparency and oversight constraints, together with the growth of encrypted technology, have tilted the balance towards privacy."
Sounds a bit idealistic.
We all should have the basic dignity that is the right to privacy in our homes and personally owned devices (at a minimum).