Quick freeze: Activists warn against backdoor data retention

Federal Justice Minister Marco Buschmann (FDP) is relying on the quick freeze to freeze connection and location data for law enforcement to prevent further data retention. But for civil rights activists, this approach goes too far in principle. The quick freeze should not be applied retroactively and should more or less be used only to select or filter user traces that have already been collected, said the Data Retention Working Group in a statement on Bushman’s draft bill. There is demand. Rather, the process must initiate data collection and storage in the first place, that is, it must be “forward-looking.”

Advertisement

Quick freeze: Activists warn against backdoor data retention

Above all, “the now standard 7-day storage of IP addresses must be clearly replaced,” AK-Voraat demanded in a statement on Monday. “Otherwise we would have backdoor data retention for everyone.” On the other hand, Bushman clearly relies on providers that maintain user traces that are already saved for operational purposes. AK-Voraat counter: If a judge’s decision gives the initial signal for an initial quick freeze, the access provider will at this point “have to start with an empty database, so to speak, tabulated Rasa for storage by individuals” . Otherwise, it can be assumed that user marks will be recorded across the board.

According to the Justice Ministry’s draft law, only “potential evidential significance” should justify the storage of traffic data, civil rights activists continue to complain. This raises apprehensions that user traces of all citizens may be stored “widely and regularly” with government prosecutors and district courts as there is a strong possibility that these may prove useful for some investigation in the future. As part of the investigation into gang thefts with changing vehicles, the public prosecutor’s office of Frankfurt (Oder) planned to store all license plates on the Brandenburg motorway in “recording mode” over a period of two years starting in 2019. Ordered. Reason: Only in this way could “further vehicles that later became known and other investigation findings” be handed over.

“Grand Alliance” for data retention.

“According to this logic and endless arguments, there is also a risk of total security orders for connection and location information”, Ak-Vorat warns. The proposed time limits for storage requirements do not prevent abuse, as such orders can be issued at any time “in the main proceedings or in various other proceedings”. Bushman also does not want to implement a “login trap” – as agreed in the coalition agreement – ​​with which criminals could be caught exclusively online, for example on social networks. This mechanism would be a good alternative to quick freeze.

Despite a government agreement for a quick freeze, Federal Interior Minister Nancy Feser (SPD) is insisting on storing at least a small number of IP addresses in reserve. The SPD parliamentary group wants to examine such a move “with an open mind.” The Federal Council is also pushing: In particular the states led by the CDU and CSU have blocked parts of the “security package” that had already been approved by the Bundestag because they did not go far enough in terms of surveillance powers. Were. They consider it necessary to log IP addresses without giving any reason. The federal government is still considering whether it wants to set up a mediation committee.

(Old)