
UK firm's surveillance kit 'used to crush Uganda opposition' - escapologybb
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34529237
======
togusa
For reference, Gamma Group are a well known bunch of evil bastards in the UK.
Nothing they do is considered honorable. Literally nothing. They also pretty
much have a license to do what the hell they like under government mandate as
a lot of things they do are actually pretty much illegal if someone founded a
startup to do it today.

It says everything about the place when I had my CV put forward by an agent a
few years ago for a "high tech position" in the "expanding data sector".
Wouldn't reveal who it was to start with due to an NDA. Moment I got told who
it was, it was "fuck off". And you know what I got stick from the agent for
actually having some ethics. Clearly it's not common these days otherwise
outfits like that wouldn't have any staff.

Then again they seem to groom people without experience or understanding of
exactly what they do at university job fairs.

I await my bag and tag for criticising them.

~~~
grkvlt
> actually pretty much illegal

Not at all. This is like saying weapons manufacturing is illegal, just because
they can be used for committing murder. As for Gamma Group being 'evil' that's
also a bit of an overstatement. I don't want to get into a huge ethical debate
here, but the principle is that tools are morally neutral, their users or mis-
users are the ones that should be criticised.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
At some point it becomes the bully on the playground, holding your arm and
hitting you with it, chanting 'stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself!'

Weapons manufacturing in bulk for sale to anybody with cash can be called
evil, with good reason.

------
dijit
I'm a British citizen, how can we stop this from happening again.

I don't think writing a letter to my MP is going to change anything since I
write very often (yearly, since snowden) about surveillance, and nothing
changes.

~~~
secfirstmd
Surprisingly, there are many quiet parts of the Conservative Party who think
this sort of thing has gone on too long. Especially the (increasingly small)
Libertarian branch. People like David Davis (the former candidate for party
leader) are a good start. Ditto reach out to people in the House of Lords,
whatever we may think of the institution, there are many very influential
voices there. Baroness Manningham-Buller for example, though the former head
of MI5, is actually a surprisingly strong critic of such surveillance. Esp
when it's over seas.

~~~
toyg
David Davis, will all due respect, is completely isolated in his own party and
mostly fulfils a theatrical role these days.

------
TazeTSchnitzel
Such software should be classified as arms for export purposes.

~~~
proveanegative
Would you say the same about Metasploit or Wireshark? If not, where do you
suggest the line be drawn?

~~~
pjc50
Software that runs on your own computer is not a weapon; software that is
designed to run on other people's computers without their knowledge or consent
probably is. That would put Wireshark clearly on the acceptable side of the
line and Metasploit in a very questionable place.

------
iamthepieman
The article is awfully light on what exactly was sold to the Ugandan
government.

The article states the technology can be used,

"to spy on the enemy, collect data, intrude enemy systems, intercept enemy
communication and also manipulate transmissions. "It can covertly be deployed
in buildings, vehicles, computers, mobile phones, cameras and any other
equipment deemed worthy for information extraction or surveillance."

I mean from the article it could be anything - a software interface on top of
standard CCTV cameras, voice activated microphones on government and
government sympathizer personal electronic devices or just a piece of analytic
software for parsing through data they've already collected.

Doing a bit more digging it appears that Finfisher (the tech sold to Uganda by
Gamma Group) is a spyware tool that uses common security exploits including
phishing and social engineering to infect target devices and monitor them. It
appears to do this in a somewhat automated, click-to-launch, way.

~~~
wavefunction
Come on, the important part is "intrude enemy systems, intercept enemy
communication and manipulate transmissions"

The big red flag for you should be "enemy" rather than "someone I disagree
with politically."

------
IllusoryReverb
If these allegations are true, then I find it hard to imagine a fair and just
society arising in these countries.

It would appear to me that autocratic governments are being given additional
tools to retain power and more control over young democracies which have not
yet developed the institutions necessary to 'self-correct' or reverse/prevent
the abuse of such tools.

In my view, it is those who are most likely to agitate for a more democratic
society and create institutions that demand for accountability who will be
targeted and silenced.

This will deny those countries of the very people who are needed to create the
kind of country that their citizens dream of.

Imagine such tools in the hands of the British during the time of the birth of
the United States.

I am left with a bitter taste in my mouth. I am not quick to see a dystopian
future, but it will make it harder for needed change to come. I welcome any
alternative viewpoints that can shed a kinder light on this situation.

------
tim333
The software seems kind of irrelevant to me. They recently arrested the main
opposition and threw them in jail on trumped up charges. You don't need
software for that.

>Police arrested the country’s main opposition leader and a dozen other
officials from his party in dawn raids on Thursday, as President Yoweri
Museveni scaled up efforts to thwart a mounting challenge to his three-decade
rule.

[http://www.wsj.com/articles/ugandan-opposition-leader-
kizza-...](http://www.wsj.com/articles/ugandan-opposition-leader-kizza-
besigye-arrested-on-public-order-charge-1444922283)

------
d4nt
I don't think the technology, and who sold it to whom, is the real story here.
We all know that the NSA and GCHQ have similar capabilities. I imagine China,
Russia and several other states do too. The point is, this power will corrupt.

Consider this quote:

> people deemed dangerous to state security like government officials and
> opposition politicians are being surveilled

What happens if Labour look likely to win the election and someone decides
Jeremy Corbyn is "dangerous to state security" because he opposes renewing
Trident. What institutions exist to ensure that he can't be surveilled?

~~~
mcintyre1994
There was a ruling this week saying MPs can be surveilled by gchq, it'd be
interesting to know where the immunity really is - the PM and his cabinet?
Opposition leaders? The opposition leader? [http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-
policy/2015/10/gchq-allowed-to...](http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-
policy/2015/10/gchq-allowed-to-spy-on-mps-and-peers-secret-court-rules/)

Oh, and David Cameron has already called the Labour party run by Corbyn a
danger to national security.
[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-
cameron-...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-
claims-jeremy-corbyn-is-a-threat-to-national-security-10498651.html)

~~~
branchless
And the day you want to cut GCHQ funding? Well just a moment minister let me
play you this before you make a final decision...

