[Cryptography] German govt tells parents to destroy WiFi-connected doll

[Walter van Holst]

On 2017-02-22 23:19, Florian Weimer wrote:

> But in general, the emerging consensus (not just in the EU) seems to
> be that recording someone's spoken word isn't really recording as long
> as only a machine processes the recording.  Which aligns quite well
> with how government agencies make copies of data generated by citizens
> who are clearly not suspected of any wrongdoing and claim that it
> doesn't count as long as only machines look at the data.

While this is a line that has been trotted out by intelligence services 
to the point of it getting tiresome, I would not consider it an 
"emerging consensus".

So far both the highest courts in Europe (CJEU for the EU and ECtHR for 
the Council of Europe) seem to interpret the treaties underpinning 
fundamental rights in Europe in a way that cannot be reconciled with 
such a limited notion of "recording".

For examples, look at DRI vs Ireland (CJEU) and Zakharov vs Russia 
(ECtHR) in which both courts reaffirmed that collection in itself can 
constitute an illegal intrusion in the right to a private life.

Pointers to evidence of such an emerging consensus, despite the 
aforementioned jurisprudence of the highest European courts, would be 
most welcome, obviously.

Regards,

  Walter