The government is tightening the noose around telcos, internet service providers (ISPs), network service providers and search engines in a bid to monitor internet traffic. The exercise is ostensibly for security reasons and to prevent “misuse” of the freedom of speech in cyberspace.
In a recent meeting of an inter-ministerial group to review the IMS deployed nationwide by the Centre for Development of Telematics (C-DoT), it was suggested 3G mobile services may also be considered as internet service provider data. The group had officials from the department of telecommunications (DoT), Intelligence Bureau and C-DoT, among others. The IMS already installed by C-DoT enables the monitoring of internet data. It will now be upgraded, keeping in mind the latest attacks and security needs of the country.
The IMS covers 71 locations and nearly 1,500 Gbps internet traffic, and is developed in close coordination with security agencies. The IMS capacity is decided in consultation with service providers by C-DoT, considering the three-year traffic projections provided by service providers. The government can access data through IMS based on the needs of security agencies. Both state-run telecom players BSNL and MTNL have already floated tenders for procuring hardware equipment. For BSNL, the process is expected to be completed by the month-end. The IT Act (Amendments), 2008, provides the broad parameters for interception/monitoring of telecom services.
If 3G mobile services are brought under it, it will be the first step towards making the Act effective, according to cyber law expert and Supreme Court lawyer, Pawan Duggal.
Curbs on search engines and ISPs in India are not new. Currently, under Section 79 of the IT Intermediary (Rules and Guidelines) 2011, intermediaries (comprising telcos, ISPs, network services providers, search engines, cyber cafes, web-hosting companies, online auction portals and online payment sites) are mandated to exercise “due diligence” and advise users not to share/distribute information violative of the law or a person’s privacy and rights. Intermediaries are expected to act on a complaint within 36 hours of receiving it, and remove such content when warranted. Now the government is not only demanding “due diligence” but also active monitoring of content on the internet.
The affected parties, meanwhile, are understood to be preparing their response while simultaneously garnering the support of industry bodies to support their point of view. While ISPs and search engines like Yahoo and Google actively support the government when asked to remove content from their sites, they do not monitor content. "We do understand there should be no child pornography or other such content on our sites. But how, for instance, does one define defamation? That should be left to the courts. We can only remove offensive content when requested," said an ISP player, who did not wish to be identified.
It was only last month that the Centre had written to DoT, asking it to “ensure effective monitoring of Twitter and Facebook”, a fact the minister of state for communications and information technology, Milind Deora, acknowledged a few days later in a written reply to a question in the Rajya Sabha. He spoke, in particular, about access to “encrypted data” on social networking sites, but did not elaborate on the subject.
Also Read
Currently, the Indian Telegraph Act and the Indian Information Technology Act 2008 (amendments were introduced in the IT Act 2000) give the government the power to monitor, intercept and even block online conversations and websites. The Centre for Internet and Society has put up a list of 11 such websites blocked by a government order. The data were received from the department of information technology.
DoT is also looking at the feasibility of having an interception solution for all highly encrypted services such as BlackBerry, Gmail and Skype. Earlier, all the operators had agreed to develop the required technical capability for interception of 3G video calls. DoT and the home ministry are working together to put in place rules for intercepting or monitoring 3G data.
The government can, and should, monitor conversations and websites if it believes the content can harm the security, defence, sovereignty and integrity of the country, agree experts. But, they have often wondered how the government would go about its idea of "blanket surveillance", implementing the task of monitoring each and every conversation on an unstructured internet. Companies like Facebook, Twitter and Google have their servers outside India. Hence, the jurisdictions are different, and Indian laws will not apply.
Twitter, for instance, states in its guidelines for law enforcement, “Non-public information about Twitter users is not released, unless we have received a subpoena, court order, or other valid legal process documents.” Facebook has a similar policy. US federal law prohibits the disclosure of the contents of an account such as messages, wall posts and photos except in response to a civil subpoena or court order, the company says on its website. Google's policy is no different, though it has cooperated with the Indian government in cases where security was involved.