Comment by ignoramous

2 years ago

> Here I'd say look at the jurisdictions of the orgs.

Per Covert Surveillance Act passed in 2020, looks like Sweden (where Mullvad is based) can ask communication providers / website services to secretly add or assist with backdoors?

  ... Where the identity of the suspect is not known, but his contacts are known, or a third party (such as a website which the suspects visits) is known, one can permit secret data reading of these contacts, or the third party, but only in order to identify the suspect. Only (stored) historical metadata, not real-time data or communications and not by means of activation of audio or video surveillance functions can be used for this (section 4b).

https://www.venice.coe.int/files/Spyware/SWE-E.htm / https://archive.vn/LgE7a

7 comments

ignoramous

kfreds 2 years ago

I'm pretty sure you're talking about this law, in which case it doesn't apply to us.

https://mullvad.net/en/help/swedish-covert-surveillance-data...

In short, "Mullvad is thus not covered by either the data storage provisions in the LEK for operations subject to a reporting obligation, or the duty to cooperate pursuant to the Covert Surveillance of Data Act."

ignoramous 2 years ago
> it doesn't apply to us
This is also what your website says,
But it could be interpreted contrarily - that VPN services through, for example, encryption via signals that the VPN service itself has power over through agreements with subcontractors, etc. could possibly be seen as an electronic communications service ...
And I'm not just talking about Mullvad VPN (the "electronic communication service" provider), but Mullvad AB, which also hosts websites and builds apps (like the browser and VPN clients), too.
So, is the "law doesn't apply" a fact? If so, may want to reword this bit on your website to make that much clear:
[Mullvad's] opinion is that the reasonable interpretation is that a VPN service is not to be considered as an electronic communications service based on previous legislative history.
If not, due to the "covert" nature of the Act, if Mullvad was coerced to co-operate with the govt, it seems Mullvad couldn't even publicly talk or hint about it (like warrant canaries, for example)?
- kfreds 2 years ago
  
  I'm writing this on my phone and for whatever reason can't find the passages that you're quoting. Are they in the same article that I linked?
  In any case, to my knowledge the law in question doesn't apply to us. If the Swedish government tried to argue otherwise we'd get our lawyers involved.
  Having said all of this, I am concerned about National Security Letters and similar concepts. Technologies like reproducible builds, transparency logs, and remote attestation can help there.
  
  3 replies →
- ziddoap 2 years ago
  
  It is worth noting that your second quote is from a blog posted in May 2020, and the link that kfreds posted is from their follow-up blog post, dated July 2020.