The UK ’s IPT ( GCHQ ) has ruled that GCHQ ’s hacking activities are legal. The case against the GCHQ alleged that the intelligence agency was breaking British law and violating fundamental warrant protections through its intrusive and persistent surveillance activities. IPT will never confirm nor deny that these operations exist, but the case caught the headlines in December 2015 when the intelligence agency admitted that it operated “within and outside the the United Kingdom ”. The British spying nerve center GCHQ has won a major court case in defense of the agency's persistent hacking programs. The IPT has now ruled that computer network exploitation that may involve remotely activating cameras and microphones on devices without the owner’s knowledge does not breach human rights.
The UK ’s IPT ( GCHQ ) has ruled that GCHQ ’s hacking activities are legal. The case against the GCHQ alleged that the intelligence agency was breaking British law and violating fundamental warrant protections through its intrusive and persistent surveillance activities. IPT will never confirm nor deny that these operations exist, but the case caught the headlines in December 2015 when the intelligence agency admitted that it operated “within and outside the the United Kingdom ”. The IPT has now ruled that computer network exploitation that may involve remotely activating cameras and microphones on devices without the owner’s knowledge does not breach human rights.