Online anonymity

Like nearly all European Union members states, Denmark has domestic laws on the books that require Internet service providers and telecommunications firms record all location, correspondence and traffic data for six months as part of an EU anti-terrorism directive. But a new proposal drafted by a working group in the Danish Ministry of Justice would go beyond those requirements and effectively make it impossible to use the Internet anonymously.

Danish media reported last week that the working group suggested all Danes use so-called strong identification, such as their social security number or an electronic signature, to identify themselves while online.

To learn more about this potential encroachment on privacy in Denmark, Deutsche Welle turned to Jon Lund, the chairman of the Danish Online News Association.

DW: Should Europeans be scared or just concerned by the Danish proposal?

Jon Lund: They should not be scared right now. It's not a law, not yet at least. It's not even a proposed law. What it is is a bunch of government officials from the Danish Ministry of Justice, the police and the intelligence services who are trying to find out what to do about this Internet thing, and how to deal with the fact that potential terrorists can communicate on it.

The group members have met before, but what got their attention this time was: What do we do if people use an open wireless network? Then we don't know who they are. We can watch what they say, but we don't know who they are, and that's a problem.

The address that problem, this working group proposed that you had to identify yourself by your social security number or another type of strong identification to get online from various hotspots.

What do you think the chances are that the idea becomes law?

It hasn't, and I'm fairly confident that it won't pass if it gets proposed.

For the past week there's been a rather large debate here in Denmark, and it's ended up that all political parties have said "We don't want to do this. There is no political support for it." It's just a government group that has come up with some suggestions, and it turns out that nobody really wants to see them carried through.

I think is that proposals like these bear witness to an understanding of the Internet that's not progressive. It's seeing the Internet as something evil that has to be controlled. It's not trying to take advantage of the Internet, but rather to roll things backward to a time when things were much simpler.

In recent weeks, Denmark has come up in the news for wanting to re-impose stronger land borders with Sweden and Germany. That's not directly connected to the Internet regulations but can they be related in terms of the political atmosphere in Denmark?

It's not that the same people who want the border control also who want more control on the Internet. It is not the same politicians. But, there is a broader cultural movement which puts more focus on safety, control and keeping bad guys out and good guys in. You could say that the two different proposals are part of the same paradigm in a very broad sense.

Why would members of the Danish Online News Association be opposed to a proposal like this?

We love the Internet for its freedom, for everyone to be able to communicate and make themselves heard. It would narrow down people's willingness to communicate online if they have to logon with their social security number.

Look at the Arab Spring. What would have happened if all protesters had to log on with their real identity, to tell people that something was going to happen? That wouldn't happen. This is a totalitarian approach.

Interview: Cyrus Farivar

Editor: Sean Sinico