Anonymous Hacks UK Government Site in Response to Detention of David Miranda

United Kingdom authorities have detained David Miranda, Glenn Greenwald's partner. Greenwald is the journalist responsible for publishing the information obtained by Edward Snowden from the NSA. Anonymous hackers have responded to the incident by hacking a UK government website.
The fact that UK authorities have detained Miranda has been heavily criticized – including by Amnesty International despite the fact that he was released after nine hours of questioning.
For their part, the hacktivists have defaced the official website of the Mole Valley District Council (molevalley.gov.uk), which they've used to publish a statement.
“We expect there to be many pointed questions asked in the coming days, both domestically and internationally as to how and why an already ridiculously broad and draconian act of law was ripped of its last remaining shred of legitimacy in what cannot be described as anything other than an act of pure spite and intimidation, an act intended to exert a chilling effect on a stream of high-quality journalistic reporting whose historic importance cannot possibly be overstated,” the hackers said.
The statement is accompanied by a table comprised of the personal details of US government employees. The table includes information on their children, parents, spouses and friends.
The hacktivists say that if Miranda can be detained under terrorism legislation just because he’s related to Greenwald, based on the same theory, other possible terrorists might be related to people working in the US government and military.
“We encourage anyone who is interested in preventing terror attacks to fully investigate these spouses and siblings and mothers and fathers and son and daughters, before they too are embroidered in terrible terror plots of the most heinous variety,” Anonymous members said.
Finally, they conclude their statement with a threat. The hackers say they’re preparing something that’s “befitting the gravity of the crimes.”
“Oh, and before we go, we should probably mention that we have been very, very angry over the last few months -- and very, very busy. The only reason you have not heard from us before now is that we have been waiting and watching as the leaks come out and the spooks trip up over own lies and distortions,” the hacktivists noted.
At the time of writing, the Mole Valley Council website still hosts Anonymous’ statement.

Google: UK privacy laws don't apply to us, we're American

Google has argued that UK privacy laws do not apply to the firm as it is a US-based company.
According to law firm Olswang, Google made the statement after Olswang brought a High Court case against the search giant. The claimants in the case, backed by Safari Users Against Google's Secret Tracking, argue that Google is bypassing the Apple iPhone's built-in security settings in order to monitor and collect users' personal information through the Safari browser.
At the time of publishing, Google had not responded to V3's request for comment on the accusations.
The case is similar to one filed with the US Federal Trade Commission, which ended with Google being fined $22.5m. Claimant Marc Bradshaw said the UK action is designed to make UK authorities take even sterner action against Google, arguing that fines alone will not work.
"It seems to us absurd to suggest that consumers can't bring a claim against a company which is operating in the UK and is even constructing a $1bn headquarters in London. If consumers can't bring a civil claim against a company in a country where it operates, the only way of ensuring it behaves is by having a robust regulator," Bradshaw said.
"Fines would be useless – even if Google agreed to pay them – because Google earns more than the maximum fine in less than two hours. With no restraint Google is free to continue to invade our privacy whether we like it or not."
Olswang partner Dan Tench said the law firm has already started working to make departments such as the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) take a more proactive and stern approach with Google.
"Our letter to the Information Commissioner conveyed our client's position that fines won't work and urged him to change Google's behaviour through an enforcement notice or other alternative sanctions. The response was that they found our client's position simplistic and difficult to implement," Tench said.
"But a leading QC disagrees and has advised that the Information Commissioner does have stronger powers. We note that France's regulator CNIL has been more robust, announcing a final ultimatum to Google to ensure quickly that its privacy policy complies with European law. Our regulator should listen to consumers and recognise that other sanctions are needed to get Google to behave."
The case is one of many privacy complaints facing Google. In the US, rights group Consumer Watchdog launched a similar complaint against the firm. Last week, Google claimed Gmail users should not expect privacy in a court filing for the case.