In this episode of Tech It Out, We show you how countries around the world are improving their defence systems to counter attacks and how some nations are turning to high-tech devices to keep an eye on their citizens. Also, watch our exclusive interview to know everything about India's new online gaming rules.

Suicide drone, nuclear submarine, mass surveillance, and more | Tech It Out: ​Ep 106 | Full Show

Time and again, some countries have been slammed for mass surveillance. They use a combination of high-tech tools to keep a close tab on people. It seems more countries are now following this unethical practice of snooping on their citizens. We get you more details in this report.

Mass surveillance: Should you be worried? | Tech It Out

More than 31 non-governmental organisations (NGOs) including Amnesty and European Network Against Racism have targetted European Union for what they are the efforts to turn migrant database into a mass surveillance tool through proposed changes. The campaigners for the NGOs made the charge in an open letter to Members of the European Parliament (MEPs).

The NGOs have urged the EU to rethink overhaul of the Eurodac database of asylum seekers’ fingerprints. In a decision taken in 2018, the database was expanded to include passport or ID card details, facial images as well as fingerprints. This would also enable the officials to take fingerprints of children as young as 6. The previous age limit was 14.

The changes are yet to be implemented as the draft resolution is frozen pending agreement on reformation of centerpiece of EU asylum law.

The NGOs have said that use of facial imaging was “intrusive, disproportionate and privacy invasive". They said that the people on the move deserved the same level of protection as anyone else.

"...EU should not take advantage of their vulnerable situation to subject them to mass surveillance and undignified treatment.” they said.

The NGO's also lashed out at the practice of fingerprinting children

“Taking and retaining the biometric data of children for non protection related purposes is a seriously invasive and unjustified infringement on the rights of the child,” says the letter

Fingerprint database Eurodac was made in 2000 to deter asylum seekers from making multiple asylum requests

Under existing EU laws, asylum seekers are required to seek asylum in the first country they arrive in. This puts pressure on southern European countries.

More than 31 non-governmental organisations (NGOs) including Amnesty and European Network Against Racism have targetted European Union for what they are the efforts to turn migrant database into a mass surveillance tool through proposed changes.

More than 31 non-governmental organisations (NGOs) including Amnesty and European Network Against Racism have targetted European Union for what they are the efforts to turn migrant database into a mass surveillance tool through proposed changes. The campaigners for the NGOs made the charge in an open letter to Members of the European Parliament (MEPs). The NGOs have urged the EU to rethink overhaul of the Eurodac database of asylum seekers’ fingerprints. In a decision taken in 2018, the database was expanded to include passport or ID card details, facial images as well as fingerprints. This would also enable the officials to take fingerprints of children as young as 6. The previous age limit was 14. The changes are yet to be implemented as the draft resolution is frozen pending agreement on reformation of centerpiece of EU asylum law. The NGOs have said that use of facial imaging was “intrusive, disproportionate and privacy invasive". They said that the people on the move deserved the same level of protection as anyone else. "...EU should not take advantage of their vulnerable situation to subject them to mass surveillance and undignified treatment.” they said. The NGO's also lashed out at the practice of fingerprinting children “Taking and retaining the biometric data of children for non protection related purposes is a seriously invasive and unjustified infringement on the rights of the child,” says the letter Fingerprint database Eurodac was made in 2000 to deter asylum seekers from making multiple asylum requests Under existing EU laws, asylum seekers are required to seek asylum in the first country they arrive in. This puts pressure on southern European countries.

EU seeking to develop migrant database into surveillance tool: NGOs

The Centre on Friday authorised select security and intelligence agencies for purposes of interception, monitoring and decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource.

The agencies empowered by the government in accordance with the Information Technology Act, 2000, include the Intelligence Bureau (IB), Narcotics Control Bureau (NIB), Enforcement Directorate (ED), Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), National Investigation Agency (NIA), Cabinet Secretariat (RAW) and the Commissioner of Police, Delhi.

"In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000) read with rule 4 of the Information Technology ( Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009, the Competent Authority hereby authorises Security and Intelligence Agencies for the purposes of interception, monitoring and decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource under the said Act," read the notice issued by Home Secretary Rajiv Gauba.

Furthermore, the Directorate of Signal Intelligence has been given authority for service areas of Jammu and Kashmir, North-East and Assam.

The direction from the Ministry of Home Affairs comes as a follow up to a 2009 notification, wherein the then UPA government had stated that no person shall carry out the interception, monitoring, or decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource under sub-section (2) of section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, except by an order issued by the competent authority.

"Such order may be issued by an officer, not below the rank of the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, who has been duly authorised by the competent authority," the 2009 notice read.

As per this earlier notification, in case of remote areas where obtaining prior directions for interception is not feasible, the guidelines provided for monitoring of information generated, transmitted or received in any computer resource to be done with prior approval of the head or second senior-most officer of the security and law enforcement agency at the central level and the officer authorised on this behalf, not below the rank of the Inspector General of Police or an officer of equivalent rank at the state or union territory level.

However, the authority supervising surveillance in such cases was required to inform in writing to the competent authority about the emergency deception of data within three working days and obtain approval within seven working days.

"If the approval of the competent authority is not obtained within the said period of seven working days, such interception or monitoring shall cease and information shall not be intercepted thereafter without prior approval," the document had stated.&nbsp;

The Centre on Friday authorised select security and intelligence agencies for purposes of interception, monitoring and decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource.

The Centre on Friday authorised select security and intelligence agencies for purposes of interception, monitoring and decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource. The agencies empowered by the government in accordance with the Information Technology Act, 2000, include the Intelligence Bureau (IB), Narcotics Control Bureau (NIB), Enforcement Directorate (ED), Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), National Investigation Agency (NIA), Cabinet Secretariat (RAW) and the Commissioner of Police, Delhi. "In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000) read with rule 4 of the Information Technology ( Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009, the Competent Authority hereby authorises Security and Intelligence Agencies for the purposes of interception, monitoring and decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource under the said Act," read the notice issued by Home Secretary Rajiv Gauba. Furthermore, the Directorate of Signal Intelligence has been given authority for service areas of Jammu and Kashmir, North-East and Assam. The direction from the Ministry of Home Affairs comes as a follow up to a 2009 notification, wherein the then UPA government had stated that no person shall carry out the interception, monitoring, or decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource under sub-section (2) of section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, except by an order issued by the competent authority. "Such order may be issued by an officer, not below the rank of the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, who has been duly authorised by the competent authority," the 2009 notice read. As per this earlier notification, in case of remote areas where obtaining prior directions for interception is not feasible, the guidelines provided for monitoring of information generated, transmitted or received in any computer resource to be done with prior approval of the head or second senior-most officer of the security and law enforcement agency at the central level and the officer authorised on this behalf, not below the rank of the Inspector General of Police or an officer of equivalent rank at the state or union territory level. However, the authority supervising surveillance in such cases was required to inform in writing to the competent authority about the emergency deception of data within three working days and obtain approval within seven working days. "If the approval of the competent authority is not obtained within the said period of seven working days, such interception or monitoring shall cease and information shall not be intercepted thereafter without prior approval," the document had stated.

Government empowers security, intelligence agencies for mass surveillance

The opposition parties on Friday said the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/government-empowers-security-intelligence-agencies-for-mass-surveillance-185626">Home Ministry order authorising 10 Central agencies</a> to intercept, monitor, and decrypt "any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer"&nbsp;is unconstitutional and against fundamental rights.

The Congress, the CPI(M), the Samajwadi Party, the Rashtriya Janata Dal and the Trinamool Congress spoke out against the order, which they said was issued on Thursday.&nbsp;

Congress leader Anand Sharma said the order was against the right to privacy, which was a fundamental right.

"The government has done it by stealth and we collectively oppose it. This gives unlimited powers to all these agencies to monitor every information that interests them and complete surveillance which is unacceptable in a democracy," he said.&nbsp;

Samajwadi Party's Ram Gopal Yadav termed the order unconstitutional and said the present government should refrain from making such moves with just a few months left for the general elections.&nbsp;

"This government has only a few months left and it should not dig potholes for itself as a new government will be installed in the centre soon," he said.

TMC's Sukhendu Sekhar Roy said the move was 'draconian'&nbsp;while RJD's Manoj Jha said that it was a cause of concern for not just parliamentarians, but for every Indian.&nbsp;

CPI(M) general secretary Sitaram Yechury voiced his opposition on Twitter.

"Why is every Indian being treated like a criminal? This order by a govt wanting to snoop on every citizen is unconstitutional and in breach of the telephone tapping guidelines, the Privacy Judgement and the Aadhaar judgement," he said.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Why is every Indian being treated like a criminal? This order by a govt wanting to snoop on every citizen is unconstitutional and in breach of the telephone tapping guidelines, the Privacy Judgement and the Aadhaar judgement. <a href="https://t.co/vJXs6aycP0">https://t.co/vJXs6aycP0</a>
— Sitaram Yechury (@SitaramYechury) <a href="https://twitter.com/SitaramYechury/status/1075965497827577856?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 21, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

According to the order, the subscriber or service provider or any person in charge of the computer resource will be bound to extend all facilities and technical assistance to the agencies. Failing to do so will invite seven-year imprisonment and fine.

The agencies are the Intelligence Bureau, Narcotics Control Bureau, Enforcement Directorate, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Central Bureau of Investigation; National Investigation Agency, Cabinet Secretariat (R&amp;AW), Directorate of Signal Intelligence (For service areas of Jammu &amp; Kashmir, North-East and Assam only) and Commissioner of Police, Delhi.&nbsp;

The opposition parties on Friday said the Home Ministry order authorising 10 Central agencies to intercept, monitor, and decrypt "any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer" is unconstitutional and against fundamental rights.

The opposition parties on Friday said the Home Ministry order authorising 10 Central agencies to intercept, monitor, and decrypt "any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer" is unconstitutional and against fundamental rights. The Congress, the CPI(M), the Samajwadi Party, the Rashtriya Janata Dal and the Trinamool Congress spoke out against the order, which they said was issued on Thursday. Congress leader Anand Sharma said the order was against the right to privacy, which was a fundamental right. "The government has done it by stealth and we collectively oppose it. This gives unlimited powers to all these agencies to monitor every information that interests them and complete surveillance which is unacceptable in a democracy," he said. Samajwadi Party's Ram Gopal Yadav termed the order unconstitutional and said the present government should refrain from making such moves with just a few months left for the general elections. "This government has only a few months left and it should not dig potholes for itself as a new government will be installed in the centre soon," he said. TMC's Sukhendu Sekhar Roy said the move was 'draconian' while RJD's Manoj Jha said that it was a cause of concern for not just parliamentarians, but for every Indian. CPI(M) general secretary Sitaram Yechury voiced his opposition on Twitter. "Why is every Indian being treated like a criminal? This order by a govt wanting to snoop on every citizen is unconstitutional and in breach of the telephone tapping guidelines, the Privacy Judgement and the Aadhaar judgement," he said. Why is every Indian being treated like a criminal? This order by a govt wanting to snoop on every citizen is unconstitutional and in breach of the telephone tapping guidelines, the Privacy Judgement and the Aadhaar judgement. https://t.co/vJXs6aycP0 — Sitaram Yechury (@SitaramYechury) December 21, 2018 × According to the order, the subscriber or service provider or any person in charge of the computer resource will be bound to extend all facilities and technical assistance to the agencies. Failing to do so will invite seven-year imprisonment and fine. The agencies are the Intelligence Bureau, Narcotics Control Bureau, Enforcement Directorate, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Central Bureau of Investigation; National Investigation Agency, Cabinet Secretariat (R&AW), Directorate of Signal Intelligence (For service areas of Jammu & Kashmir, North-East and Assam only) and Commissioner of Police, Delhi.

Authorising agencies for mass surveillance unconstitutional: Opposition