GCHQ can legally snoop on Facebook, Google users: UK government

The UK government has revealed that intelligence service GCHQ could snoop on the use of Facebook and Google without an individual warrant as the firms were based overseas, AP reported.

According to UK spy boss, Charles Farr, the services were being used for external communications.

The distinction between external and internal interactions was significant as the UK's  electronic intelligence agency, GCHQ, had broad powers to intercept communications outside the country, but needed a warrant and suspicion of wrongdoing to monitor domestic internet traffic.

A broad definition of what constituted ''external'' communications increased the amount of data GCHQ could snoop to keep tabs on the daily activities of millions of UK internet users.

The policy came to light as part of a continuing legal battle with campaign group Privacy International (PI).

According to PI, the law "patronised the British people".

It is the first time the UK had commented on how its legal framework allowed the mass interception of communications as outlined by US whistleblower Edward Snowden in his leaks about global government surveillance.

The former National Security Agency contractor revealed extensive details of internet and phone snooping and had since fled the US and sought temporary asylum in Russia.

Charles Farr, director general of the Office of Security and Counter-Terrorism told PI that Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and web searches on Google as well as webmail services such as Hotmail and Yahoo are classified as "external communications", which meant that they could be intercepted without the need for additional legal clearance.

The internal communications between citizens could be intercepted only when a targeted warrant was issued. Warrants must be signed by a minister and issued only on suspicion of illegal activity.

According to Farr's witness statement which went public Tuesday, data sent on those services was classed as ''external'' rather than ''internal'' communications because the companies' servers are based outside the UK, BBC reported.

Rejecting  Amnesty International's charge that this amounted to ''industrial-scale intrusion,'' Farr said this did not amount to mass surveillance because the vast majority of messages intercepted in this way were not read.

According to Farr, emails sent between two UK citizens would usually be classed as internal even if they traveled by route outside the country.

However, Facebook and Twitter posts or searches on Google or YouTube that were sent to data centres outside the UK would fall under the external category, he said.