States haven’t stopped spying on their citizens, post-Snowden - they’ve just got sneakier | Heather Brooke

The historic leaks prompted legislation: yet governments are finding new ways to monitor us. The UK's online safety bill is one of them

It's been 10 years since Edward Snowden holed up in a Hong Kong hotel room and exposed Britain and America's mass surveillance operations to a group of journalists. His bombshell revelations revealed how the US and UK governments were spying on their citizens, intercepting, processing and storing their data, and sharing this information. Since then, although neither state has lost its appetite for hoovering up huge amounts of personal data, new transparency and oversight constraints, together with the growth of encrypted technology, have tilted the balance towards privacy.

Snowden's revelations sparked outrage and anger. Bulk interception was being done without a democratic mandate and with few real safeguards. When the scope of this surveillance came to light, officials claimed most of the information was not read" and therefore its collection did not violate privacy. This was disingenuous; the data could reveal an intimate picture of someone's life - a fact that was upheld in later legal challenges, which proved the surveillance violated privacy and human rights law.

Heather Brooke is an author, investigative journalist and a member of the Royal United Services Institute panel appointed to examine government surveillance