We should all be worried by this story on the BBC.

Jeffrey Sterling has been found guilty in the USA of espionage, on the basis of metadata proving that he communicated repeatedly, by phone and email, with a reporter who later published classified information. The metadata shows who was communicated with, but not the content of those emails and phone conversations. That is like you being convicted of terrorism, because you often talked to your neighbour who later turned out to be a terrorist.

The rule in most western nations is "innocent until proven guilty", and I don't feel that Jeffrey Sterling's guilt has been proven. His legal rights have been trampled in the name of national security. There are countries where he might have expected such cavalier treatment, but in the USA? I am not saying that he is definitely innocent, but I am most certainly saying that his guilt has not been proven.

The whole issue of metadata came to public attention after the Edward Snowden leaks, when security agencies in various countries attempted to justify their collection of data about our communications by saying that mostly they were only collecting and storing metadata, not the message content itself. Well apparently, metadata is enough to convict people, so that assurance is not very reassuring.

Warning: this message will self-destruct in five seconds.