Au cours des dernières années, la demande de plus en plus forte pour des mémoires non-volatiles performantes, a mené au développement des technologies NOR Flash et NAND Flash, qui dominent aujourd'hui le marché des mémoires non-volatiles. Cependant, la miniaturisation de ces technologies, qui permettait d'en réduire le coût, laisse aujourd'hui entrevoir ses limites. En conséquence, des mémoires alternatives et émergentes sont développées, et parmi celles-ci, la technologie des mémoires à changement de phase, ou PCRAM, est l'une des candidates les plus prometteuses tant pour remplacer les mémoires Flash, notamment de type NOR, que pour accéder à de nouveaux marchés tels que le marché des SCM. Toutefois, afin d'être pleinement compétitives avec les autres technologies mémoires, certaines performances de la technologie PCRAM doivent encore être améliorées. Au cours de cette thèse, nous cherchons donc à obtenir des dispositifs PCRAM plus performants. Parmi les résultats présentés, nous réduisons les courants de programmation et la consommation électrique des dispositifs tout en augmentant la rétention de l'information à haute température. Pour cela, nous modifions la structure du dispositif ou nous utilisons un matériau à changement de phase alternatif. De plus, à l'aide de solutions innovantes, nous permettons aux dispositifs PCRAM de conserver l'information pendant une éventuelle étape de soudure de la puce mémoire. Enfin, nous avons conçu, développé et validé un procédé de fabrication permettant d'intégrer une diode PN de sélection en Silicium en série avec un élément résistif PCRAM, démontrant l'intérêt de ce sélecteur vertical pour être utilisées comme élément de sélection d'une cellule PCRAM intégrée au sein d'une architecture crossbar. / In the past few years, the increasing demand for high quality non-volatile memory (NVM) devices, leads to the developpment of NOR Flash and NAND Flash technologies, which are now the two main NVM players. However, because of some limitations such as performance degradation and limited cost reduction, the scaling of these technologies will reach in the next few years. Therefore, new NVM technologies are under development and among them, phase-change memory (PCM) technology has attracted strong interest and is now became one of the most promising candidates in order to replace Flash technologies, especially NOR Flash technology, and to address new memory markets, such as storage-class-memory market. However, in order to fully take their role in the memory arena, some performances of the PCM technology have to be improved. Therefore, during this PhD, we have tried to improve PCM devices electrical performances by reducing both programming currents and energy consumption while increasing high-temperature data-retention. To this extent, we have studied innovative device structure and alternative phasechange material. Moreover, using innovatives solutions, we show that our PCM devices could store data during the soldering step of the memory chipset. Finally, we have conceived, developed and validated, a process flow in order to make 1D1R PCM cell with Silicon-based vertical PN diodes, proving the relevance of this selector for PCRAM-based crossbar architecture.

The thesis deals with the approach level, meaning, purpose and benefit of personal data protection in their processing within police and judicial cooperation in the EU. In the introduction the fundamental issues of personal data protection in the context of the EU and the Czech republic are defined, focusing on terminology and explanations of current issues, particularly the area of biometric data and data retention. Extra attention is also given to the conflict of the right to privacy, and the related right to personal data protection and protection of public interests and safety. After that the thesis deals with a performing of police and judicial cooperation in the EU through specific subjects, in particular Europol and Eurojust. The final part of the thesis focuses on the practical implementation of personal data protection in police and judicial cooperation in the EU, and secondly the importance of personal data protection in police and judicial cooperation, as a deduced basic human right, and the difficulties with which the personal data protection in police and judicial cooperation in the EU are joined. The final part of this thesis consider the main sections in which we can find area for adjustment towards more effective police and judicial cooperation in the EU, with full respect for the right to personal data protection.

<p>EU direktiv 2005/0182 röstades igenom i början av år 2006. All trafik-data kring Internet- och telekommunikation ska lagras mellan sex må-nader och ett år. Direktivet kommer innebära gemensamma regler för EU:s medlemsstater. Syftet med direktivet är att data ska lagras för till-gänglig vid utredning, avslöjande och åtal av grov organiserad brottslig-het och terrorism.</p><p>Studien innehåller tre problemområden som behandlar andra gällande direktiv och konventioner, personlig integritet och etik. Först undersöks det nya direktivet i relation till European Convention on human rights (ECHR) Vidare förs diskussioner kring lagring av trafikdata och lokali-seringsdata i förhållande till personlig integritet. Även etikens syn på hur lagring av personuppgifter ska hanteras och rättfärdigas tas upp.</p><p>Studien har kommit fram till ett resultat kring varje problemområde. I relation till redan gällande direktiv och konventioner visar studien att det är väldigt öppet för tolkningar. Dock är det framförallt mot artikel 8 i ECHR som det nya direktivet strider mot.</p><p>Peter Seipel har definierat sex olika teorier kring synen på personlig in-tegritet. Direktivets påverkan på den personliga integriteten har analy-serats med hjälp av dessa teorier. Sammanfattningsvis kan det konstate-ras att lagring av trafikdata och lokaliseringsdata kan ses som ett in-trång i den personliga integriteten, frågan är om detta intrång är berät-tigat?</p><p>Inom etiken är synen på direktivet koncentrerat till vems nytta direkti-vet är och vilket mål direktivet ska uppnå. Ofta hamnar olika regler och ställningstagande i konflikt med varandra där två saker kan ses som rätt, men de båda inte kan samexistera.</p> / <p>At the beginning of year 2006 EU directive 2005/0182 was approved by the European parliament. The directive contains rules concerning the retention of traffic and localization data created with electronically communication. This data will be stored between six months and 1 year depending on the data type. The intension is to use the data to detect, investigate and prosecute heavy criminals and terrorists.</p><p>This study contains three different problem areas, if the directive op-poses to existing directives and conventions. The relationship between personal integrity and storage of personal information is also investi-gated. The last area is ethical issues with the storing of personal data.</p><p>The result is divided into three parts, one for each problem area. It shows that the new directive don’t comply with article 8 in the European convention on human rights. Although all the articles presented are open for wide interpretation.</p><p>Peter Seipel has made a categorization of six different views of the per-sonal integrity. It is clear that the new directive will affect the personal integrity.</p><p>The ethical view on the directive is concentrated to who will benefit from the changes and witch goals are the directive set to meet. Often the rules of ethics will conflict with each other because of two sets of rules can’t exist together.</p>

EU direktiv 2005/0182 röstades igenom i början av år 2006. All trafik-data kring Internet- och telekommunikation ska lagras mellan sex må-nader och ett år. Direktivet kommer innebära gemensamma regler för EU:s medlemsstater. Syftet med direktivet är att data ska lagras för till-gänglig vid utredning, avslöjande och åtal av grov organiserad brottslig-het och terrorism. Studien innehåller tre problemområden som behandlar andra gällande direktiv och konventioner, personlig integritet och etik. Först undersöks det nya direktivet i relation till European Convention on human rights (ECHR) Vidare förs diskussioner kring lagring av trafikdata och lokali-seringsdata i förhållande till personlig integritet. Även etikens syn på hur lagring av personuppgifter ska hanteras och rättfärdigas tas upp. Studien har kommit fram till ett resultat kring varje problemområde. I relation till redan gällande direktiv och konventioner visar studien att det är väldigt öppet för tolkningar. Dock är det framförallt mot artikel 8 i ECHR som det nya direktivet strider mot. Peter Seipel har definierat sex olika teorier kring synen på personlig in-tegritet. Direktivets påverkan på den personliga integriteten har analy-serats med hjälp av dessa teorier. Sammanfattningsvis kan det konstate-ras att lagring av trafikdata och lokaliseringsdata kan ses som ett in-trång i den personliga integriteten, frågan är om detta intrång är berät-tigat? Inom etiken är synen på direktivet koncentrerat till vems nytta direkti-vet är och vilket mål direktivet ska uppnå. Ofta hamnar olika regler och ställningstagande i konflikt med varandra där två saker kan ses som rätt, men de båda inte kan samexistera. / At the beginning of year 2006 EU directive 2005/0182 was approved by the European parliament. The directive contains rules concerning the retention of traffic and localization data created with electronically communication. This data will be stored between six months and 1 year depending on the data type. The intension is to use the data to detect, investigate and prosecute heavy criminals and terrorists. This study contains three different problem areas, if the directive op-poses to existing directives and conventions. The relationship between personal integrity and storage of personal information is also investi-gated. The last area is ethical issues with the storing of personal data. The result is divided into three parts, one for each problem area. It shows that the new directive don’t comply with article 8 in the European convention on human rights. Although all the articles presented are open for wide interpretation. Peter Seipel has made a categorization of six different views of the per-sonal integrity. It is clear that the new directive will affect the personal integrity. The ethical view on the directive is concentrated to who will benefit from the changes and witch goals are the directive set to meet. Often the rules of ethics will conflict with each other because of two sets of rules can’t exist together.

1 PROTECTION OF PRIVACY AND PERSONAL DATA IN EUROPEAN UNION LAW WITH REGARDS TO DATA RETENTION ABSTRACT The thesis deals with the issue of data retention, i.e. the issue of storing communications metadata by telecommunications service providers for the purpose of possible later access to this data by state authorities. The thesis focuses not only on the relevant EU legislation, but also on the related case law of the Court of Justice, which plays crucial role in determining the standard of protection offered by EU law. This analysis focuses on two main legal issues - the issue of scope of the EU legislation in this area and the issue of proportionality. With regards to the first issue, the author is of the opinion that the Court of Justice interprets the scope of the relevant EU legislation overly broadly. Author criticizes the fact that the Court of Justice applied secondary law adopted on the basis of Article 95 TEC on the issue of access to the retained data by the Member States authorities, including the authorities of Member States which are active in the field of national security. Regarding the issue of proportionality, author criticizes the fact that the Court of Justice perceives the blanket retention of communications metadata to be incompatible with EU law as such, no matter how strict the...

The Court of Justice of the European Union has in its case law been strict in its approach towards Member States’ legislative measures providing for retention of and access to data relating to electronic communications. In recent case law the Court has made clear that also such provisions with the object of safeguarding national security need to comply with EU law and the Court’s jurisprudence. This might mean that the Swedish cable-based signals intelligence is within the scope of EU law contrary to the previous conception. It is decisive for whether the Swedish signals intelligence is within the scope of EU law whether the requirement on the providers of electronic communications systems to transfer all signals crossing the Swedish border to collaboration points, in order for the signals intelligence to be carried out, is to be interpreted as a requirement on the providers to process personal data. If within the scope of EU law, a great majority of the Swedish signals intelligence could be disproportionate in the light of the Court’s case law and thus contrary to EU law. Since the signals intelligence is considered to be an indispensable tool to solve all tasks the Swedish foreign intelligence encompasses this could affect the capability of the foreign intelligence.

Since the US National Security Agency’s former contractor Edward Snowden exposed the Agency’s mass surveillance, the EU has been making a series of attempts toward a more safeguarded and stricter path concerning its data privacy protection. On 8 April 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the CJEU) invalidated the EU Data Retention Directive 2006/24/EC on the basis of incompatibility with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter). After this judgment, the CJEU examined the legality of the Safe Harbour Agreement, which had been the main legal basis for transfers of personal data from the EU to the US under Decision 2000/520/EC. Subsequently, on 6 October 2015, in the case of Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner, the CJEU declared the Safe Harbour Decision invalid. The ground for the Court’s judgment was the fact that the Decision enabled interference, by US public authorities, with the fundamental rights to privacy and personal data protection under Article 7 and 8 of the Charter, when processing the personal data of EU citizens. According to the judgment, this interference has been beyond what is strictly necessary and proportionate to the protection of national security and the persons concerned were not offered any administrative or judicial means of redress enabling the data relating to them to be accessed, rectified or erased. The Court’s analysis of the Safe Harbour was borne out of the EU Commission’s own previous assessments. Consequently, since the transfers of personal data between the EU and the US can no longer be carried out through the Safe Harbour, the EU legislature is left with the task to create a safer option, which will guarantee that the fundamental rights to privacy and protection of personal data of the EU citizens will be respected. However, although the EU is the party dictating the terms for these transatlantic transfers of personal data, the current provisions of the US law are able to provide for derogations from every possible renewed agreement unless they become compatible with the EU data privacy law. Moreover, as much business is at stake and prominent US companies are involved in this battle, the pressure toward the US is not only coming from the EU, but some American companies are also taking the fight for EU citizens’ right to privacy and protection of their personal data.