PM backs spy chief's blast at Facebook and Twitter over the help they give terrorists GCHQ's Robert Hannigan said some US-based tech firms were "in denial" He claims that their services are used to facilitate mass murder Internet Service Providers Association said comments "wrong" and "ill-judged" Number Ten said the Prime Minister shared concerns of Robert Hannigan Tech companies became less helpful after Ed Snowden revelations Downing Street last night backed a scathing attack on the internet giants by the new boss of GCHQ. Number Ten said the Prime Minister shared the concerns of Robert Hannigan, who accused firms such as Twitter and Facebook of turning into "the command and control networks of choice" for terrorists. Mr Hannigan said some US-based tech firms were "in denial" about how their services were being used by fanatics to facilitate mass murder and said they must do more to help GCHQ, MI5 and MI6. Number Ten said the Prime Minister shared the concerns of Robert Hannigan, who accused firms such as Twitter and Facebook of turning into "the command and control networks of choice" for terrorists He highlighted how Islamic State fanatics in particular were using social networking sites to spread their message of poison - sending 40,000 Tweets a day. But, rather than providing more co-operation with the security services, the tech companies have become less helpful in the wake of the revelations about State surveillance by the CIA fugitive Edward Snowden. The new head of GCHQ accused firms such as Twitter (left) and Facebook (right) of turning into "the command and control networks of choice" for terrorists The Internet Service Providers Association (ISPA) said Mr Hannigan's comments were "wrong" and "ill-judged." But the Prime Minister's official spokesman said Mr Cameron "very much shares the view that's being expressed around the use of internet access technologies by violent and extremist groups amongst others, and the need to do more." In his article in the Financial Times, Mr Hannigan said the tech firms must understand that mobile technology and smartphones have massively increased the options available to terrorists. He continued: "Techniques for encrypting messages or making them anonymous which were once the preserve of the most sophisticated criminals or nation states now come as standard. These are supplemented by freely-available programs and apps adding extra layers of security, many of them proudly advertising that they are "Snowden approved."" Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the chairman of Westminster's Intelligence and Security Committee, backed the GCHQ boss - saying some of the technology firms had an "amateurish" approach to monitoring alleged criminal behaviour. He even accused the firms of obstructing security efforts with systems that prevent intelligence agencies from being able to find out lawfully "what's being said from one terrorist source to another," he told Radio 4"s World At One. But ISPA Secretary General Nicholas Lansman criticised Mr Hannigan and instead called for a "full public debate" to determine the balance between the right to privacy and need for security. He added: "The internet has opened amazing opportunities for communication and business. To mis-characterise it as a tool for terrorists is short-sighted. Internet companies have and will work with authorities to tackle unlawful activity. Ultimately, the public will be the arbiters of where the line should be drawn between privacy and security. For this to happen an honest and frank debate is required based on the full facts. The opinion piece from GCHQ falls short of this. They help our mortal enemies - but couldn't care less says PROFESSOR ANTHONY GLEES Jihadi John's videos were put on-line Apple and Google have arrogantly announced that they have created operating systems that allow people to permanently lock their smartphones. Apple and Google say they can't break that code, and nor could they help government agencies unlock phones The EU, too, has been equally feeble and deluded, as shown by the appalling decision by the European Court of Justice - in the name of upholding "the fundamental right to privacy" - to let people demand that internet providers remove their personal online records from Google searches.