View Full Version : EU snoopers charter - Big Brother is comming
From The Guardian...
Local councils, health authorities and hundreds of other public bodies are to be given the power to access details of everyone's personal text, emails and internet use under Home Office proposals published yesterday.
Ministers want to make it mandatory for telephone and internet companies to keep details of all personal internet traffic for at least 12 months so it can be accessed for investigations into crime or other threats to public safety.
The Home Office last night admitted that the measure will mean companies have to store "a billion incidents of data exchange a day". As the measure is the result of an EU directive, the data will be made available to public investigators across Europe.
link to full article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/aug/13/privacy.civilliberties) There's also a 5 min interview broadcast talking about it.
One "Example" they gave, was where a woman sent an email to her friend threatening suicide, they could track back the source of the email and try to prevent her death.... WTF?
Anyone use one of those "stealth surfer" USB stick type things? Are they any good?
Mite start looking at Skype mobiles too :mad:
The really worrying thing is an EU wide database storing all this information, open to the whole EU machine. Which is hardly known for it's data security is it <sigh> it won't be long before this is a global database open to anyone with power or connections.
I can see Insurance companies getting access to prevent "fraud" when they're really snooping to cherry pick the best customers or drop anyone about to claim, or profile their medical communictions. Same for retail giants profiling customers, all your financial comms.
Fuggin scary eh.
San:smokin:
S'ok San, I've saved a space for you down here :bananna:
Oh dear, I seem to be getting pelted with childrens toys........
:shrug:
Mr Burns
08-13-2008, 05:00 AM
San I remember this being talked about. It started out as a security measure for anti terrorism but now look at it :mad:
Surely there must be software that can completely wipe your surfing history every shut down :shrug: I looked at that stealth surf pen and it looks good, but in the reviews it says the software can slow browsing down to a snails pace with large image files.
Gotta look into this security cause I'm starting to get a little concerned over this government :mad:
tripps
08-13-2008, 06:17 AM
Sad to say, living somewhere like Mexico or Jamaica is starting to look better and better. How can people be such sheep? Nobody can see the wolf?
surely there must be software that can completely wipe your surfing history every shut down
Yeah, but it's not your local PC that will be the issue ;) ISP's, telephone and mobile companies will be collecting data.
You could throw out your PC, rip the phone out and drown your mobile, but that won't do shyt to the records at snooper HQ which come straight from the connection data at the place your device hooks into the internet/phone system
Proxy surfing is the only way to make it harder, they'd have to get the details from the proxy company. I say "harder" because even companies like hushmail say they will furnish authority's with personal data if they're served with a court order :(
We could always invest in companies who make encrypted telephone hardware, seems they mite be about to have a boom :eek:
We wouldn't even know they had pinged our activities, until the stormtroopers broke the door down <sigh>
They bring this law in, I'm going hermit, face to face comms only, period.
BTW anyone thinking this news coming out in the middle of the olympics is just coincidence, open your eyes ;)
San:smokin:
:mad::mad::mad:
Fockin' typing a post for over an hour then my laptop FOCKIN DIED!!!!
:mad3::mad3:
I've fired up my PC and I'll start retyping I guess.... after a break!!
Needless to say this is VERY bad for us, Gang.
Mr Burns
08-13-2008, 11:31 AM
BTW anyone thinking this news coming out in the middle of the olympics is just coincidence, open your eyes ;)
San:smokin:
I hear ya san and also how that pen works, but I never seen anything about the pen that avoids the ISP from collecting surfing history? Or did I miss something... probably :laugh:
As for Skype:
The encryption of Skype VoIP phone calls might not be as secure as you think.
It's possible the company keeps keys so law enforcement authorities can decrypt encrypted VoIP phone calls, a report says, but Skype won't say for sure one way or the other. (Compare IP PBXs .)
Don't Miss!Read the latest WhitePaper - Monitor the core and troubleshoot the access layer with integrated network analysis solutions
According to an online report, Austrian officials with legal authority to tap VoIP phone communications have no problem listening in on Skype calls, which are encrypted as a standard part of Skype service.
A Skype spokesman wouldn't say whether Skype keeps keys to decrypt calls. "Sorry, Skype does not comment on media speculation," says Chiam Haas, who works for Skype's PR firm. "Skype to Skype calls are safe and secure. The privacy of our users' communications is very important to us. Skype cooperates with law enforcement agencies where legally appropriate and technically possible."
Asked for further clarification, he responded by e-mail with, "This statement is all the company has to say on the matter."
It's virtually impossible to figure out for sure from independent research whether Skype keeps encryption keys or not, says David Endler, chairman of Voice Over IP Security Alliance and senior director of security research at Tipping Point.
"No one has shown it publicly," he says. "Skype is a closed software package, essentially a black box." The company has on rare occasions allowed outside researchers to examine and verify the security of its encryption, but not whether the keys that can crack the encryption can be retrieved, he says.
To allay fears that the calls might not be secure from law enforcement, Skype should open its platform to evaluation by trusted, credible industry experts, he says.
Endler says it's equally difficult to know whether commercial VoIP vendors leave open the possibility of turning encryption keys over to law enforcement.
In the United States, the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) forbids requiring that vendors build in back-door decryption, says Jim Dempsey, vice president for public policy at the Center for Democracy & Technology. "CALEA expressly forbids requiring anyone to be able to decrypt anything," he says.
But that doesn't mean they don't build in key-retrieval anyway. Dempsey says there are no active proposals to force vendors to leave encryption back doors in their VoIP gear, but that could change. "Nothing in regulations is permanent," he says.
Endler says that attempts by researchers to learn more about how Skype works have been effectively blocked by measures put in place by Skype. "They've taken extreme measures to prevent reverse engineering of their client software," he says, more so than mainstream VoIP vendors.
######
But there is an alternative:
Skype "Back Door" for Eavesdropping Revealed
I (Mark Nestmann 'preserving your privacy and more') like Skype—the low-cost voice over Internet (VOIP) telephone provider—for several reasons.
First, it's extremely easy to install and use. Secondly, you can make free calls to other Skype users, anywhere in the world. But most importantly, Skype automatically encrypts calls to other Skype users, protecting your conversations from being monitored.
However, I've long been skeptical about the encryption method Skype uses. The reason is that Skype refuses to publish the source code it uses for encrypting phone calls to permit experts to inspect it for possible flaws or "back doors."
Apparently, my concerns were warranted. European news sources report that an Austrian government official recently disclosed that monitoring conversations over Skype presented "no particular problems." And Skype (now owned by eBay) refuses to comment on the allegations.
It's not clear how eavesdropping occurs, although there's speculation that Skype's global service outage last summer wasn't due to "Windows update" issues, as previously reported. Instead, it was allegedly part of a secret plan orchestrated by the U.S. National Security Agency to install software that would allow law enforcement personnel to decipher Skype conversations.
I'm not surprised by this development. I've repeatedly warned that Skype may be secure against casual eavesdropping, but that it's not safe from "official" monitoring. The report from Austria only confirms this conclusion.
If you really want privacy for your Internet telephone calls, check out Zfone (zfoneproject dot com). Like Skype, Zfone lets you make encrypted phone calls over the Internet. But unlike Skype, its open-source design allows experts to examine the software for back doors or other flaws.
Zfone's principal designer is Phil Zimmermann, the creator of PGP, the most widely used email encryption software in the world. It's not as easy to use as Skype, but if telephone privacy is important to you, I recommend that you check it out.
Mr Burns
08-13-2008, 11:36 AM
Also regarding Skype & The missing Maddie:
Cops believe the Belgian plea (for a child) was picked up by a Portuguese paedo, who took a photo of Maddie near her holiday flat and sent it to them. The youngster disappeared just three days later.
A security source said: "GCHQ have been told to keep a close eye on Skype calls between individuals with known links to child-sex websites.
"They believe someone could let slip a crucial clue when they think they are having a secret chat about their evil desires."
####
Source: The people uk.
I'll start retyping I guess I'm on the edge of my seat here wiating for your opinion :D
Zfone's principal designer is Phil Zimmermann, the creator of PGP
I did some research on PGP today ;) It ain't simple, but certain versions do have back doors in, I don't think it's as safe as people think. The new corporate owners have some top execs who look very ex military ex presidential staff, very 'new world order' if you're up on the conspiracy. 'They' put a backdoor into the voting software to rig the election, so who knows what they're doing to PGP, or indeed Zfone, behind the veil ;)
Hurry up Foxy :D
This British laws right? Actually EU law, lobbied for by UK, at time of 7/7 bombings in London, will become UK law. Get this tho, IMO they woulda NEVER got this through parlement in the UK, NO WAY, they got a backbench rebellion over increasing no charge jail time, so they get it though Brussels and the UK just has to accept it as law, pretty much :mad:
edit: proxy surfing Burnsy, where the ISP only see's the proxy site address, you then got through the proxy site to your desired site, the ISP still only see's the proxy address - like viewing a web page on someone elses webpage - using multiple proxies all over the world makes it really hard for them to track each one and serve each one with a court order ;) "When you are surfing the web anonymously with Tor or other web proxy services, your web access may slow down. This is because your web traffic is being bounced across other servers, sometimes all over the world, before reaching its destination."
San:smokin:
Yeah I figured that wouldn't fly over here in the US..ACLU would be all up on it.
Mr Burns
08-13-2008, 03:51 PM
... proxy surfing Burnsy, where the ISP only see's the proxy site address, you then got through the proxy site to your desired site, the ISP still only see's the proxy address - like viewing a web page on someone elses webpage - using multiple proxies all over the world makes it really hard for them to track each one and serve each one with a court order ;) "When you are surfing the web anonymously with Tor or other web proxy services, your web access may slow down. This is because your web traffic is being bounced across other servers, sometimes all over the world, before reaching its destination."
San:smokin:
I understood the reasons for slowing connection down having the path bounced around and I understand that using the proxy hides the physical web site you're surfing, but my concern, and hopefully Basil can chip in with this, is that the proxy would be registered with your ISP and so the trace is there, proxies although seeming a long anonymous route around will still leave a trail :shrug:
Its getting a little deep for me but basically were fucked because no matter how much us as citizens do to complain the answer will predictably be: "you only need worry if you're a criminal", and in between the lines is 'forget the right to privacy'.
I need to look into this more and get my head around it, cause if this is as bad as it seems it would be foolish for me to carry on with on-line grow talk over my partner, her children, extending my criminal record into the worlds of 'grow house' and having my name plastered over the only community paper we have amongst 160K people :2cents:
Fuggin 1984. Again :(
yes it does leave a trail and even using one of those...you can still be traced to at most the ISP. I've done it to see how well they worked...tons of programs like traceroute can beat some of the freebie software out there. It bounces around all over....used one bounced from here to spain then UK back to portugul or sum chit. but if given enough time...unless you fork over cash for a good one...barely even worth it. If your a small op I wouldn't worry...too many bigger fish to fry. But if a comm grower...no chance in hell would I post my grow up. Even now how things are.
(edit: but they would need a helluva a warrant to get the info from the ISP in the states)
I've lost a lot of the thoughts I had in the last post I lost due to a faulty cooling fan but I'll try and get down the important bits I remember.. ;)
Firstly the most important bit in this news is not what they are proposing to physically do, it is the radical and society changing approach to how they find the baddies:
But the Home Office document makes clear that the personal data will now be available for all sorts of crime and public order investigations and may even be used to prevent people self-harming.
"This data allows investigators to identify suspects, examine their contacts, establish relationships between conspirators and place them in a specific location at a certain time,"
These two sections show the difference, in that what they are going to effectively do is allow the authorities to go fishing. This has so far been illegal, the police for instance can't just stop you and search your car "just to see" if you have anything, you can't have your phone or email bugged, just because the criminal conviction figures are down for the month and a Sergeant thinks you live in a dodgy area so you may be a criminal and he "might get lucky". Until now, you've had to have come to the attention of the authorities first and a case proven (way beyond just reasonable suspicion) that you warranted further investigation. Then, and only then could they get out all the toys and collect all the data.
What this law will allow is us to be monitored, probed and fished, at ANY point, even BEFORE suspicion.....
CONSTABLE: "Drugs offence convictions are down for the month Serg, what shall we do?"
SERGEANT: "Pull up all the calls to XXX Hydroponics shop for the month and filter the list to include only the people that called more than 2 times in the month, then check to see if they've visited any of the list of the known growing websites. If you get any hits, check DVLA to see if they drive a 4x4. If it's a black one, nick 'em!"
Up until now, as I've said to some of you, I put all my effort into not being found out in the first place... I don't make a huge effort to hide the "afters" of growing, as in the bits they look into after your under official observation, like calling hydro shops from my home or mobile, destroying receipts for purchases, wiping my internet cache, using a proxy etc., The reason being is up until now, if they've got to the point of looking into that stuff, you were already effectively nicked good n' proper!!! But once this thing comes in, Gang, we're gonna have to think of everything because the stuff they previously only used to re-inforce an already tight case will actually be the stuff that STARTS the case against us. :mad:
It would also be dead easy to automate, so say all emails that have the keywords +Cannabis +ounce +carbon flag up a request for a manual search.
Second point, I've read and listened through what they're saying and there's no "new" technology or methods they're gonna use, it's all stuff that's already possible and indeed done. I have a training partner who works for the Police in IT and ALL UK mobile phone calls and texts have been digitally recorded and kept for the last 22 months at least (Although I don't know how long they keep them for). I say 22 months only because that's when he told me how the procedures he has to go through to get certain calls or texts recalled from the networks was a major ballache, especially with Vodafone for some reason he didn't go into. He then used those calls along with the networks triangulation data to prove that the criminal went from A to B to C etc., calling X at the beginning of his journey and Y on the way from his mobile phone. I've told some of you about this already because this guy even turned his phone off during his journey, but if you leave your battery connected your phone is still faithfully and continuously giving its location to the network. Again though, the difference is this collection of data was only approved and allowed AFTER there was a very good case against the person. Not like how this law is proposing.
Third point, there's not a single product or service out there that can 100% completely stop anyone seeing what you're doing on the internet, if, IF, you or the enitity you are emailing, browsing, or speaking to allows them to see it. E.g., you can go through thirty different proxies in 10 different countries but if your ISP has said they're going to, and you've agreed to the terms, there is absoloutely nothing you can do to stop them sniffing the packets of data before they are forwarded to your PC.
You gotta remember gang, all encryption means (like SSL and what Skype use) is that the data going between you and the other entity is scrambled, with officially only you and the other entity knowing the secret code on how to unscramble it at either end. But, if you effectively tell someone else that secret code they WILL be able to see all your data chat, as easily as you do. What I'm trying to get across is Skype itself is safe, SSL (as in https) is safe, a good proxy that encrypts the data chat between your PC and their servers is safe... but if you (or the other side, like Skype Inc.) tell somebody else the code to decrypt it, none of your clever ways to hide make a spot of difference. If this law develops to cover encrypted traffic, you could effectively have to agree that your ISP will always intercept those secret codes so they can snoop into and record all your traffic. :(
So to me, the full horror of this news means:
1. We can't call, email, browse or order online from any hydro or seed shops. No way, at all, 'cause it's too risky that they'll be monitored.
2. If we want to verbally speak to each other we'll have to use telepathy, or have a pre-arranged time where we both go to pre-determined public phone boxes, changed randomly, and ring each other (like Goodfellas!!).
3. No more visiting grow sites..... :(
BUT!!!! I do have some thoughts on how to get round 2 and 3!!! :p I wouldn't want to leave on a bad note would I?!!? Dealing with hydro shops either online or on the phone is just way too risky so it's face to face, and getting there in a hire car or on foot but that's it. But the other two parts might be ok if we can use an ISP and phone company who is not controlled by this law when it comes in. My thinking is (and guys and gals, this is only an early thought so feedback very welcome ;) ) that why not use a dial up account to an ISP who is not in the UK?? :shrug: I go to Spain quite often so a couple of years ago I signed up to a dial up account for when I was over there with the laptop. I've tried it from here earlier today (I was using it when my laptop died earlier) and it worked fine! I connected to the spanish ISP then through a proxy. The data won't even touch any of the horror-database ISP's so try and packet sniff that you fockers!!! All they'll see is a call to spain and if they listen in they'll just hear encrypted static with no secret code to decrypt it. :D You could even use twin ISDN lines to speed up the connection to 256k-ish if you really wanted to.
I have thought of another way by remote controlling a remote Citrix Server in another country and using that to surf but that's whay too technical to explain at 3.30 in the morning. ;) If the foreign dial up doesn't work I'll explain that further.
The phone part we can definitely get around, I won't say what country but one of my work colleagues lives in a far eastern country and so I could speak to him cheaply when he was away from the office he gave me his country's version of a "pay as you go" mobile. If I call you using that mobile I appear like I'm in that country! Et voila.... Track me now, fockers!!! :D Whenever I need to I just top up online (which I'd obviously do in future over the foreign dial up :laugh: ) So essentially, all you need is a mobile phone through a company that's not bound by UK law and it's got to be one you can top up online or whatever. ;)
Anyway Gang, that's my thoughts for now. I'm very tired. And paranoid. Night-night. :)
Cheers Foxy, but pushed meself this morning ;)
why not use a dial up account to an ISP who is not in the UK??
Since it's EU law, it's have to be outside the EU even outside countries that want to join the EU ;)
Wonders if they will be tapping satelite internet- as in dial up to a non-EU uploader, and get fast download <shrug>
San:smokin:
Pistol Pete
08-14-2008, 04:30 AM
One Has To Take The Guardian With A Pinch of Salt IMO
Only A Few Months Ago It Headlined A Appology To All Readers Of The Relative Safety Of Cannabis , And Now Is Very Anti cannabis In Light Of Old Studies Being Dragged Up Again ( Schitzophrenia Induced By Cannabis )
This Is based On Old Research From The 1970's Which Found That Cannabis Indeed Did Accelerate The Onset Of Shitzophrenia ONLY With Those Pre Disposed To Contracting The Disease (17-21 Yrs On Average )
I Have An Image Somewhere On The CoverStory , Which Was Titled ; " 14 Years Imprisonment For One Joint ":eek:
( I'll Dig It Up )
Nowadays I Have Opted To Save My Data On The Kid's Playstation 3 ;) And Also Use Photobucket To Save My Images
In Response To The Guardians Attitude , May I Say That I Do Not Believe In Cannabis Consumption Until The Brain Has Fully Matured , And Also Believe The Majority of mature Cannabis Smokers Would Also Encourage Sensible Smoking ( Or Vapourising )
Until The Government Attempts To Get To Grips With It's Out Of Control Alcohol Problems Which Cost The Government Billions Of Pounds
And Asian Triads And Tongs Using 7-9 Year Old Imported Children To Grow Cannabis In Underground Shipping Containers In The U.K:eek:
I'll Continue To Grow And Medicate Myself With A Plant Whose Patent belongs To Mother Nature
BTW; With Cannabis Use Declining , What Are The Government Doing About The Cocaine Epidemic That has Shown A Steady 300% Increase Each Year For The Last Three Years
" Gateway Drug " ; Pretty Soon If Things Continue Like This , There Will be No Gate , Instead Only A Bottomless Hole For Our Youth To Fall Into
With Only The Few Managing To Clamber Out
Humans Are Always Going To Look For Relaxation In One Way Or Another
No Government Can Change The Will Of Human Nature
PP
majestyk5
08-14-2008, 04:54 AM
Humans Are Always Going To Look For Relaxation In One Way Or Another
No Government Can Change The Will Of Human Nature
PP
exactly
I am not a computer gizmo like any of you folk, I've always figured that if someone really wants to find out what I'm doing on the interweb its not going to be hard.
I do however share the concerns over the mandate of Governments all over the world taking an increasing interest in monitoring the activities of the general public.
I have always described my cabinet in the corner as my own little piece of anarchy, a small rebellion against blanket legislation and normality now that I'm too old to listen to 'th Pistols and don't look good in my dog collar anymore ;)
Where I live, in a country with a population half of that of London it would probably be more cost effective to stake out the local hydro shops in order to catch us 'criminals'
I guess we all feel to some extent, despite all the information to the contrary, that things are far more discreet ordering products online or via various phone systems, I always feel more uneasy when I do get the treat of walking into the only supply shop within four hours drive compared to punching my pre pay credit card number into a website page.
Then you always have the rock hard place argument, if this shuts down real crime in any way, busts a child pornography ring, stops another tube bombing then is it worthwhile?
Or just another way to see behind those closed curtains.
And Governments always use their powers for good not evil :trust:
~Kiwi~
tripps
08-14-2008, 07:48 AM
Yeah I figured that wouldn't fly over here in the US..ACLU would be all up on it.
Ha, I used to believe that, but the times, they are a changin'. Not for the better. Scary
You guys think the local council getting your internet records is bad look where it's heading :eek:
Human beings may be forced to be 'microchipped' :eek:
source (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23372564-details/Britons+%92could+be+microchipped+like+dogs+in+a+de cade%92/article.do)
Human beings may be forced to be 'microchipped' like pet dogs, a shocking official report into the rise of the Big Brother state has warned......
It paints a frightening picture of what Britain might be like in ten years time unless steps are taken to regulate the use of CCTV and other spy technologies.
.... its use in humans has already been trialled in America, where the chips were implanted in 70 mentally-ill elderly people in order to track their movements.
And earlier this year a security company in Ohio chipped two of its employees to allow them to enter a secure area.....
Prisoners 'to be chipped like dogs'
Hi-tech 'satellite' tagging planned in order to create more space in jails
Civil rights groups and probation officers furious at 'degrading' scheme.....
Ministers are planning to implant "machine-readable" microchips under the skin of thousands of offenders as part of an expansion of the electronic tagging scheme that would create more space in British jails.
source (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/prisoners-to-be-chipped-like-dogs-769977.html)
Can anyone say .... slippery slope?
Anyone thinking this is 'conspiracy theory' think again, it ain't theory anymore.
I want my mummy :laugh:
San:smokin:
Cheers Foxy, but pushed meself this morning ;)
Wonders if they will be tapping satelite internet- as in dial up to a non-EU uploader, and get fast download <shrug>
Sorry Matey, was a bit heavy eh?!? :D
In short summary what I'm saying is:
*This new law allows authorities to go trawler fishing for easy targets, without any initial suspicion, which they had to have before.
*There's no new technology proposed here, they're just letting any focker use the current stuff against us as they please.
*If your ISP complies with the requirements under this law, there's nothing you can do to fully hide/disguise your net traffic.
*The only way around it (That I can think of at the moment) is to use an ISP and a pay as you go mobile from a country that is not governed by this law.
I've only ever set a satellite connection up for clients when they couldn't get a DSL or fixed line connection so I haven't checked it for a while. When I last looked at it, it was very expensive (but hey, still might be worth it..) but I'm guessing that all the companies that offer satellite net access to the EU will be in the EU. I think I know who to ask about that, so I'll get on it.
I dunno if our American chums here can help us out and point us towards a company or network in the States that does pay as you go cell phones, that you can top up online and offer cheap calls while abroad? :shrug:
I'm going to the States in September so i could pick up a few. :) Actually, I feel a new business coming on!! :laugh:
tripps
08-15-2008, 07:48 AM
I'm not real savvy about that shit (but I can nail 2 boards together pretty good, LOL) , but they sell a lot of trac-phones here, are pay as you go.
I'm not real savvy about that shit (but I can nail 2 boards together pretty good, LOL) , but they sell a lot of trac-phones here, are pay as you go.
Don't worry, you don't need the brains when you got the looks eh?!?! :gt:
Thanks for the Trac phone tip, but they don't allow international text messages. That would mean I wouldn't be able to text when I'm in the UK. Actually... that may not be so bad... :confused
The more I think of it, the more I think the pay as you go mobile would be best coming from either the States or Hong Kong. The States 'cause I believe their bill of rights would never allow a law like this come in over there. Hong Kong, because if any British authority asked them to release their mobile phone data, they would be greeted by a firm fuk yooo!
CylonBud
08-16-2008, 04:44 PM
My wife uses a pepayable T mobile account so here dad (In Indonesia) can text message with her (In the USA). Works great. :D We use version for our regular cells but they don't use the small chips that are in most overseas phones but T Mobil does as do a few others. Hopefully this helps.
Yeah I figured that wouldn't fly over here in the US..ACLU would be all up on it.
The US don't need a new snoopers charter, you guys have the FISA Bill ;)
The new law will allow for much more surveillance of Americans at home and abroad, as well as the monitoring of all internet traffic that passes through the US, as much as 35 per cent of the global total. :eek:
link (http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2221204/senate-passes-fisa-bill)
San:smokin:
Thanks Cy. 2thumbs We have T-Mobile here though, so I'm sure they'd pass details internally between countries, if asked. :(
The US don't need a new snoopers charter, you guys have the FISA Bill ;)
Bollocks! That's a bummer. Their one seems to be more concentrated on government and its agencies hunting for terrorists, but it does open the door and give the excuse. You can imgaine it, the FBI call the DEA, saying, "We were looking for terrorists but during our looking we found this guy..."
I still would say though that if the EU version goes through it's worse, 'cause it allows police, councils, the tax office, anyone really.... to look in at our surfing, email, phone calls and texts whenever they fancy it. :2cents:
It's looking more and more we're gonna have to become hermits eh Gang? :shrug:
Cranky
08-17-2008, 10:39 AM
they been monitoring us for years:rolleyes: fuck um;)come trace my arse i ain't doing anything wrong!
cranks
It's looking more and more we're gonna have to become hermits eh Gang?
yeah, cryptic messages through the personal ads only ....
WLTM Bubbley Foxy Bloke for serious Dioecious relationship :D
San:smokin:
majestyk5
08-18-2008, 07:45 AM
ya heard on the news today uk'ers are recorded 3,000 times a week or something, i forgot now. and all that is given to the gov.
hate to think what they dont tell us
what a crock. but its kinda our fault for letting them install gps chips and rfid tags in all our crap. paying with credit cards that log our locals.
i am all for the hermit thing. if not to hide from the man, atleast my family
UK ‘snoopers charter’ claimed to break EU law (only in Europe eh :laugh: )
Commission's retention of data framework itself is unlawful, says legal opinion
The data retention regimes in operation or preparation in at least ten European states are unlawful, and breach the European Convention on Human Rights, according to a legal opinion released today. According to the opinion, comissioned by Privacy International from law firm Covington & Burling, the European Commission's framework directive on the retention of communications data is in itself unlawful, which means that any state in the process of actually implementing it may have to think again.
In the UK, this could add another chapter to the tortuous and - so far - unfortunate history of the 'snooper's charter, which is currently before Parliament as a series of Statutory Instruments. Although a little watered down from its previous version, this still requires widespread retention of data as regards web sites visited, email addresses, phone calls and mobile phone location data, and still gives numerous public authorities access to that data.
According to the opinion, it's precisely this scattergun approach that breaches the Convention on Human Rights:
"Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) guarantees every individual the right to respect for his or her private life, subject only to narrow exceptions where government action is imperative. The Framework Decision and national laws similar to it would interfere with this right, by requiring the accumulation of large amounts of information bearing on individuals' private activities. This interference with the privacy rights of every user of European-based communications services cannot be justified under the limited exceptions envisaged by Article 8 because it is neither consistent with the rule of law nor necessary in a democratic society.
"The indiscriminate collection of traffic data offends a core principle of the rule of law: that citizens should have notice of the circumstances in which the State may conduct surveillance, so that they can regulate their behaviour to avoid unwanted intrusions. Moreover, the data retention requirement would be so extensive as to be out of all proportion to the law enforcement objectives served. Under the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, such a disproportionate interference in the private lives of individuals cannot be said to be necessary in a democratic society."
Privacy International is to pursue test cases in at least two EU countries where mandatory data retention is already in place, and has also lodged a complaint with the UK Information Commissioner, alleging that the government's regulations and voluntary code on retention breach at least three core principles of the Data Protection Act. Blanket retention of data, it argues, breaches the principle of proportionality, and flouts the specificity principle, while "the existence of a voluntary code for communications providers takes no account of the consent principle." PI has also lodged an Open Government request for disclosure of the government's legal advice relating to the regulations currently before Parliament.
PI director Simon Davies commented that the government was forcing "unwilling companies to be complicit in an unprecedented and disproportionate surveillance regime", and called on communications providers to "support their customers' rights by ignoring the government's proposals." Which would be fun - any takers?
Davies told The Register that the first test case is likely to be brought in Denmark. The second has yet to be determined, but as legislation is well advanced in several other cases, this may be an influential factor.
source (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10/15/uk_snoopers_charter_claimed/)
San:cool:
Mr Burns
08-22-2008, 01:15 PM
I'm not being picky bugger lugs, but that news item is 5 years old. Any chance of an update or are they still asleep in the commons over this ;)
CylonBud
08-22-2008, 01:19 PM
I'm not being picky bugger lugs, but that news item is 5 years old. Any chance of an update or are they still asleep in the commons over this ;)
I'll say Published Wednesday 15th October 2003 22:02 GMT:eek:
I too wonder if there was any follow up to this. :hmmmm:
Well spotted sherlock :D
That's what you get for all this multi tab multi tasking bollix :o
This from the Guardian August 13 2008..... it ain't pretty
Zero privacy
The British government is taking extraordinary new powers to monitor everyone's emailing, internet browsing and phone calls link (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/13/privacy.privacy)
Guardian again August 13 2008
'Snooper's charter' to check texts and emails
Local councils, health authorities and hundreds of other public bodies are to be given the power to access details of everyone's personal text, emails and internet use under Home Office proposals published yesterday.
link (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/aug/13/privacy.civilliberties)
Liberty 01 Jul 2008....
Government must review Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act
#
In a significant judgement today, the European Court of Human Rights found that UK surveillance laws had lacked the necessary clarity and accountability to prevent abuses of power when used to intercept cross-border communications.
#
The ECHR agreed with human rights group Liberty that surveillance law and practice must be tighter to protect individual privacy rights.
Alex Gask, Liberty’s Legal Officer who brought the case, said:
“The Court of Human Rights has rightly found that greater accessibility and accountability is required to ensure respect for the privacy of thousands of innocent people. While secret surveillance is a valuable tool, the mechanisms for intercepting our telephone calls and e-mails should be as open and accountable as possible, and should ensure proportionate use of very wide powers.”
Gareth Crossman, Liberty’s Policy Director and leading expert on privacy rights, said:
“This judgement highlights the wider problem of excessive surveillance undermining public trust. Whether it’s fishing expeditions of our overseas phone calls or local councils using targeted surveillance to check on school catchment areas, we need a prompt review of the broad powers in RIPA.”
In the judgement, the ECHR states that it, “does not consider that the domestic law at the relevant time indicated with sufficient clarity, so as to provide adequate protection against abuse of power, the scope or manner of exercise of the very wide discretion conferred on the State to intercept and examine external communications. In particular, it did not, as required by the Court’s case-law, set out in a form accessible to the public any indication of the procedure to be followed for selecting for examination, sharing, storing and destroying intercepted material. The interference with the applicants’ rights under Article 8 (the right to privacy) was not, therefore, “in accordance with the law.”
Notes to Editors
1. The judgement by the European Court of Human Rights in Case of Liberty and Others v The United Kingdom (application no. 582443/00) was handed down on 1 July 2008. The case was brought by Liberty (the National Council for Civil Liberties), the Irish Council for Civil Liberties and British Irish Rights Watch.
2. The Court recognized that the 1985 Interception of Communications Act failed to provide the accessibility and accountability needed to ensure respect for the privacy of thousands of innocent people. Since the case was brought, the 1985 Act was replaced with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.
more at link (http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/news-and-events/1-press-releases/2008/government-must-review-regulation-of-investigatory-powers-act.shtml)
Seems they swirveballed the court judgement by bringing in RIPA :rolleyes: these latest snooper charter shinanigans are an extension to those powers they already had since 2000 :doh:
RIPA wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Investigatory_Powers_Act)
From Times Online July 23, 2008
Councils rapped as spy requests surge
Official ‘surveillance’ requests for details of telephone and internet records have surged to 1,400 a day, according to figures published yesterday.
Sir Paul Kennedy, the commissioner, said that the vast majority of requests were made by police and the security services with only 1,707 made by 154 local authorities.
Local councils can apply for the information to tackle a range of issues including crime, protecting the environment and public health and dealing with the sale of counterfeit goods.
Sir Paul said local authorities could make much more use of the surveillance powers to help them investigate crimes in their areas.
link (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4382907.ece)
San:o
Mr Burns
08-22-2008, 05:23 PM
Ok, so now I'm completely depressed :( :laugh:
Bit of a tangent buddy but I've just been spending the last few hours looking at properties over 'yonder'. I was talking with the lady of the house and suggesting downgrading to get out of this nanny state earlier than we planned, and she agrees, to a point.
When I'm out of this temporary financial fix and have that place lake side, remember there's an open invite to my fellow tokers to come spend some peace time, where newspapers are 2 days old and money takes second place to neighbours sharing provisions for each season :hippy:
Had I not come across a fellow countryman with the same passion as me, and 'living it' in a similar area as I want to be, I can only imagine what little hope this country would give me looking at retirement, no matter how many tokens you can fit under the mattress :pass:
(2 hours that took me :bong: )
2 hours that took me
way to go! :laugh:
I'm still going for self sufficiency, hermit style ;) planning to plant my fuel this winter :D
San:smokin:
I don't know whether this was further clarification, or a back-track, but what was released yesterday makes things sound more hopeful than they originally did at the beginning of this saga... :shrug:
I know it's still one-step further towards burning hell, but if for once they're true to their word, this just sounds like basic traffic analysis, which we can get round reasonably easily...
Link to BBC article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7671046.stm)
15th October 2008
Plans to gather and record millions of pieces of information about everyone's internet and telephone habits have been condemned as "Orwellian".
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said the police and security services needed new powers to keep up with technology.
And she promised that the content of conversations would not be stored, just times and dates of messages and calls.
But the Lib Dems slammed the idea as "incompatible with a free country", while the Tories called on the government to justify its plans.
Details of the times, dates, duration and locations of mobile phone calls, numbers called, website visited and addresses e-mailed are already stored by telecoms companies for 12 months under a voluntary agreement.
The data can be accessed by the police and security services on request - but the government plans to take control of the process in order to comply with an EU directive and make it easier for investigators to do their job.
Information will be kept for two years by law and may be held centrally on a searchable database.
Without increasing their capacity to store data, the police and security services would have to consider a "massive expansion of surveillance," Ms Smith said in a speech to the Institute for Public Policy Research earlier.
'Vital capability'
She said: "Our ability to intercept communications and obtain communications data is vital to fighting terrorism and combating serious crime, including child sex abuse, murder and drugs trafficking.
"Communications data - that is, data about calls, such as the location and identity of the caller, not the content of the calls themselves - is used as important evidence in 95% of serious crime cases and in almost all security service operations since 2004.
"But the communications revolution has been rapid in this country and the way in which we intercept communications and collect communications data needs to change too.
"If it does not we will lose this vital capability that we currently have and that, to a certain extent, we all take for granted.
"The capability that enabled us to convict Ian Huntley for the Soham murders and that enabled us to achieve the convictions of those responsible for the 21/7 terrorist plots against London."
She said the "changes we need to make may require legislation" and there may even have to be legislation "to test what a solution to this problem will look like".
There will also be new laws to protect civil liberties, Ms Smith added, and she announced a public consultation starting in the New Year on the plans.
"I want this to be combined with a well-informed debate characterised by openness, rather than mere opinion, by reason and reasonableness," she told the IPPR.
'Necessity'
Ms Smith attempted to reassure people that the content of their e-mails and phone conversations would not be stored.
"There are no plans for an enormous database which will contain the content of your emails, the texts that you send or the chats you have on the phone or online.
"Nor are we going to give local authorities the power to trawl through such a database in the interest of investigating lower level criminality under the spurious cover of counter terrorist legislation.
"Local authorities do not have the power to listen to your calls now and they never will in future. You would rightly object to proposals of this kind and I would not consider them.
"What we will be proposing will be options which follow the key principles which govern all our work in this area - the principles of proportionality and necessity."
But the idea of storing phone and e-mail records has provoked concern among experts.
The government's own reviewer of anti-terror laws, Lord Carlile, said: "The raw idea of simply handing over all this information to any government, however benign, and sticking it in an electronic warehouse is an awful idea if there are not very strict controls about it."
'Soft soap' claim
Shadow home secretary Dominic Grieve, for the Conservatives, said he welcomed Ms Smith's consultative approach but added her speech "begs mores questions than it answers".
"These proposals would mark a substantial shift in the powers of the state to obtain personal information on individuals," he said, adding: "The government must present convincing justification for such an exponential increase in the powers of the state."
Lib Dem home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said: "The government's Orwellian plans for a vast database of our private communications are deeply worrying.
"I hope that this consultation is not just a sham exercise to soft-soap an unsuspecting public."
He said the government had repeatedly shown it could not be trusted with sensitive data, adding: "There is little reason to think ministers will be any less slapdash with our phone and internet records.
"Ministers claim the database will only be used in terrorist cases, but there is now a long list of cases, from the arrest of Walter Wolfgang for heckling at a Labour conference to the freezing of Icelandic assets, where anti-terrorism law has been used for purposes for which it was not intended."
"Our experience of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act suggests these powers will soon be used to spy on people's children, pets and bins.
"These proposals are incompatible with a free country and a free people."
I only just found this page which says it was last updated yesterday, although it may have been written earlier... apologies if it's a repeat but it does clarify a bit what they're looking at and helpfully for us, what they're struggling with. ;)
Link to BBC article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7671759.stm)
15th October 2008
How do you find out what a terrorist, spy or criminal is up to?
By monitoring them, of course.
That may involve relying on informants and agents to pass on information.
It could entail surveillance by officers covertly observing them.
Or it might mean planting bugging devices to listen to their conversations.
One of the most powerful intelligence tools is the interception of telephone calls and e-mails to listen to conversations or read messages.
This power is tightly regulated and requires the permission of the home secretary.
Far more widely-used are powers to track a suspect's telephone calls, texts, e-mails and internet use, to find out whom they're communicating with, how frequently they're in touch, and in the case of the internet, what websites they're visiting.
This does not involve viewing or listening to content.
'Vital tool'
This information - known as "communications data" - is held for billing and business use by telephone companies, communications firms and internet service providers.
The data may also include other details, such as the time a message or e-mail was sent, and the location from which calls are made.
Under legislation, law enforcement agencies can request access to communications data - the companies involved are obliged to hold on to it for 12 months.
It's a vital tool for police and the security and intelligence services - and not just for terrorism and serious crimes.
Last year, in the Metropolitan Police, there were 54,000 requests to access communications data, including 650 applications to trace missing people.
Assistant commissioner John Yates says the availability of communications data is "absolutely crucial" in developing investigative leads, establishing the link between co-conspirators and helping to save lives.
"Its importance to investigating the threat of terrorism and serious crime cannot be overstated," he says.
New technology
The Crown Prosecution Service reckons that communications data forms an important element of prosecution evidence in 95% of serious crime cases.
The Serious Organised Crime Agency (Soca), HM Revenue and Customs and the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism at the Home Office all agree that it's a vital investigative tool.
But they're concerned that the availability of communications data in the fight against crime is being put at risk by the increasingly complex and sophisticated nature of communications technology.
Until recently, monitoring phone usage was relatively straightforward - calls went on a single line from one phone to another.
But new phone networks are increasingly based on internet technology, which is cheaper and more flexible.
They offer a wide range of services, allowing people to message and speak to each other on social networking, gaming, auction and video sites.
There's some evidence, for example, that criminals are using gaming sites not to play games but to exchange messages in order to avoid detection.
Sites such as Skype, which make use of Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP), are also used.
Crime rise threat
The problem for law enforcement agencies is that many of these sites do not hold their own communications data.
So, even if the authorities are able to find out which websites a suspect is visiting, they can't necessarily track the phone calls and messages within the sites, to find out who's talking to whom, when, how often and for how long.
The use of multiple and false identities by suspects and the increasing number of sites, telephony and internet companies complicates the picture even further.
Since 2006, law enforcement agencies and government officials have been working out ways to combat the problem.
The project is known as the Interception Modernisation Programme.
Its conclusion is that legislation will be needed to improve the collection and storage of communications data.
If nothing is done, Sir Stephen Lander, chair of Soca, predicts "more unsolved murders, more firearms on our streets, more successful robberies, more unresolved kidnaps, more harm from the use of Class A drugs, more illegal immigration and more unsolved serious crime overall".
Database plan
Among the options thought to be under consideration is a huge database of communications data.
Data about use of telephones, internet and e-mails would be channelled to one central point, but the database would not store the content of people's messages or calls.
Another possibility is that internet service providers and communications companies would be given some government funding to improve the way they collect and store data.
No decisions have been taken yet. There are clearly considerable civil liberty concerns and privacy issues which will need to be overcome for any scheme to get off the ground.
But counter-terrorism officials have warned that there is no time to lose. "The ground is shifting under our feet," said one.
Mr Burns
10-23-2008, 10:40 AM
Last year, in the Metropolitan Police, there were 54,000 requests to access communications data
"The capability that enabled us to convict Ian Huntley for the Soham murders and that enabled us to achieve the convictions of those responsible for the 21/7 terrorist plots against London."
So that's 2 requests leaving 53.998 for what crime investigations? The thing is, they say its to be used for serious crime and crime figures have gone down (cough) so doesn't 53,998 investigative cases of serious crime including murder, paedophilia & terrorism make scary reading :shrug:
They'll still fuck with the rules once its in. Pander to all the concerns to get it instated and when the concerned turn attention to the next dilemma it'll get abused.
Also don't forget that this form of investigating and collecting data to start a case against an individual is just that, the start. Once that leads to more solid evidence and a case can be bought against you the initial snooping can be tossed aside and not bought up as evidence. I don't GAF what they say and especially that bitch, she can kiss my hairy unwashed ass :buttshake
Lets start a commune in a far away country, you know it makes sense :)