PDA

View Full Version : When did they slip this one through?



Matt
01-09-2009, 02:35 AM
Not entirely happy about this, especially with our Governments record on keeping data safe.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7819230.stm

DiedonD
01-09-2009, 03:24 AM
Not entirely happy about this, especially with our Governments record on keeping data safe.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7819230.stm

Sooo.... One should oughta be careful when writting you an e-mail, and to triple check that there isnt anything suspicious about it, otherwise if they sniff out soemthing suspicous your gonna be affiliated with the terrorists huh!

You know the e-mail when I said 'I believe God has given me a duty to ruin your economy' , honestly I was joking, go tell them that please :D








for the record, there was never such an e-mail sent from my side, I for one matter dont even know Matts e-mail

Oedo 808
01-09-2009, 04:37 AM
I've actually got no objection to the theory, but as you alluded to Matt, because it's our government putting it into practice, I'd vote against if I had a choice, especially considering things like:

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-369838/DVLA-sells-details-criminals.html

and

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/11/17/uk-local-governments.html

Captain Obvious
01-09-2009, 06:29 AM
I'm not even sure why I live here anymore...

vpii
01-09-2009, 06:51 AM
I would imagine peer to peer / skype type networking will become more used.

JeffrySG
01-09-2009, 07:04 AM
Unfortunately it seems that people are more and more in need of starting to use encryption tools for emails. Something like GNU (http://www.gnupg.org/). It's sad that we live in a world like this now.

cresshead
01-09-2009, 07:10 AM
just to clarify the govt will be storing the to and from info as well as the when you send it off or recieve it but NOT the actual email content.

they already do this with telephone and text messaging where they keep on file when you send a text or call someone on a telephone and are extending this to emails.

the content will not be stored as>
1. the money given to isp's is not enough to cover it
2. that woud be HUGE!!! amount of data to KEEP for a year

in future they ARE thinking of keeping the content of people who are being activly investigated.

just so you know...content>> not stored.
i know this form the bbc interview today and also as i worked for an isp last year and this came up in conversations with the boss.

the idea here is to TRACK networking with suspects not the actual messages.

Matt
01-09-2009, 07:47 AM
Well, that's not as bad then. Even so, this Government is incompetent at doing anything right, and it's one foot in the door from total lack of privacy.

Dexter2999
01-09-2009, 11:44 AM
It seems largely pointless.
I could be wrong, but as soon as terrorists figure it out, all they have to do is spoof an address and put "CHEAP VIAGRA ONLINE" in the Info line and they can probably sneak anything through they like.

If you aren't actively screening data in the content, the loss of privacy isn't worth anything if you aren't going to catch them. Well, the very stupid you could.

Also there are forms of encryption where you encode the data into an image. They could send Anthrax data encoded into a picture of the kitten that says "Hang in there" and the screeners probably wouldn't know what they were looking at.

But like I said, I could be wrong. I mean it could still catch the stupid ones...and the argument can and will be made "if we can save even one life, it's worth it."

Bog
01-10-2009, 08:59 AM
Exactly how many secret databases did UKGOV lose last year? Six? Seven? *sighs*

Brace for spam, people.

pauland
01-10-2009, 06:01 PM
I think you should all cut out the government middleman and email me your bank account details and pin codes straight away - just in case they've changed since I bought that disc down the market..

Hopper
01-10-2009, 07:42 PM
Well .. also keep in mind that if it leaves your system and is routed outside your local network (i.e. Internet) - it's public. I don't care what you wrap it in - encrypted or not - SSL, PGP, etc. Unless your on the DoD SIPRNet or BlackStar, everything you do is subject to public review, so why they decided to waste tax payers money with this ridiculous law, I'll never know.

If the government wants it - they'll take it. Simple as that. You can't claim invasion of privacy unless they're grabbing the mail out of your mailbox and opening it. Anything over the Internet is fair game for anyone who wants to take it. It looks to me that they're trying to alleviate some technical limitations (i.e storage) by forcing the ISP's to store what they would have to take on the fly, so they can retrieve it at will later.

What a crock.

Sarford
01-10-2009, 07:56 PM
It seems largely pointless.
I could be wrong, but as soon as terrorists figure it out...

This has nothing to do with terrorists. It about controlling the masses.

I can't believe there is anyone who think this is a good idear (except the goverments ofcourse). And since storage space is getting cheaper all the time and the amount of storage per volume increases, the storage of all CONTENT of your calls and e-mails and p2p data etc is a question of WHEN, not IF.

I think that no goverment has the right to know everything about the people.

Even in the hay-day's of communism the secret services didn't monitor every citizen.

Captain Obvious
01-11-2009, 10:45 AM
I can't believe there is anyone who think this is a good idear (except the goverments ofcourse). And since storage space is getting cheaper all the time and the amount of storage per volume increases, the storage of all CONTENT of your calls and e-mails and p2p data etc is a question of WHEN, not IF.
Not quite. Yes, storage is getting cheaper, so it seems logical that it would get cheaper to store all the data sent. But because storage is getting cheaper, people also send bigger data files. And if you want to store all transactions, well, how exactly are you going to do that? Storing all the contents of Youtube is a challenge, yes, but obviously one that can be overcome (I mean, Youtube manages it!). However, storing everything everyone's ever downloaded from Youtube, every single data transaction, then we're looking at a LOT more data. Especially since you then also need to store all the less-compressed or even uncompressed data that people send TO Youtube.

bobakabob
01-11-2009, 11:13 AM
Matt: Not entirely happy about this, especially with our Governments record on keeping data safe.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7819230.stm

Matt, there's been a fair amount of press coverage, but it's not hit the front pages because in a way, it's already here, with ISPs storing info independently.

A few years ago, visiting Cuba, I countered a Brit traveller's smug accusations of Castro's 'Big Brother' dictatorship by pointing out what was going on back home: digital storage of texts, email, web traffic, tv viewing, video surveillance, financial transactions... the list goes on.

Worryingly the masses just don't seem interested; they appear to have 'Privacy Fatigue' and there are few audible protests. I often hear the 'I've got nothing to hide so I don't care' response trotted out from young and old alike, which is sleepwalking into a fundamental invasion of privacy. By monitoring email and web activity the authorities can effectively peer into the contents of your head.

I thoroughly agree it's shocking and a sad end to the Internet as a free and liberating medium - a Post Orwellian nightmare; one that George could never have imagined: Instead of an austere grey world of oppression, in the west (and east, let's not forget the rest of the world), people are willingly buying into technology which simultaneously 'entertains' them and monitors their lives: Big Brother with tinsel.

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/cgo/lowres/cgon94l.jpg

kyuzo
01-12-2009, 03:13 AM
"You can't claim invasion of privacy unless they're grabbing the mail out of your mailbox and opening it."

Hi Hopper, is this what you mean..?

Police could routinely hack into personal computers without the need for a warrant under new plans from the European Union
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/4109031/Government-plans-to-extend-powers-to-spy-on-personal-computers.html

I am sick to death of this oppressive, incompetent, blundering excuse we have for a government. I'd mind less if some people, somewhere had actually voted to let Gordon Brown continue systematically destroying the country. Combine that with the actively anti-democratic EU, and we're pretty much screwed.

Sorry, I try to avoid politics and ranting here, but it's Monday morning and there's very little that makes me proud to be British anymore.

Derek

Sarford
01-12-2009, 10:39 AM
Cheer up mate, this has nothing to do with being brittish. Its actualy an EU rule (invented by an italian if I'm correct). And don't kid yourself, torries or labour, they both would have implemented this rule.

Hopper
01-12-2009, 10:44 AM
"You can't claim invasion of privacy unless they're grabbing the mail out of your mailbox and opening it."

Hi Hopper, is this what you mean..?

Police could routinely hack into personal computers without the need for a warrant under new plans from the European Union
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/4109031/Government-plans-to-extend-powers-to-spy-on-personal-computers.html

Yeah .. that's what I meant .. holy crap, that's insane. I didn't see that part.

Andyjaggy
01-12-2009, 10:50 AM
Just justify it with the word terrorism and you can get away with anything you want.

We have to do this to guard against terrorism. Yeah, well what can we do to guard against our own governments?

JeffrySG
01-12-2009, 10:59 AM
Just justify it with the word terrorism and you can get away with anything you want.

We have to do this to guard against terrorism. Yeah, well what can we do to guard against our own governments?

Exactly....

People shouldn't be scared of their governments. Governments should be scared of it's people.

--V

Dexter2999
01-12-2009, 11:22 AM
"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither." - Benjamin Franklin

Glendalough
01-12-2009, 11:58 AM
Don't see why the various agencies set up to combat these terrorist attacks and attempts on innocent lives can't use the usual tools of their trade. It's not like they don't have a huge advantage and can get permission to tap phones and email no bother of any suspect at a moments notice.

There is also nothing to stop them from planting people in these networks etc. (and learning how to speak foreign languages and maybe getting foreign people to help them).

This idea of huge data mining operations looks suspiciously like we are trying to be sold an idea that maybe (as well as the invasion of privacy aspect) is not really very sound. How many false leads are going to be turned up and time wasted?

A lot of defense companies have been trying to get into this area (computer data mining). It looks like they are more after the money, which would be endless if they could get it going. As of present they can't make much out of it, (and some projects have been abandoned, so it says in the news). So unless they can change the public's perception or lobby something through the government they aren't going to get their hands on the money.

I see parallels with the attempt to sell the idea of privatizing Social Security in the US. Wasn't that just such a bad idea! Hope this suffers -justly- the same fate.

bobakabob
01-12-2009, 01:17 PM
Cheer up mate, this has nothing to do with being brittish. Its actualy an EU rule (invented by an italian if I'm correct). And don't kid yourself, torries or labour, they both would have implemented this rule.

Absolutely. One look at David Cameron (aristocratic dough faced Tory Opposition leader) and you can wave what's left of your freedom goodbye. :lol:

PS Excellent quote, Dexter...

kyuzo
01-13-2009, 09:14 AM
You're absolutely right Sarford. That law has come from the EU.
The problem I see is that the current rulers in this country (Brown, Mandelson, etc) are unelected. The people who wield the true power in Europe are unelected.
Nature has a way of keeping things in a nice equilibrium. The further these unelected anti-democratic ego-maniacs go against the wishes of the people, the nastier the 'rebalancing' will be.

JeffrySG - I absolutely agree with the sentiments in V for vendetta. The original graphic novel is a damn sight better than the film though.

I hope the good folks over in Ireland reject the Lisbon treaty again. At the very least it might buy the rest of us enough time to demand the referendum we were promised. The rulers in Brussels have shown themselves to be completely untrustworthy, and any verbal assurances they have ever given are completely worthless.

I'm all for co-operation between European countries, just not the current setup we have where the people are ignored or bullied, and pretty much just along for the ride.

Anyway, I'll keep my spirits up repeating the mantra of one of my earliest heroes.. "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own"

Be seeing you.

Bog
01-13-2009, 09:18 AM
I'm off to LA next saturday.... wish me luck on not coming back....

(He says fervently hoping that Obama will actually re-active the First, Fifth and several other delightful and useful Amendments to the Constitution)