Watching you legislation

[MidnightFlyer]

He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.

 

[Yew]

He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.

Indeed, I sometimes wonder that if all the money spent on 'anti terrorisim' was spent on the NHS, road safety, and the emergency services. If we would, overall, have a lower number of deaths..

 

[DarloRich]

But there does seem to be a thought by many (conspiracy land?)that the government is going to routinely intercept, monitor, audit and record all of every communication made by a person in this country.

Whilst i am sure that is a potent fantasy surely even CGHQ/MI5/whoever simply do not have the resources to do this!

 

[fowler9]

But there does seem to be a thought by many (conspiracy land?)that the government is going to routinely intercept, monitor, audit and record all of every communication made by a person in this country.

Whilst i am sure that is a potent fantasy surely even CGHQ/MI5/whoever simply do not have the resources to do this!

I have a phone in my pocket that can instantly update me of many things going around the world. I can contact a mate on the other side of the planet instantly, it tells me with more accuracy than the station staff can how late my train is running. My phone is smaller than my hand and cost little over £100. GCHQ have a centre the size of the area I live in and you think they can't intercept or store that information? My phone could tell people where I am quicker than I could if I had it set up to do so.

 

[NSEFAN]

But there does seem to be a thought by many (conspiracy land?)that the government is going to routinely intercept, monitor, audit and record all of every communication made by a person in this country.

Whilst i am sure that is a potent fantasy surely even CGHQ/MI5/whoever simply do not have the resources to do this!

These days it's very easy to pick out patterns quickly in vast amounts of data. Heck, the USA does deep packet inspection on all traffic in and out of the country. It is done in the name of identifying cyber attacks, but most problems in this regard are simply down to users having weak passwords, which can be fixed without such manic inspection of all internet traffic.

In my view, state-level monitoring of communications is less about national security and more about politics. If someone is 'causing trouble', being able to dish dirt on them to discredit them in the public eye is much easier when you have direct access to their personal communications. If there is a real threat of cyber attack on national infrastructure then perhaps we need to ask ourselves why we are putting power stations etc. on the globally accessible internet with shoddy security.

 

[SS4]

Should anyone want to write to their MP you can use this link from the Open Rights Group. Just why does it need to be rushed through is my question...

To answer my own question it's because the EU has decided we have a right to privacy and Westminster has decided to overrule them citing the vacuous duo of paedophilia and terrorism.

And people wonder why I am desperate for us to stay in the EU :roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In my view, state-level monitoring of communications is less about national security and more about politics. If someone is 'causing trouble', being able to dish dirt on them to discredit them in the public eye is much easier when you have direct access to their personal communications. If there is a real threat of cyber attack on national infrastructure then perhaps we need to ask ourselves why we are putting power stations etc. on the globally accessible internet with shoddy security.

I wonder what this will do to the idea of businesses moving away from an office environment. Phone calls and VOIP will have to be encrypted properly (and don't even think about using Skype).

I suspect they are connected to the internet for remote monitoring rather than having someone on site - it's the only reason I can think for having the internet rather than an intranet.

Of course any security measures may well be pointless as long as people continue to use closed source software

 

[Tetchytyke]

But there does seem to be a thought by many (conspiracy land?)that the government is going to routinely intercept, monitor, audit and record all of every communication made by a person in this country.

Whilst i am sure that is a potent fantasy surely even CGHQ/MI5/whoever simply do not have the resources to do this!

Of course they're not going to store everything, but they will store enough to make sure you can't work out whether you're being listened to or not. That's how the Stasi did things in the 80s.

The information you can get from Metadata is massive. Whilst you don't know what was discussed, they can have a pretty good guess based on who you rang (e.g. Samaritans) and where you rang them from (e.g. platform 3 at Bletchley).

As for snooping powers, my phone has an app that can listen to ten seconds of music in a shopping centre and tell me who sang it and when. I'm certain GCHQ will have use of similar technology.

 

[fowler9]

Of course they're not going to store everything, but they will store enough to make sure you can't work out whether you're being listened to or not. That's how the Stasi did things in the 80s.

The information you can get from Metadata is massive. Whilst you don't know what was discussed, they can have a pretty good guess based on who you rang (e.g. Samaritans) and where you rang them from (e.g. platform 3 at Bletchley).

As for snooping powers, my phone has an app that can listen to ten seconds of music in a shopping centre and tell me who sang it and when. I'm certain GCHQ will have use of similar technology.

Indeed chief, I have access to a free app the tells me exactly where I am 24/7, how far it is from home and roughly how long it will take by any transport method t get home. And people are asking how they think GCHQ can fund this, that is free. For a couple of quid a month you can track most civil airliners in the world, get photos of the plane and see how fast and how high it is.

How hard do you reckon it is for the government to get all of this for free if they stick a law in place saying you have to give it to them, which they are doing?

 

[SS4]

Of course they're not going to store everything, but they will store enough to make sure you can't work out whether you're being listened to or not. That's how the Stasi did things in the 80s.

The information you can get from Metadata is massive. Whilst you don't know what was discussed, they can have a pretty good guess based on who you rang (e.g. Samaritans) and where you rang them from (e.g. platform 3 at Bletchley).

As for snooping powers, my phone has an app that can listen to ten seconds of music in a shopping centre and tell me who sang it and when. I'm certain GCHQ will have use of similar technology.

Metadata is something people do not pay enough attention to IMO. Tagging your photo with it's location is obvious to see but the time and date, the camera model can say a lot. Downloaded files can have these too so may be worth getting rid of before you stream anything obtained from the internet

Indeed chief, I have access to a free app the tells me exactly where I am 24/7, how far it is from home and roughly how long it will take by any transport method t get home. And people are asking how they think GCHQ can fund this, that is free. For a couple of quid a month you can track most civil airliners in the world, get photos of the plane and see how fast and how high it is.

How hard do you reckon it is for the government to get all of this for free if they stick a law in place saying you have to give it to them, which they are doing?

Perhaps GCHQ are funding these apps which enables them to be free?

Those on Android may wish to consider switching to a ROM with SELinux support (such as CyanogenMod). Whilst I don't pretend this will stop GCHQ or the NSA listening in it's great for curbing excessive permissions (I'm looking at you Facebook)

 

[Emyr]

I get a warm fuzzy feeling inside when Privacy Guard pops up a box asking me to allow or deny Facebook's access requests. Not very warm, but slightly.

 

[DarloRich]

People on here seem to have a lot to hide I assume you have all read the actual bill: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/328939/draft-drip-bill.pdf

 

[fowler9]

People on here seem to have a lot to hide I assume you have all read the actual bill: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/328939/draft-drip-bill.pdf

Ha ha. Well what you don't mind being visible to one group of leaders may be something that you may quickly want to hide from another. First they came or the..... chose your own following word. It could never happen here of course.

 

[hassaanhc]

Those on Android may wish to consider switching to a ROM with SELinux support (such as CyanogenMod). Whilst I don't pretend this will stop GCHQ or the NSA listening in it's great for curbing excessive permissions (I'm looking at you Facebook)

Have used CyanogenMod for 7 months but that was because the normal Samsung software slows my S3 to a crawl :roll:

 

[cjp]

People on here seem to have a lot to hide [/url]

Not from good friends but yes to faceless powers with no proven need to enquire - just fishing around:-x

 

[Emyr]

Have used CyanogenMod for 7 months but that was because the normal Samsung software slows my S3 to a crawl :roll:

CM7 is Ancient. We're up to CM11 now.

 

[SS4]

Have used CyanogenMod for 7 months but that was because the normal Samsung software slows my S3 to a crawl :roll:

CM7 on the S3? Surely that'll support CM11.

 

[Emyr]

CM7 on the S3? Surely that'll support CM11.

My phone is a Samsung Galaxy S3 (GT-I9300) currently running CM11 Nightly build 2014-07-15. Works great. Been using the nightly builds on this phone since November 2012, a month after I got it. Was using them on my i9000 before then.

 

[hassaanhc]

CM7 is Ancient. We're up to CM11 now.

Using CM10.2, but for the last 7 months

 

[DarloRich]

Have used CyanogenMod for 7 months but that was because the normal Samsung software slows my S3 to a crawl :roll:

CM7 on the S3? Surely that'll support CM11.

My phone is a Samsung Galaxy S3 (GT-I9300) currently running CM11 Nightly build 2014-07-15. Works great. Been using the nightly builds on this phone since November 2012, a month after I got it. Was using them on my i9000 before then.

Using CM10.2, but for the last 7 months

Are you people even speaking English? I think this is some sort of subversive code! See how easily they use modern communications to spread their evilitude! Here we see why this legislation is required!!!!!!!!!!

Where are GCHQ when you need them

 

[Manchester77]

Another Angry Voice (AAV) has an article on the 51 MPs who voted against DRIP
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/51-mps-drip-emergency.html

It is quite extraordinary that the majority of parliament have decided to vote in favour of allowing the security services to continue dredging the private communications data of millions of completely innocent people. The Edward Snowden leaks showed the alarming extent of the security services violations of our right to privacy, their collusion with foreign powers and their evasion of democratic oversight, so it would have been no surprise at all had parliament decided to introduce emergency legislation to bring the security services back under control, however they didn't do that at the time.

It includes a list of the 51 MPs who opposed this piece of legislation.

Open rights group are also hoping to take Theresa May to court since she has ignored the ruling made in the European courts that mass surveillance was unlawful.
https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2014/dear-theresa-see-you-in-court

But in doing so they won’t have had the final word. You’ve already shown them the growing public opposition to mass surveillance. There was incredible action from supporters: 4458 of you wrote to your MPs with even more phoning up on the day of the vote. Together we helped 49 MPs rebel against the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Bill. It may have passed, but thanks to you they know that we do not agree.

Help us challenge DRIP: Join now

Whilst Parliament swallowed Theresa May’s tired arguments that “terrorist plots will go undetected” and “these are powers and capabilities that exist today", she failed to make a compelling argument that holding everyone’s data is necessary and proportionate. Frankly, the Government was evasive and duplicitous, and they were in a hurry to cover their tracks.

Tom Watson MP described the process as “democratic banditry, resonant of a rogue state. The people who put this shady deal together should be ashamed.”

And the European Court’s decision was very clear: blanket data retention is unlawful and violates the right to privacy.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Sometimes (and this is one of those times), I find it hard to grasp how people on here are engage with what they are commenting on. This thread is a perfect example.

All this week, the UK Government has been under challenge in Court for the weaknesses in their application of Human Rights in repsect of communications monitored by GCHQ and other agencies, both here and overseas. The challenge is both powerful and determined, and the government's response has been simultaneously precise (in terms of legislation) and frank (in terms of weaknesses in practice). I've been in Court merely as an observer, and impressed by the thoroughness of the argument.

This forum is discussing models of mobile phone, and claiming that "the EU has decided we have a right to privacy and Westminster has decided to overrule them". I (and 5 Law Lords) have heard no mention of phone brands in Court this week in Liberty v GCHQ, and we have hard almost the complet opposite in terms of the UK Government deferring to European legislation, preferring to allow Strasburg to set the precedents (and where that have not, to avoid pre-empting that precedent with any local Decision).

I'm confused.

 

[TSR :D]

I find whole of the legislation thing fishy. Why did the majority of parliament MPs and the main parties has suddenly decided that they agree with this legislation without much of debate. Despite many protests from technologically oriented groups and sites (like Reddit) and despite what has happened to Snowden, MPs has ignored them and sent them a "stock" template provided from their party in case if someone contacts them about this legislation even if the stock letter doesn't (or is irrelevent) answer what other people have asked them.

To be honest, I think this is one of few reasons why it's better to abolish parties completely so we can only vote for MPs according to their political stances.

 

[Merseysider]

To be honest, I think this is one of few reasons why it's better to abolish parties completely so we can only vote for MPs according to their political stances.

We can live in hope.

Like it or not, our government has been spying on us for longer than we know about. Their reasons may or may not be justified. But they certainly won't stop snooping purely because it's illegal.

 

[londiscape]

I find whole of the legislation thing fishy. Why did the majority of parliament MPs and the main parties has suddenly decided that they agree with this legislation without much of debate. Despite many protests from technologically oriented groups and sites (like Reddit) and despite what has happened to Snowden, MPs has ignored them and sent them a "stock" template provided from their party in case if someone contacts them about this legislation even if the stock letter doesn't (or is irrelevent) answer what other people have asked them.

To be honest, I think this is one of few reasons why it's better to abolish parties completely so we can only vote for MPs according to their political stances.

↑↑ This.

I would refer to the excellent Yes Prime Minister episode "Power to the People" for a good idea of why it won't happen and how "British democracy" actually works.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I would refer to the excellent Yes Prime Minister episode "Power to the People" for a good idea of why it won't happen and how "British democracy" actually works.

I disagree.

The TV series were highly enjoyable, and gave some useful insights, yes. As have 'House of Cards' and 'The Thick of It' since then.
But as I tied to explain in my other post on this issue (), the real insight into 'how "British democracy" actually works' has been taking place last week with surprising little interest from the public or commentators: National Council for Civil Liberties vs GCHQ and other agencies in Court 19 of the Rolls Building. There were plenty unoccupied seats - perhaps all the people concerned with 'how democracy actually works' were pre-occupied with watching repeats of political satire on TV?

 

[DarloRich]

I disagree.

The TV series were highly enjoyable, and gave some useful insights, yes. As have 'House of Cards' and 'The Thick of It' since then.
But as I tied to explain in my other post on this issue (), the real insight into 'how "British democracy" actually works' has been taking place last week with surprising little interest from the public or commentators: National Council for Civil Liberties vs GCHQ and other agencies in Court 19 of the Rolls Building. There were plenty unoccupied seats - perhaps all the people concerned with 'how democracy actually works' were pre-occupied with watching repeats of political satire on TV?

It is because many people (although they THINK otherwise) have little or no idea about how laws are created and framed in this country and even less about the role of the courts in interpreting those laws.

Your 1st post is very informative and should serve a pointer to many. I wonder how many people read the draft legislation?