Home internet Surveillance Bill

[Kimbers]

This bill is being proposed today after being rejected for being too intrusive previously.

Any thoughts on the government insisting that your internet provider keeps records of your browsing history?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34715872

I must admit I was against the previous bill as it was too intrusive and allowed local councils and government departments full access but this one is hugely watered down.

Is this still too intrusive in a "free society" and the thin edge of the wedge on government intervention in our lives and censorship? Or is this the way things are going to allow us to sleep safely at night and acceptable behaviour for a democratic country?

I am sitting on the fence. Your opinions?

[lotusesprit1]

The thought police are coming. The new version is better as it involves a panel of judges but I can still see circumstances where it will get get abused. 

 

Edited November 4, 2015 by lotusesprit1

[100th_Idiot]

It is either misguided or malicious.

All the terrorists/pedos take your pick need to do is go to an internet cafe, use a VPN or use a tor plugin.

All this will do is gather information on the majority of law abiding peace loving hard working people.

They will then need to do something with it to justify the cost and intrusion. So look out for more abuse in the same way as RIPA with local councils accessing it for anything they so wish. Don't like your planning permission application because a builder friend wants the land? OK. Let's do some digging.

[100th_Idiot]

The Telegraph has a decent article which basically states what I say above with a few more facts.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11975759/The-politics-of-surveillance-are-about-politics-not-keeping-us-safe.html

[Bibs]

You can be fairly sure that terrorists and criminals won't be planning their activities via facebook messenger.

[100th_Idiot]

Also your data will be securely held by ISPs such as Talk Talk.

[Bibs]

What's the point in it anyway? If I read correctly, they'll only know which website you visited and when but not which pages you viewed. How would that information be useful, they're hardly going to send anyone to jail for visiting Google a few times but if they knew what was searched for, then it has a relevance etc?

[Kimbers]

From what I read, it's my understanding the NCA have a system that alerts them when someone searches something illegal. That then has to be prioritised and tied in with the number of times it has been searched by that IP address. Of course they have to sift through miss searches and people who search for something just once because they heard about it in the press AND have anough manpower to do all of the above (which they don't). But I suppose if you search how to make a bomb enough times you will get a visit......though you would also need a visit from the stupid police for doing it on an open search engine and from your own Address.

Like you said, most arrests are made from "information received" and THEN they check the records and computers owned by the person. Until they come to notice no one knows any better.

The whole govt proposal seems like a waste of time just to make it look like they are doing something!!

 

[oneshot]

Most of it is done by computers using sophisticated software which analyses the data and only shows relevant info. Not much manpower required.

[100th_Idiot]

They can do a lot of analysis with data. In the US, they have started trawling through people's "big data". They are then able to work out how people vote and then target floating voters directly with campaigning and direct calling.

That's not to far away from the state being able to find out how you voted in an election...

I think they will record every web page request. Once they know the page it is quite simple to look up the content. They are also working on a system to correlate data in order to resolve shared internet access to an individual. That mean building a database of citizen data.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/11/04/ukgov_request_filter_in_snooping_bill/

[LazyDonkey]

Most people who are appalled by this would be amazed at what information i can access from this laptop.

We freely give away loads of data about ourselves that is then sold, resold, analysed and compared every time you click "accept" on someone's T&C's

Government and law enforcement already have access to huge amounts of data, but the key here is the "without warrant" change. 

 

[basalte]

It is appropriate on this Armistice Day to remember that our grandfathers (both of them in my own case ) fought  to protect a democratic way of life from potentially vicious State intrusion. Their fight was obviously way before the internet but the fundamental principle of protecting privacy and "innocent until proven guilty" must hold sway and not founder beneath a welter of panic and contrived hysteria . More people in the UK are still killed falling downstairs than by terrorists.  Remember how in Nazi Germany you could be hung for listening to the BBC and by contrast in Britain during WW2 it was not even thought necessary to tap everyones telephone calls -and we were at total war ? Seeing something online is just not the same thing as approving of it for a start. And as has been pointed out,  the real villains will take pains to avoid the net altogether ?

Assuming Cameron, May et al mean well (swallows hard) and having heard them,  I simply do not believe that the British State has the ability either to secure the data it collects (given its dependence on demoralised, sullen  underpaid school leavers  to staff civil service bureaucracies ) or to use it in a manner free from corruption. It also ignores the possibility of  other future  more malevolent governments using mass data collection in more sinister ways. In short they may find that the cure is worse than the disease-(How long before someone tries to out Cameron searching for "Prime Porkers" or "Readers` Sows " ?)   

I know its a cliche but Benjamin Franklin`s adage  "those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither liberty nor security " holds true.

[C8RKH]

It's funny but it always seem we fear the Tories want to intrude on our privacy. Can I ask you all who think that to go and check through what Labour did? In general, Tories want you to get on with it and accept the risk (think pensions) whereas under New Labour our democratic right to choice in our daily lives was being increasingly restricted as under new or old socialism the state always knows what's best for you so no need for choice!

I don't care what data the government collects on me and maybe it will make us safer, and maybe it won't, and I must be dumb as I have googled "making a bomb" - i was just curious! No harm in that. I've also googled making cup cakes and constructing walls out of reinforced concrete. In isolation or together it hardly makes me public enemy 297, 634th! But giving those total pillocks and twits in local authorities access to my data is just wrong. They're just to plain dumb to do anything useful with it.

As for complex systems to calculate how I voted they just need to ask, I'd be happy to share...

As another poster correctly stated, we're happy to give confidential/private data away all day long, we post anything and everything on social media etc and all these private companies that run these systems trawl theough our every posting. Are these companies worthy of more trust than our democratically electrd government? Sometimes I think people think we live in 1960/70's paranoid America or one of the old Soviet block states or heaven permit North Korea (bet that got a ping at GCHQ!). We really are a long way off that level of state inteference and intervention in our private lives in the uk. But then I just might be blinkered and bonkers, or a clever terrorist trying to hoodwink everyone (likely another GCHQ supercomputer ping but no knock at the door just yet!). 

[Barrykearley]

The issue is where the line is drawn.

today - they are just monitoring naughty people legally. Tomorrow they could well be spying on everyone ensuring they ain't lying on forms, tax returns, application forms the lot. It starts with an essential need to protect....... And then slips to do what ever they please.

now I'm no fan of chami chatriabte - the woman from Liberty - but at some point this is going to slide into unintended ground and it will be too late. 

In reality - they are already doing what they need to do. What they are now trying to do is legitimise the intelligence. Guantanamo bay detainees - now an awful lot more of them would be behind bars for a very long time if intelligence sources were revealed in a court of law - but they couldn't and wouldn't do it as most was unlawfully obtained. 

Wheres the rights and wrongs?? State snuffing would surely be on its way??

[C8RKH]

To be honest Barry I had just assumed that state soonsored "snuffing" had been with us for years, and I'm not just talking about radioactive umbrella tips!

I get it to an extent and of course it depends on where the line is drawn.

I'm not totally against snooping, nor checking that people are lying on benefits applications, tax returns etc. If you want to sleep at night don't cheat or lie the system and if everyone plays fair maybe we can properly look after our citizens who need it! It might help me to also understand how someone who is so imobile they need a blue badge yet can easily get in and out of an S2 Elise with the hardtop on everyday!

We're swimming in difficult times. Communication used to be paper based - and intelligence was gathered and communications intercepted, copied etc. Then it was analogue over telephone lines and radio waves, and again we snooped and intercepted. Now it is everywhere, digital, always on and more dangerous than ever. So we now should stop?

First duty of government is to protect its citizens so in my view snoop away. Yes we need checks and balances to ensure justice and to keep the state in check. It's back to that line again isn't it.

Again, I trust our laws and their officers and the institutes we have to provide the check and balances needed. I do think in the UK we are a long way away fron an Orwellian 1984 country.

Now, remember 7 -7?  There was a huge press and public backlash against Government and our law and intelligence services for 'allowing" these atrocities to happen. Damned if they do, damned if they don't

The internet is a wonderful thing, but it can also be a hugely lawless place, a meeting place and feeding frenzy for terrorists, scammers, perverts, criminals, etc. Do we just do what many people in society do and close our eyes and walk on by and ignore it? A bit like the people in the video on another yhread or just ignored the guy hacking into the 911 convertible?

 

[Bibs]

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/nov/11/broadband-bills-increase-snoopers-charter-investigatory-powers-bill-mps-warned

We're paying for this by the way!

[C8RKH]

Yup. We pay for everything in the end....  Taxes and death, only two things in life that are certain and many of us spend our entire lives trying to cheat both :)

[Barrykearley]

It's all about balance. Bit like paying tax etc.

i believe if you have nothing to hide its all fine - but I do worry if it's used inappropriately. Frankly - maybe an awful lot more just should not be reported in the media

Why people cheat - I just don't understand. Tax avoidance - again I don't get it. Schools and hospitals might be free at the point of use - but they just aren't free. It's a bit like the cash in hand argument. I always issue a proper invoice vat and all - you would never believe that some folks think they can get it cheaper for cash....... Hmm nice concept - but it ain't right. I have had folks offer to do a cash deal and knock of 10% for the tax they are trying to get me to avoid - frankly I don't like folks like that and find it hugely insulting. It's either on the books and above board or find someone else!! . I simply can't slag off the Starbucks et al and then not be doing the right thing. We are now in a world where everything is online and bacs etc - so bacs wins everytime!! 

As long as there are real checks and balances - then it's fine by me. 

Snuffing - hmmm they need to crack on - why they never did for the hook bloke I will never know

[Bibs]

16 hours ago, Barrykearley said:

i believe if you have nothing to hide its all fine

Because the public sector/Police have never made mistakes and wrongly accused people?

[C8RKH]

Awww, come on Bibs so where does it stop?

I don't go to a GP because they make mistakes and I'd never go to hospital as more people die in those places from what they didn't go in with as people make mistakes.

I wouldn't trust buses or trains to transport me as drivers make mistakes. I never pay my taxes as HMRC always gets the calculation wrong etc etc.

I tell you what, no surveillence. No law and order. No monitoring and therefore no point in silly made up rules and regs then either eh?

We can do what we want, when we want, without fear of action being taken against us as we can argue freedom of choice, action and intent is a right of all humans.

Yes mistakes will always be made. It's inevitable as humans are not infallible. But checks and balances help to mitigate against the risk. It will never be irradicated though.

[LazyDonkey]

The problem with the "if you've done nothing wrong" argument is that it works so long as the information is right.

if you've ever wrongly had a poor credit rating on equifax or experian you can see how quickly your life can be turned upside down by a mistake. 

What if this mistake then starts to impact on everything?   You happen to share a name with a bad person and the next time you try to fly you get a gloved hand up the arse. 

DVLA run the most efficient and accurate database in the country and by their own account it's only 96% accurate.

Sounds good, unless you're in the 4%. 

 

[DaveC72]

The irony...

 

[C8RKH]

18 minutes ago, DaveC72 said:

The irony...

 

 

Yup, totally ironic that the cameras are all pointing west, when the threat these days is from the east!

I get all the easy quips re being one of the 4% etc, so what is your answer to keep the nation safe? Do sod it all to risk the majority in case the minority suffer?

I've had one friend shot dead by terrorists and my wife had a relation blown up. Seen and felt the impact of poor intelligence and surveillance thanks very much.

[DaveC72]

Andy, I am genuinely sorry for your loss - and when we finally meet, we'll have a beer or nine and swap personal experiences.

The biggest issue with intelligence and surveillance has always been when to act on the threat.  I do not envy the security services the constant judgement calls they make on this.  They get it right, constantly and we hear nothing about it.  Our outrage and indignation is reserved for when they get it wrong, which unfortunately has significant consequences.

I have no issue with perceived threats being the subject of legislatively approved surveillance.  I do take exception to effectively mounting surveillance on the whole population.  I'm sorry, it's just bloody wrong from a civil liberty, moral and ethical point of view.

In concurrence with previous posters I do not believe that the bill will provide any greater security than we currently enjoy, in that any serious threat is (extremely) unlikely to be caught by the measures being introduced in the bill.

A better use of the funds, which as Bibs pointed out we're paying for, might be in ensuring that deeper intelligence would be available on those identified groups who are an identified threat (and they're not likely to be found on Facebook, or indeed google).

 

 

27 minutes ago, C8RKH said:

Yup, totally ironic that the cameras are all pointing west, when the threat these days is from the east!

 

I think you'll find that pointing West is just due to graphics, not actual positioning...

 

[Barrykearley]

1 hour ago, LazyDonkey said:

 

What if this mistake then starts to impact on everything?   You happen to share a name with a bad person and the next time you try to fly you get a gloved hand up the arse. 

Some folks in some places pay good money for that