• Snooper’s Charter just got passed
    53 replies, posted
[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;51386858]Actually fucking worse, There were things the NSA wouldn't even touch because they considered it "Too useless and infringing". Those things are in the Snooper's Charter.[/QUOTE] such as?
[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;51387680]You mean 'widely hated by extremely left-wing British Facepunchers' Normal people don't care about Internet surveillance, like, at all.[/QUOTE] Well yeah, like most authoritarian ideas people tend not to care when it's not currently pointed at them. emphasis on not currently
Just for clarity on who is gaining access to this information, from the Bill. [quote] Persons who may apply for issue of a warrant (1)Each of the following is an “intercepting authority” for the purposes of this Part— (a)a person who is the head of an intelligence service; (b)the Director General of the National Crime Agency; (c)the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; (d)the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland; (e)the chief constable of the Police Service of Scotland; (f)the Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs; (g)the Chief of Defence Intelligence; (h)a person who is the competent authority of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom for the purposes of an EU mutual assistance instrument or an international mutual assistance agreement. [/quote] In other words, exactly who you'd expect to gain access to the information.
I have a huge problem with the retention of web records and bulk personal data not just because it's amoral, but also because it's a huge security risk. 99.99% of that data is going to worthless to the authorities, and yet it's going to be sitting on a server somewhere for at least a year. ISPs [I]should[/I] be some of the most secure organisations on the planet, but when a [URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37990246"]17-year-old script kiddie can grab over a hundred thousand people's personal information from one[/URL] my faith is significantly diminished.
[QUOTE=CMB Unit 01;51386890] Really, it's a case of if you're doing nothing wrong, this won't affect you. It'll just help the authorities filter the bad people out a lot easier.[/QUOTE] And that is a terrible sentiment/precedent that invariably precedes privacy evaporating into the ether. You don't need any reason to hide your life beyond 'I want to hide my life'. That is the spirit of right to privacy, that is the crux of arguments against things like the Snooper's Charter. It shouldn't matter if you 'don't have anything to worry about'.
[QUOTE=CMB Unit 01;51388037]Just for clarity on who is gaining access to this information, from the Bill. [QUOTE]Persons who may apply for issue of a warrant (1)Each of the following is an “intercepting authority” for the purposes of this Part— (a)a person who is the head of an intelligence service; (b)the Director General of the National Crime Agency; (c)the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; (d)the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland; (e)the chief constable of the Police Service of Scotland; (f)the Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs; (g)the Chief of Defence Intelligence; [B](h)a person who is the competent authority of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom for the purposes of an EU mutual assistance instrument or an international mutual assistance agreement.[/B][/QUOTE] In other words, exactly who you'd expect to gain access to the information.[/QUOTE] Is the bolded line defined further anywhere? Who decides who this is? This seems very vague.
[QUOTE=ben1066;51388267]Is the bolded line defined further anywhere? Who decides who this is? This seems very vague.[/QUOTE] Probably refers to primarily Five Eyes and secondarily to other countries (such as EU agreements) where we have intelligence sharing agreements
[QUOTE=CMB Unit 01;51386890]Really, it's a case of if you're doing nothing wrong, this won't affect you. It'll just help the authorities filter the bad people out a lot easier.[/QUOTE] Just give me all your passwords to your online accounts, let me read all of your emails and view your browsing history, give me your phone too so I can look at all your texts and view every private conversation you've ever had on it. You've done nothing wrong, right? So there's no reason for you to say no to me.
[QUOTE=WJS;51388283]Just give me all your passwords to your online accounts, let me read all of your emails and view your browsing history, give me your phone too so I can look at all your texts and view every private conversation you've ever had on it. You've done nothing wrong, right? So there's no reason for you to say no to me.[/QUOTE] Pretty much. If viewing my porn history and taking notes about how I require ASM to fall sleep stops me getting blown up on the tube by a nutcase then please go ahead. Is it more naive to be happy with privacy breaches or to actually believe the government will be hiring individual people to search through 70~ million people's worth of texts, emails and browsing histories. There will be alogorithms doing this for them, and computers won't care if you like smelling your own farts or that you've asked your girlfriend to pick up milk on her way back from work. Perhaps the opposition to this is yet another example of the far left's dream to have a country full of criminals and terrorists (which, surprisingly, doesn't appear to be working in some European countries which have adopted the far left model)
[QUOTE=Ishwoo;51388357]Pretty much. If viewing my porn history and taking notes about how I require ASM to fall sleep stops me getting blown up on the tube by a nutcase then please go ahead. Is it more naive to be happy with privacy breaches or to actually believe the government will be hiring individual people to search through 70~ million people's worth of texts, emails and browsing histories. There will be alogorithms doing this for them, and computers won't care if you like smelling your own farts or that you've asked your girlfriend to pick up milk on her way back from work.[/QUOTE] The effectiveness of mass surveillance as a way of countering terrorism is dubious. More often than not it just results in information overflow which can hinder rather than help. This is why people are suspicious of this bill because from a stopping terrorism point of view it isn't necessarily very effective, something they'd most likely know so what exactly is their motive.
[QUOTE=TestECull;51388230]And that is a terrible sentiment/precedent that invariably precedes privacy evaporating into the ether. You don't need any reason to hide your life beyond 'I want to hide my life'. That is the spirit of right to privacy, that is the crux of arguments against things like the Snooper's Charter. It shouldn't matter if you 'don't have anything to worry about'.[/QUOTE] I'm not advocating the evaporation of privacy, it's just from reading the bill I just don't see much of it being feasible. The government doesn't even have an electronic system for introducing and amending legislation in Parliament, they won't have the infrastructure for storing and analysing any usable information in bulk. I can see the Science and Technology Select Committee pulling this Bill to pieces once it gets passed. Remember that in the UK's legislative process, bills aren't given proper scrutiny in going through Parliament. For one, there isn't enough time in the second reading stage for MPs to scrutinise properly, and at the committee stage, the government dominates legislative amendments given their relative majority vs. the opposition, so it essentially gets fast tracked through. It's only after the bill has been passed that there's the time and resources to scrutinise laws properly, and in the Parliamentary Select Committees, they always invite along industry experts who will be able to give real-world scrutiny on the clauses of an Act. Once you get some tech experts in to have a look at the scope of this Bill, I can see this fizzling out.
[QUOTE=Ishwoo;51388357]Pretty much. If viewing my porn history and taking notes about how I require ASM to fall sleep stops me getting blown up on the tube by a nutcase then please go ahead. [/quote] Except it won't work that way. If someone's determined to blow up the tube and they're going to do so in a country that's known to snoop in electronic communications [i]they won't use electronic communications.[/i] In much the same vein of logic that Russia used in justifying using actual paper documents for state secrets, they will stick to means of communication that aren't easily tapped. Your government will end up with vast libraries of furry porn and grocery lists and the terrorists will blow the tube up anyway. Your privacy was given up for nothing. Good job. Keep your privacy. [quote]Is it more naive to be happy with privacy breaches or to actually believe the government will be hiring individual people to search through 70~ million people's worth of texts, emails and browsing histories. There will be alogorithms doing this for them, and computers won't care if you like smelling your own farts or that you've asked your girlfriend to pick up milk on her way back from work. Perhaps the opposition to this is yet another example of the far left's dream to have a country full of criminals and terrorists (which, surprisingly, doesn't appear to be working in some European countries which have adopted the far left model)[/QUOTE] It's more naive to let fear cloud your judgement. You're more likely to see someone get struck by lightning while waiting for a tube train than you are to see a terrorist bomb the tube train.
[QUOTE=Ishwoo;51388357]Pretty much. If viewing my porn history and taking notes about how I require ASM to fall sleep stops me getting blown up on the tube by a nutcase then please go ahead.[/QUOTE] That's not even the point though. If some stranger at a bus stop asked to look through all your texts, emails, call history, download all your photos and videos, view your bank transactions and get a peak at every other piece of personal information you have you'd obviously say no to them. You would never be okay with a total stranger [U]asking [/U]to view your private information. But you're somehow okay with a whole group of strangers having total access to all of your information [U]without asking[/U], on a national scale.
Lmao good fucking luck funding and enforcing this technologically illiterate horseshit. [editline]18th November 2016[/editline] We're also not out of the EU yet so there's a chance it'll be shot down again.
ugh I remember talking to brexiters telling them exactly this would happen once the EU human rights were gone [editline]18th November 2016[/editline] a classic case of smug left-wing "I told you so" rhetoric
Morality aside, this is just setting up a goldmine of personal info for some hacker to get into.
So you know that Dave Cameron thing about making swathes of perfectly normal porn including BDSM illegal like CP is, did that shit ever go through?
[QUOTE=Jon27;51389789]So you know that Dave Cameron thing about making swathes of perfectly normal porn including BDSM illegal like CP is, did that shit ever go through?[/QUOTE] It sounds like you have something to HIDE. Please forward any questions and materials you might have to your local police station.
[QUOTE=CMB Unit 01;51388459]I'm not advocating the evaporation of privacy, it's just from reading the bill I just don't see much of it being feasible. The government doesn't even have an electronic system for introducing and amending legislation in Parliament, they won't have the infrastructure for storing and analysing any usable information in bulk. I can see the Science and Technology Select Committee pulling this Bill to pieces once it gets passed. Remember that in the UK's legislative process, bills aren't given proper scrutiny in going through Parliament. For one, there isn't enough time in the second reading stage for MPs to scrutinise properly, and at the committee stage, the government dominates legislative amendments given their relative majority vs. the opposition, so it essentially gets fast tracked through. It's only after the bill has been passed that there's the time and resources to scrutinise laws properly, and in the Parliamentary Select Committees, they always invite along industry experts who will be able to give real-world scrutiny on the clauses of an Act. Once you get some tech experts in to have a look at the scope of this Bill, I can see this fizzling out.[/QUOTE] Last year I followed a course on Privacy Technologies and the professor, who dedicates her research to privacy, said how badly worded the entire charter is. Vulnerable to abuse of power and IIRC it adds the ability to lock up someone who refuses to help break into other systems. Remember the Apple v FBI lawsuit last year in the US? Yeah, with this law, if it would happen in the UK, Apple would've been found guilty and someone would end up in prison. Mind you, who is again not properly worded in the charter, so the court can pick and choose who to stuff in a prison cell (as long as they work in the relevant company). It's shit, pure shit
[QUOTE=The cheese;51389807]It sounds like you have something to HIDE. Please forward any questions and materials you might have to your local police station.[/QUOTE] Problem is most of the coppers have something to 'HIDE' too. Especially where I live there is some well hidden, messed up shit. Says the guy who's looking at a policing career.
[QUOTE=Jon27;51389994]Problem is most of the coppers have something to 'HIDE' too. Especially where I live there is some well hidden, messed up shit. Says the guy who's looking at a policing career.[/QUOTE] "Do as I say, not as I do", wonderful isn't it? All joking about how the upper echelons probably have petabytes worth of snuff aside, there seems to be a ton of practical problems involved with this. Like storage and the inevitable leaking of pretty much everything, and we all know that it will be abused for some shady shit within the year.
[QUOTE=WJS;51388711]That's not even the point though. If some stranger at a bus stop asked to look through all your texts, emails, call history, download all your photos and videos, view your bank transactions and get a peak at every other piece of personal information you have you'd obviously say no to them. You would never be okay with a total stranger [U]asking [/U]to view your private information. But you're somehow okay with a whole group of strangers having total access to all of your information [U]without asking[/U], on a national scale.[/QUOTE] Completely different, a vetted government agency will not be using random people off the street. You would not tell a random stranger on the street about your medical problems etc, but more than happy to have it kept in a national database which anyone in the NHS can accesss. This is similar, except it will only be a select few officers who have access. Like I said previously, they won't be snooping through your mundane texts and emails without reason, and it's more likely a computer will be analysing your online behaviour and comparing it with that of an extremist. Unless you like watching live leak, buying large amounts of fertiliser and pressure cookers then I doubt anyone will ever actually go through the effort of hacking into all your devices.
This is an excellent tume to be an IT business in the UK, imagine all the contracts to setup new secure databases and the like. In reality they will ask the one intern who knows nothing about security who will them proceed to setup a completely unsecured database saving all the information as plain text. Its a wonderfull time to be a hacker in the UK! [editline]18th November 2016[/editline] Also for the people who think nothing bad will happen, remember all thosr occasions of police in the US using those kind of tools to keep tabs on protesters and the like? Or all these tech companies making mad dough selling these kind of systems to authoritarian regimes. Or russia mad hability of keeping tabs on protesters and the like. Remember how all of those countries are totally super safe and never suffer terrorist attacks?
I want to get off Mr Bones' Wild Ride.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.