Sadly all too true.
Poll: Investigatory Powers Bill or "Snoopers' Charter" has been approved
- Thread starter thebennyboy
- Start date
Sadly all too true.
The pessemist in me thinks that the law won't be softened until it happens to a member of the cabinet. I know that MPs are excluded from the data collection but I wonder whether that extends to their home use.
I'm sure it won't be long until a tabloid newspaper is using 'leaked' data against someone they don't like.
I imagine it would.
It's almost worth getting together an A team to tap the lines of MPs and show them how much data they produce that they believe is innocuous that can be used for other means.
There would be something beautiful about blackmailing one or two to fight the snoopers charter using their internet history
.
*Hypothetically* before this post lands me in front of the thought police.
It's almost worth getting together an A team to tap the lines of MPs and show them how much data they produce that they believe is innocuous that can be used for other means.
There would be something beautiful about blackmailing one or two to fight the snoopers charter using their internet history
.*Hypothetically* before this post lands me in front of the thought police
.
Are poltiicians actually exempt from data collection or is it just that their privacy is respected and none of the bodies can have access to it? either way I'm sure most of them will have done embarrassing things online prior to becoming an MP so they could in theory still be blackmailed if the data falls into the wrong hands.
Last edited:
Their data is stored same as everyone else, but the people who have access to it are told not to look at it without approval from the Prime Minister. I think a lot are clueless about technology, they all think they are "exempt" and their data will magically be discarded but in reality it's still stored and any blackmailer with access to the database won't care about getting approval from the Prime Minister.
surely the isp will just remove thier address from the recording system.
all that will happen in that case is "new security measures have been put in place this wont happen again"
Nope. I think many MP's have a false sense of security. They are told "MP's are exempt" so they believe their data won't be recorded. When actually it will be, and people told "don't look at this persons Internet Connection Records unless we have approval from the Prime Minister". That will stop legitimate people from doing so of course, but won't be effective against a blackmailer.
Liberty is crowdfunding a legal challenge against the Snoopers Charter.
http://www.wired.co.uk/article/ip-act-liberty-crowdfunding-legal
Well this is good news, hope it gains some traction.
http://www.wired.co.uk/article/ip-act-liberty-crowdfunding-legal
Well this is good news, hope it gains some traction.
Already donated before to Liberty UK but donated here too. Cheers for sharing.
?Already donated to this, if they need more I'll do so again. At least get it in front of the courts so the absurdity of some of the measures can be voiced in public.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 6,306
+1
Don't let up! Eventually Jeremy Corbyn will run out of stunts (and will hopefully look at this again for his Populism 2.0), and May of deflections. If Parliament can't do its job in scrutinising and properly drafting a law such as this, then it has to be tested in courts now that it's here, one way or another.
If you think this is about ISP's collecting data, you've misunderstood the complexity and the real ethic behind the charter. UKInt will not be asking ISPs for information, they'll be gleaning it themselves. That's the essence of the of IPB
oldbag;30485092 said:
No. This is a massive, expensive undertaking and will put many smaller ISPs out of business. I think the idea is to retain connection logs rather than storing content itself but that's still a lot of data.
It's being challenged in court by Liberty UK. I expect many companies are hoping for a government defeat.
If they are capturing at the national borders then good luck to them in wading through the petabytes of nonsense and VPN traffic.
Non-targeted interception means we are all actually less safe because time will be wasted on false positives or following up on people like me who are deliberately obfuscating their innocent online activities as a matter of principle.
Man of Honour
Narj;30485247 said:
There are quite a lot of us. I'm using a VPN now, for example. It's only a few quid a month if you buy a couple of years at a time and it passes leak tests since I enabled a DNS restriction that was labelled as being only needed in Win10. I'm using Win7, so it seems that it's no longer only Win10. Essentially, DNS requests were sent every possible way and not only through the VPN. Worth testing for that with leak sites. The only drawback is a slight delay in connection to websites and I think that's a configuration issue with my firewall (which is hardly configurable at all, so I should get a better one).
I don't really care if MI6 or some other spy agency monitors my internet use if they are investigating something. My objection is to blanket surveillance because, as you point out, it means we're all less safe. Blanket surveillance is useful for internal suppression, not protection against threats.
Associate
https://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-poli...s-law-missing-draft-communications-data-code/
For now it looks like the gathering of web browsing history is on hold due to the recent EU ruling. What happens next with that section depends on the appeal to the CJEU (which they are still waiting for a date) etc.
For now it looks like the gathering of web browsing history is on hold due to the recent EU ruling. What happens next with that section depends on the appeal to the CJEU (which they are still waiting for a date) etc.