+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 159
General Chat Thread, Another rushed law, another death knell for privacy in General; You'd be wrong there I think - Local Councils Abusing Anti-Terrorism Powers For Lesser Crimes The list of possible users ...
  1. #31

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,684
    Thank Post
    516
    Thanked 2,453 Times in 1,899 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    833
    You'd be wrong there I think - Local Councils Abusing Anti-Terrorism Powers For Lesser Crimes

    The list of possible users of RIPA is much longer than that. That list is for a specific part of RIPA. A long list of agencies can also access the data - Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

  2. #32

    Theblacksheep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In a house.
    Posts
    1,934
    Thank Post
    138
    Thanked 290 Times in 210 Posts
    Rep Power
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by SovietRussia View Post
    RIPA is supposed to be authorised by the Secretary of State for the Home Department of Secretary of State for Justice along with these outlined in RIPA:

    (a)the Director-General of the Security Service;
    (b)the Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service;
    (c)the Director of GCHQ;
    (d)the Director General of the [F1Serious Organised Crime Agency]F1 ;
    [F2(da)the Director General of the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency;]
    F2(e)the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis;
    (f)the Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary;
    (g)the chief constable of any police force maintained under or by virtue of section 1 of the Police (Scotland) Act 1967;
    (h) the Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs;
    (i)the Chief of Defence Intelligence;

    Over 700 establishments can use it including all all 400+ councils. Its also been used by County Councils to do surveillance on residents to see if parents are living within school catchment areas or if sick employees were well enough to leave to house. Your tax is paying for council employees to literally sit outside other peoples houses and spy on them.

    In 2010 it was used 8,500 times by County councils with under 400 prosecutions.

    The slippery scope argument, only police etc were designed to use it at first.

    EDIT: @localzuk beat me to it.



    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    How many of us run Internet filters that keep just these kinds of logs? I do. Is that an invasion of our users privacy?
    A school is not a free and open system. It is on a technical level an invasion of privacy, but students have no expectation of privacy on a school system. I dont think there is a parallel between a school system and a national phone/internet system.

    It is interesting to talk about why we have these systems in school and why a government would want to know what sites you've visited and when.

    Its also interesting to consider that a multi-year retention period doesn't mean the data can be grabbed and stored elsewhere by GHCQ. Whats really significant is the data analysis tools as shown by Snowden, tying up phone/email/sms/facebook/blog records with users. Thats where GHCQ /NSA systems go beyond the needles and haystacks "too much data" argument, there's no such thing as too much data to sort through.

    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    I'd be more worried about forcing all outgoing traffic through a great firewall of the UK were packet sniffing gets a lot easier than this - even with this needles and haystacks come to mind.
    They tap the fibres, they don't need a great firewall.



    A dragnet is not going to stop anyone or anything from happening, because the ones that actually want to harm the country wouldnt be that stupid. It'll only be used to further curtail civil liberties further when it catches some stupid kids trying to setup their own ISIS.

    On the week of the state "losing" records on high level government officials abusing children is more than a little ironic, but hey if you have nothing to hide... bend over.
    Last edited by Theblacksheep; 10th July 2014 at 04:30 PM.

  3. #33
    Alkaline's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    221
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 22 Times in 19 Posts
    Rep Power
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Theblacksheep View Post
    Its making legal what has rightly been made illegal by Europe.

    People have everything to fear from a state that has too much power. The Steven Lawrence family had nothing to hide yet they faced surveillance, intimidation and propaganda from state tools. I find the nothing to fear comments bordering on the retarded, unless sarcastic.
    I do not see an alternative for the government to follow. There is no other sufficient way they would be able to keep track of these people planning attacks against us without seeing who they are in contact with.

    There are millions of people connecting to the mobile phone and internet services in the UK. Most of the data will sit on the database for twelve months or so and then be deleted. If they want to look at who you are talking to they need a warrant and good reason.

    I am quite sure if an attack were to occur, the majority of people who are against limited snooping would be the first to ask why the attackers were not being monitored.

    Anyone who does not wish to be monitored does not use the system, if they are really that concerned.

    I don't care very much for Europe and hope we are out of it soon. But that is another matter.........

  4. #34

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,684
    Thank Post
    516
    Thanked 2,453 Times in 1,899 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    833
    Quote Originally Posted by Alkaline View Post
    There are millions of people connecting to the mobile phone and internet services in the UK. Most of the data will sit on the database for twelve months or so and then be deleted. If they want to look at who you are talking to they need a warrant and good reason.
    That's the problem. They don't need a warrant for a request for the data via RIPA. They only need a warrant to engage in more detailed surveillance.

  5. #35
    Alkaline's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    221
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 22 Times in 19 Posts
    Rep Power
    10
    This is going around on other forums, now I think that is retarded.

    Hitler's Rise of Evil (Full Documentary) Part 2 - YouTube

  6. #36

    Bompalompalomp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Wolverhampton
    Posts
    300
    Thank Post
    170
    Thanked 101 Times in 47 Posts
    Rep Power
    114
    My letters have fallen on deaf ears, it seems. I wrote to my MP a while ago pleading against the filter (specifically asking him to respond with something other than "THINK OF THE CHILDREN", I laid out alternatives beyond government censorship and reasons why it wouldn't protect children...) and got "As a father, I am all for this" basically in response.

  7. #37

    sonofsanta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire, UK
    Posts
    4,954
    Thank Post
    862
    Thanked 1,444 Times in 991 Posts
    Blog Entries
    47
    Rep Power
    617
    Quote Originally Posted by Bompalompalomp View Post
    My letters have fallen on deaf ears, it seems. I wrote to my MP a while ago pleading against the filter (specifically asking him to respond with something other than "THINK OF THE CHILDREN", I laid out alternatives beyond government censorship and reasons why it wouldn't protect children...) and got "As a father, I am all for this" basically in response.
    You got a reply? Think yourself lucky! I wrote to Sir Peter Tapsell about the Digital Economy Act and got absolutely nothing. Possibly because he is the very paragon of "safe Tory seat voting as the whip tells him to" and needs to do nothing to maintain his position in the House of Commons except eat, breath and poop.

  8. #38

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,094
    Thank Post
    592
    Thanked 1,953 Times in 1,351 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    814
    Quote Originally Posted by Bompalompalomp View Post
    My letters have fallen on deaf ears, it seems. I wrote to my MP a while ago pleading against the filter (specifically asking him to respond with something other than "THINK OF THE CHILDREN", I laid out alternatives beyond government censorship and reasons why it wouldn't protect children...) and got "As a father, I am all for this" basically in response.
    You should have sent an email with a link to Bill Bailey's "speaking as a mother" comment back.

  9. #39
    mthomas08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,615
    Thank Post
    135
    Thanked 165 Times in 146 Posts
    Rep Power
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by Alkaline View Post
    Nothing to fear, nothing to hide.

    There is nothing new, only making legal what was already being done.
    This is kind of my feeling.

    As or the OP: Sorry but if you have nothing to hide then what is really the problem. I also hate the accusation of being "ignorant" to what is being done simply because I don't agree or disagree with you. This goes back to when Torrent sites were being blocked, Service providers had to give options to filter and all the other changes the Government makes regarding the Internet. The screams of liberties that were being made when Torrent search sites were being blocked..... I told a friend when it happened I really didn't care. Although in a less polite manner.

    My view is as long as the government isn't knocking on my door every 5 minutes telling me the sites I have visited. If Mr Cam who has no clue about IT wants a BIG HUGE "Access database" to store millions of visited websites every hour, let him. He will hire some one like us to set it up, maintain it and probably do log checking.

    Good luck to the poor person who sits there checking it on a daily basis. Good luck to him when it comes to checking how many torrent sites (the ones not blocked yet) get visited daily. Good luck to him for keeping all that in check.

    Bad enough doing it in a School with 1400+ users but doing for a nation???

    Like many things that happen in this country it will get setup, some will scream freedom, some like me won't care and nothing will change.
    The end result will be everyone will forget about it and move on.

  10. Thanks to mthomas08 from:

    tmcd35 (14th July 2014)

  11. #40

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,684
    Thank Post
    516
    Thanked 2,453 Times in 1,899 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    833
    As someone who has been on the receiving end of police corruption and lies, I can safely say that the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" argument is demonstrably fallacious. The amount of corruption/law misuse in this country is quite high, with police lying about people who they don't like, or if they have a political agenda (where my experience of it comes from).

    Even if you've got nothing to hide, you should fear the police and government as they stand right now. The law does not apply uniformly, as they have better access to its apparatus and therefore can manipulate it to get any outcome they wish to.

  12. 2 Thanks to localzuk:

    sparkeh (14th July 2014), Theblacksheep (14th July 2014)

  13. #41

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,094
    Thank Post
    592
    Thanked 1,953 Times in 1,351 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    814
    Quote Originally Posted by mthomas08 View Post
    Sorry but if you have nothing to hide then what is really the problem.
    So... because I like having some semblance of privacy, I'm trying to hide illegal activities?


    You're lucky this is a family-friendly forum and I can't say what I really want to.

  14. #42

    sparkeh's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    6,752
    Thank Post
    1,278
    Thanked 1,651 Times in 1,106 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22
    Rep Power
    506
    Quote Originally Posted by mthomas08 View Post
    As or the OP: Sorry but if you have nothing to hide then what is really the problem.
    You mean trust the authorities?
    The kind of authorities that withhold evidence in murder investigations and smear the victims families: Murder of Stephen Lawrence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    The kind of authorities that try to evade investigation of a major tragedy, concoct lies about the events of that tragedy and cover up their own mess: Hillsborough disaster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    The kind of authorities that regularly misuse existing surveillance powers (topics exist on this subject already).

    The "if you have nothing to hide then what's the problem" argument is pretty much meaningless.

  15. Thanks to sparkeh from:

    Earthling (14th July 2014)

  16. #43

    sonofsanta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire, UK
    Posts
    4,954
    Thank Post
    862
    Thanked 1,444 Times in 991 Posts
    Blog Entries
    47
    Rep Power
    617
    The quote that always holds the strongest resonance for me is from Cardinal Richelieu: "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged." @mthomas08 - you've never, not ever, gone over the speed limit on the motorway when it's near midnight, there's no-one else around and you want to get home? You've not crept up to 80, knowing (rightly) that speed itself can do no harm, only the misapplication there of, and an empty motorway can safely sustain that speed and more?

    Then there's the potential for government to suddenly declare that something that was previously fine is now no longer, and they'll be examining logs to determine who can be charged/who should be watched. Then there's the stereotyping of people based on irrelevant information - the NSA classified a Linux site as an extremist forum. There's nothing to hide there, but they're still judging you as if you should have something to hide.

    There's activities that aren't illegal and don't require hiding from a moral/legal standpoint, but can be very embarassing and damaging if leaked - imagine if it was "accidentally" revealed that Ed Milliband enjoyed wearing women's underwear. That's not illegal, and absolutely his choice, but I can guarantee he would end up resigning because he'd have become unelectable*.

    And, of course, if transparency and "nothing to hide" is such a great idea - why do GCHQ and the NSA etc. all hide what they're doing? Why doesn't it apply to them?

    *obviously and completely fabricated and not an actual fact. The underwear thing, not the unelectable thing - that's debatable...

  17. #44
    CAM
    CAM is offline

    CAM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Burgh Heath, Surrey
    Posts
    4,118
    Thank Post
    826
    Thanked 358 Times in 282 Posts
    Blog Entries
    60
    Rep Power
    281
    It's more we don't trust politicians as to their knowledge of the Internet and how it works. Take a politician who shall not be named who was championing the filter then her site got hacked. A blogger posted pictures of the site on their blog and she went after them threatening to sue them for computer crimes for hacking her website and showing zero idea of how the Internet works even though she legislates about it. Got criticism? Jump in with an unrelated Twitter scandal going on at the same time and watch the blame get deflected and covered up whilst branding every person unhappy with her foul behaviour as trolls.

    Name not mentioned because I'd rather not have a run in with her again...

  18. #45
    Grey-gear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Derby
    Posts
    467
    Thank Post
    35
    Thanked 62 Times in 48 Posts
    Rep Power
    25
    I'm a bit confused about this, in common law (the system of law that the UK law follows) there is no freestanding right to privacy which would make this new law legal as it doesn't brake any law, but as the EU has struke down rights that allow this from happing so in EU law what the goverment are going to do is breaking the law. I'm I reading this wrong or I'm I confusing myself? Plus how can we be part of the EU and want a bigger say in the running of the EU when the goverment just picks and choose what to follow?

    Sorry if I am being stupid.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Facebook 'to seek consent for privacy changes'
    By elsiegee40 in forum e-Safety
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 14th November 2011, 04:40 PM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 6th July 2011, 05:28 PM
  3. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 29th April 2010, 10:45 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 20th December 2009, 02:16 PM
  5. Compiling for another machine
    By Ric_ in forum *nix
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 13th March 2007, 03:34 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •