Britain unveils electronic mass surveillance plan... we are next.

MacGuyver4.2.0

Well-Known Member
Britain unveils electronic mass surveillance plan

By RAPHAEL SATTER
LONDON
British authorities on Thursday unveiled an ambitious plan to log details about every Web visit, email, phone call or text message in the U.K. -- and in a sharply-worded editorial the nation's top law enforcement official accused those worried about the surveillance program of being either criminals or conspiracy theorists.
The government insists it's not after content. It promises not to read the body of emails or eavesdrop on phone calls without a warrant. But the surveillance proposed in the government's 118-page draft bill would provide authorities a remarkably rich picture of their citizens' day-to-day lives, tracking nearly everything they do online, over the phone, or even through the post.
All that data would be kept for up to a year -- ready for browsing whenever anyone in authority wanted it. In some cases, the bill envisages monitoring the information in real time.
Home Office Secretary Theresa May said in an editorial published ahead of the bill's unveiling that only evil-doers should be frightened.
"Our proposals are sensible and limited," she wrote in The Sun, the country's top-selling daily. "They will give the police and some other agencies access to data about online communications to tackle crime, exactly as they do now with mobile phone calls and texts. Unless you are a criminal, then you've nothing to worry about from this new law."
Yet plenty of people were worried, including a senior lawmaker from May's governing Conservative Party.
"This is a huge amount of information, very intrusive to collect on people," David Davis, one of the proposal's most outspoken critics, told BBC radio. "It's not content, but it's incredibly intrusive."
Human rights defenders were aghast. Privacy group Big Brother Watch said the proposal risked turning Britain into a "nation of suspects." Civil rights organization Liberty said the law would mean the "indiscriminate stockpiling of private data."
Authorities and civil libertarians have been debating the plan for weeks, but Thursday marked the first time that the government itemized exactly what kinds of activity it wanted to track.
The list is long.
The bill would force providers -- companies such as the BT Group PLC or Virgin Media Inc. -- to log where emails, tweets, Skype calls and other messages were sent from, who was sending them, who they were sent to, and how large they were. Details of file transfers, phone calls, text messages and instant conversations, such as those carried over BlackBerry Messenger, would also be recorded.
The bill demands that providers collect IP addresses, details of customers' electronic hardware, and subscriber information, including names, addresses, and payment information.
What May didn't mention in her editorial -- and the Home Office left off its press release -- was that the government also is seeking to keep logs of citizens' Internet history, giving officials access to the browsing habits of roughly 60 million people -- including sensitive visits to medical, dating, or pornography websites.
Prefer to send mail the old-fashioned way? That would be monitored, too. Address details and other markers printed onto envelopes would be copied; parcel tracking information would be logged as well.
Officials say they need all that information to stay on top of a rapidly-changing technological landscape. Britain's online child protection agency said Thursday it was missing out on a quarter of the traffic used by child pornography networks. In an editorial in the Times of London entitled "Trust me, I need to know about your emails," Scotland Yard chief Bernard Hogan-Howe said that the collection of communications data played a role in 95 percent of serious organized crime operations.
The measure remains a draft bill, which means it's subject to change before it is presented to Parliament.
In a nod to controversy surrounding the bill, the government has taken the unusual step of submitting it for comment to two parallel legislative bodies: A joint legislative committee composed of members of Britain's House of Lords and the House of Commons as well as Parliament's intelligence committee.
In a statement to fellow lawmakers, May struck a measured tone, saying she recognized "that these proposals raise important issues around personal privacy" but that the law would be balanced.
She was less measured in The Sun, where she dismissed worries that the bill would stomp on free expression as "ridiculous claims" dreamed up by "conspiracy theorists."
"Without changing the law the only freedom we would protect is that of criminals, terrorists and pedophiles," she said.
 
Welcome to Fascist Police State, please keep all hands and feet in the cart at all times or you will be beaten and incarcerated.....thank you and enjoy the ride!
 
Doesn't matter
You expect them to convict every person on a Tor relay? They can't differentiate who's data is who's or who's IP address is being used by who. Also given that it's encrypted, so practically speaking most ISPs have no access to the data transferred either.

Govt fails at legislating for technology, it moves too fast.
 
You expect them to convict every person on a Tor relay? They can't differentiate who's data is who's or who's IP address is being used by who. Also given that it's encrypted, so practically speaking most ISPs have no access to the data transferred either.

Govt fails at legislating for technology, it moves too fast.

I definitly agree with your last statement but its not because it moves fast.

"You expect them to convict every person on a Tor relay?" - Uh no...its the data going to and from the ISP, doesn't matter if TOR is involved or what.

"They can't differentiate who's data is who's or who's IP address is being used by who." - Yeah they can from the ISP, Tor is a moot point really.

". Also given that it's encrypted, so practically speaking most ISPs have no access to the data transferred either." - Generally your right especially if you turn all your encryption settings on, the packet can still be traced however. Also There is plenty of plain text being transmitted, Its fair to say MOST data is plain text. I am sniffing data and watching plain text data streaming on a regular basis. You would be suprised how much you transmit that you think is secure or encrypted when the fact is its really not. Not that its being deceptive its just people fail to understand. Example, If you send email SSL/TLS whatever, it doesn't matter, thats just for your password authentication and/or as it leaves from you to the server, your mail is still in plain text.

The fact is people don't really use Tor, its a huge inconvenience, with any security you sacrifice convince, most people always choose convenience over security. You really have to go out of your way to keep yourself from being spyed on, hacked, or whatever. You have to be very security consensus and the fact is that nothing is 100% bullet proof these days.
 
I definitly agree with your last statement but its not because it moves fast.

"You expect them to convict every person on a Tor relay?" - Uh no...its the data going to and from the ISP, doesn't matter if TOR is involved or what.

"They can't differentiate who's data is who's or who's IP address is being used by who." - Yeah they can from the ISP, Tor is a moot point really.

". Also given that it's encrypted, so practically speaking most ISPs have no access to the data transferred either." - Generally your right especially if you turn all your encryption settings on, the packet can still be traced however. Also There is plenty of plain text being transmitted, Its fair to say MOST data is plain text. I am sniffing data and watching plain text data streaming on a regular basis. You would be suprised how much you transmit that you think is secure or encrypted when the fact is its really not. Not that its being deceptive its just people fail to understand. Example, If you send email SSL/TLS whatever, it doesn't matter, thats just for your password authentication and/or as it leaves from you to the server, your mail is still in plain text.

The fact is people don't really use Tor, its a huge inconvenience, with any security you sacrifice convince, most people always choose convenience over security. You really have to go out of your way to keep yourself from being spyed on, hacked, or whatever. You have to be very security consensus and the fact is that nothing is 100% bullet proof these days.
All you have to do is use Tor for the bold stuff and regular browser for the stuff you don't mind Big Brother seeing...I thought this was common practice?

Tor is un-crackable with current technology, otherwise it'd be useless and unused ;)
 
Back
Top