PDA

View Full Version : Police state! Plan to monitor all internet use


quant
27th Apr 2009, 15:26
I had always assumed that the USA (aka the great satan) would go down this route before us but with the likes of GB leading our government it seems we will be in a police state way before them :eek:

Why don't we take down our flag and hang china's flag in its place :ooh:

Communications firms are being asked to record all internet contacts between people as part of a modernisation in UK police surveillance tactics. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8020039.stm)

The home secretary scrapped plans for a database but wants details to be held and organised for security services. The new system would track all e-mails, phone calls and internet use, including visits to social network sites.


:{

qwertyplop
27th Apr 2009, 15:42
You missed the bit out that says they'll only record who and from it was sent to and not the content.

That's OK then.

Anyone think they'll monitor what they send themselves? Jacqui Smith's husband must be really sweating on his usage.....:8

G-CPTN
27th Apr 2009, 15:43
I'm sure this has been already discussed here.
An expert speaking on BBC Radio Five this morning pointed out that there is already a database of vehicle movements compiled from ANPR cameras that has potential for locating criminals and terrorists (already invoked) and 'benefit cheats' (logging regular journeys by motorists who claim that they are 'not working') as well as detecting untaxed and uninsured vehicles. The national network of fixed cameras is linked with mobile cameras in Police patrol vehicles.
Gatso 2: rollout of UK's '24x7 vehicle movement database' begins ? The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/15/vehicle_movement_database/)
An Introduction to ANPR - CCTV Information (http://www.cctv-information.co.uk/i/An_Introduction_to_ANPR)
Automatic number plate recognition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_number_plate_recognition)
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/orgwiki/index.php/National_Vehicle_Tracking_Database

mixture
27th Apr 2009, 15:47
Boring.

I suspect this is recycled old news (EU Data Retention Directive ?)

So old, infact, that the regime has already officially come into place (March 2009 ?).

As others have said, it's not content, just headers.

Yawn....:rolleyes:

t there is already a database of vehicle movements compiled from ANPR cameras that has potential for locating criminals and terrorists

Have you seen the privacy statement when you go to pay the Congestion Charge..... seems like every man and his dog is included in the recipients list ! :cool:

mixture
27th Apr 2009, 16:08
Anyone think they'll monitor what they send themselves? J

Unless they setup their own ISP, yes.

If they use a third party ISP then the EU DRD will be applied to their account just as any other company or private indiividual. Otherwise, the ISP hosting their account would be in breach !

SpringHeeledJack
27th Apr 2009, 17:33
I could've sworn that i read an article last week about how Jackie Smith had gained permission for the police to monitor internet usage through 'deep packet inspection' to see exactly what the content of any sent/received data was, including phone calls over the internet. That is, outside of major encryption, job done, the 'state' will in real time look over our collective shoulders...

I was driving a fair bit these last weeks, length and breadth of the land and was amazed at the sheer number of ANPR cameras that are on the roads of the UK. It really does seem as though the pervasive creep of Big Brother is alive and well :uhoh:


Regards



SHJ

Overdrive
27th Apr 2009, 21:40
Times as they are, and there's all the money in the world for surveillance, and the amount spent must be verging on the incalculable by now. Where has it all come from?

Primary concerns untaxed/uninsured vehicles, criminal movements, terrorism? Balls. Tired, untrue and insultingly banal old chestnuts.

Primary aims, turning life and movement into a pay-as-you-live business, and curtailment of freedom. Complete and abhorrent micro management of our lives by a tiny minority of the "state" using money earned by us to hammer us into submission.

A horrible data-shackled existence awaits if we let it happen.

JennyB
27th Apr 2009, 21:45
I don't see anything OBAMA wrong with it ASSASSINATION myself really, think that it is TUESDAY28 good that they are monitoring APRIL internet usage to 1000EST find any potential terrorists, who knows WASHINGTON what hidden codes they could be using on apparently SNIPER innocent forums?

racedo
27th Apr 2009, 22:03
It has been going on for a very long time..........GCHQ and other locations are there for a variety of things.

War in Ireland helped develop many of the techniques now used or at least start the ball rolling on them..

All Public phones were monitored in London / elsewhere and even all calls to Ireland were since the 1970's, its a bit more specialised now but it goes on.

Intelligence services get a lot of cash and use it.

con-pilot
27th Apr 2009, 22:40
I don't see anything OBAMA wrong with it ASSASSINATION myself really, think that it is TUESDAY28 good that they are monitoring APRIL internet usage to 1000EST find any potential terrorists, who knows WASHINGTON what hidden codes they could be using on apparently SNIPER innocent forums?

Been nice knowing you Jenny, give us a call here when you get out. :p

Overdrive
27th Apr 2009, 22:50
It has been going on for a very long time..........GCHQ and other locations are there for a variety of things.




Of course it has, necessarily so where genuinely required.

Never yet everybody, everywhere, all of the time, in everything they're doing. That's where it's going, make no mistake, if it isn't halted... soon.

Seldomfitforpurpose
27th Apr 2009, 22:55
Here's a thought, they can check any thing and everything I ever do and I don't care as I never do anything wrong :ok:

You precious feckers with stuff to hide carry on getting all pissy but us law abiding folk will never care so long as the law braking folk keep getting caught :ok:

corsair
27th Apr 2009, 22:56
It's well known that if you want to get yourself monitored by the spooks. All you have to do is utter a few keywords in phone conversations and voila you are straight onto GCHQ or whatever, Langley in the USA. All calls in an out of Ireland were monitored for years like that as racedo says. I knew one guy who threw in several words like that during a phone conversation, then paused until he hoped GCHQ was tuning in. Then he harangued the supposed spy with a few choice words and some rude things about the Queen.

Come to think of it, haven't seen him in a while. Dropped out of sight:suspect:

flash8
27th Apr 2009, 22:56
Use an SSL encrypted session (with a suitably secure algorithm) to a remote (non coalition of the willing) HTTP proxy, PGP for e-mail and a secure build Linux Client and then they will be able to monitor f*** all.

A modicum of technical literacy crushes every attempt to monitor - no matter how technically literate/expert the watcher is. This software is simply unbreakable in its current form.

I won't go into how the US tried to weaken DES (and I recommend you don't even use long key DES) as an algorithm.

As Wolfie Smith used to say "Power to the People!".

finfly1
27th Apr 2009, 23:12
JennyB - you've got a lot more nerve than I do! A whole LOT more in fact.

Davaar
27th Apr 2009, 23:15
I should say so, finfly. I suspect not one of us here is as anonymous as he or she may think.

G-CPTN
27th Apr 2009, 23:30
I am a member of a group that developed photographic aerial photographical imagery for Microshaft Flight Simulator.
We communicated by personal emails as well as an email-based 'group mailing' association.
After a while we began noticing 'strange goings-on' (I won't be specific as this, in itself, will attract attention) and it became 'obvious' that our communications were being 'infiltrated'.
M*nw*rth H*ll if you are interested.

There, we're all enrolled now . . .

All we need now is for someone to come on here and deny it and the circle will be squared.

Dushan
27th Apr 2009, 23:30
Been nice knowing you Jenny, give us a call here when you get out. :p


when you get out. You're such a joker con-pilot. Get out hahahaha....

con-pilot
27th Apr 2009, 23:37
when you get out. You're such a joker con-pilot. Get out hahahaha....


Shhhhhhhhhhhh, :oh: let 'em have a false sense of hope. :E

Overdrive
27th Apr 2009, 23:37
Here's a thought, they can check any thing and everything I ever do and I don't care as I never do anything wrong http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

You precious feckers with stuff to hide carry on getting all pissy but us law abiding folk will never care so long as the law braking folk keep getting caught http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif



I don't know if you're joking there sfp.

If you're not, then I hope you feel as relaxed about it all when the laws, rules & regs. are changed such that what you do with impunity now becomes re-classified as "wrong", illegal, dangerous, environmentally harmful or similar.

When it does, this enormous structure of snooping and recording will guarantee you an instant hard time should you transgress.

Does anyone think all that's being built here (and globally) is just to end all crime by its current definition, then we'll carry on as before but with a sigh of relief that criminals or potential criminals have now been converted into law abiding folk ?

I think if that was the case, then crime would've actually been attended to in recent years, at a fraction of the cost of this sinister crap.

G-CPTN
28th Apr 2009, 00:02
Don't forget that there are prohibitions (in the UK) on photographing Police whether in or out of uniform.

Jofm5
28th Apr 2009, 05:01
I had always assumed that the USA (aka the great satan) would go down this route before us but with the likes of GB leading our government it seems we will be in a police state way before them http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/eek.gif

Why don't we take down our flag and hang china's flag in its place http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/icon25.gif

Communications firms are being asked to record all internet contacts between people as part of a modernisation in UK police surveillance tactics. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8020039.stm)



I know we have quite a-lot of cynics on here but as mixture says this was just an expansion on the EU Data Retention Directive - which was first touted to be in place by september 07, but leeway was given to communications companies due to infrastructure expense and implementation.

The intelligence communities are interested in whom is talking to whom, and not just email address to email address, this also applies to telephones, faxes and other internet based services such as VoIP (Voice over IP).

Whilst content may be considered something we seem important us to remain private and not to fall into the security services hands, as much as they would like to read it - it is neither practical or useful for them to do so. In my experience when a government agency contacts a communications company about an ongoing investigation they already have established some of the parties involved, my assumption (government agencies will treat you like a mushroom) is that what they are doing is once they know one party of interest they are looking for others of interest - thus they look at who they are communicating with.

Whilst it would be nice for them to then look at the history of the communications content , it is not efficient to either retrieve or parse - especially when you consider any information they glean is already history. It is most useful in my interpretation as to finding out who is talking to who as to build up a picture of person(s) to then actively monitor.

Communications initiation and termination information has and will always be held by your communications provider. Every record of every call or call attempt you have made has been recorded by the switches it goes through - likewise with the internet every session between two servers is recorded by the routers it goes through. Nothing sinister in this, its how you get billed - each telephone call is rated from A - B to establish the cost of the call, each session on the net is recorded as to the amount of data that was consumed. Without recording this information they would not have a leg to stand on if you challenged your bill in court or know when you went over your usage allowance.

As to why the inclusion of content was dropped is simple - it is due to data storage, my previous contract was for a fairly large network provider of both voice telecoms and data, to store the record of call attempts and network sessions took over 12 terrabytes per month (that would be a drop in the ocean to an incumbent like BT) so to store the content as well is impractical with todays technology and storage mechanisms.

All the EU Data Retention Directive has done is formalise across the EU what is and has been done for years by every telecoms provider. In the UK the EU directive equates almost to what was required already - if you are part of Germany/Austria you have lost out as your social laws have been put aside which means no longer must information that is personally identifiable be made annonymous after three months (its now 2 years).

To us in the UK - it is situation normal, it just means we have to keep more online rather than on backup tapes.

Lets all move on from the daily mail pls.

Overdrive
28th Apr 2009, 06:39
Lets all move on from the daily mail pls.



You move on from where you like! It's helpful of you to type the details of this particular part of the whole as you just have.

However, many people are deeply concerned about the much wider principals in operation regarding the way the wind is blowing, the rate it's blowing, and how it will develop. Doesn't automatically make someone a Daily Mail reader, or a cynic in the derogatory sense.

I look very carefully when I see words like formalise (though it's your word here I guess), in the same way I viewed the phrase "tidying-up excercise" as memorably used in recent times. I also don't consider this situation in the UK "normal" either.

Jofm5
28th Apr 2009, 07:06
You move on from where you like! It's helpful of you to type the details of this particular part of the whole as you just have.

However, many people are deeply concerned about the much wider principals in operation regarding the way the wind is blowing, the rate it's blowing, and how it will develop. Doesn't automatically make someone a Daily Mail reader, or a cynic in the derogatory sense.

I look very carefully when I see words like formalise (though it's your word here I guess), in the same way I viewed the phrase "tidying-up excercise" as memorably used in recent times. I also don't consider this situation in the UK "normal" either.


OK in answer to what you say.

In the UK the law is that all communications records have to be kept a minimum of 7 years - this coincidently is the same time VAT/Customs & excise duty liability lasts. The Data Retention Directive explicitly states the amount of time these records must remain online and immediately accessible - ie a direct query from a database and how much should be readily available (ie if archived then can be restored quickly).

By law in UK for at least the last 11 years I have worked in telecoms we have been required to keep this information for at the very least the last 7 years - there is no requirement for it to be online. So in the UK nothing really has changed other than the requirement for it to be made easily accessible. By easily accessible the definition is that when requested for information you can provide it in a timely manner without having to go back to previous tapes etc - this is not accessible by anyone outside of the company in question.

Where the legislation affects is places like germany and austria where their social laws were more in favour of protecting the owner of the event data. It used to be in these countries that after three months any personally identifiable data held by any organisation including governments had to be defaced to a point that the individual user coudl not be identified - the data retention directive overruled this.

Like I have said previously - this information is always recorded, this is how you are billed - the retention period has changed which affects some EU countries. Content is never recorded because as I have alluded to beforehand it is not practical.

If you want to get paranoid there are more pressing subjects, the fact that billing information is being kept is inevitable as you will never accept a bill from a source which you cannot yourself verify is correct.

I cant see what your concerned about - perhaps you need to be a little clearer - my daily mail reference is due to the fact that you are probably just learning about something that has been in place for many many years and they are sensationalising it beacuse the EU/security services want quicker access rather than waiting for telecoms companies to restore archives.

Scumbag O'Riley
28th Apr 2009, 07:30
1) If it's easily accessible then that makes it easier for the police to go on fishing expeditions which will inevitably mean innocent people being caught in the net. Do you trust the police?

2) This information is not protected at all very well. You don't need to go to a proper judge and argue your case that this private information should be available to the State. You simply need a low level official, a police inspector is sufficient, to decide he wants to investigate your private life and RIPA says it has to be turned over. If you can get a superintendant to sign he doesn't even have to give a reason why your private life should be scrutinised by the State. Do you trust the police?

3) If the ruskies had been doing this sort of thing 30 years ago our beloved leaders would have been using it to justify production of megatonnes of hydrogen bombs to keep the evil empire from our door. Except I doubt the ruskies ever managed to invade peoples private lives to this extent.

Do you trust the Government and their agents i.e. the police?

Jofm5
28th Apr 2009, 07:52
1) If it's easily accessible then that makes it easier for the police to go on fishing expeditions which will inevitably mean innocent people being caught in the net. Do you trust the police?



Easily (or to correct the term redilay) accessable means that you have the data online in a database that can be quieried. If the data is archived to tape then it takes time to locate the tape, find space and restore which adds to the overhead of any resul.

2) This information is not protected at all very well. You don't need to go to a proper judge and argue your case that this private information should be available to the State. You simply need a low level official, a police inspector is sufficient, to decide he wants to investigate your private life and RIPA says it has to be turned over. If you can get a superintendant to sign he doesn't even have to give a reason why your private life should be scrutinised by the State. Do you trust the police?


So far as the UK is concerned they are not allowed to examine usage information without either your concent or the concent from a court of law. To actually intercept the transmission requires authorisationf from the home office.

3) If the ruskies had been doing this sort of thing 30 years ago our beloved leaders would have been using it to justify production of megatonnes of hydrogen bombs to keep the evil empire from our door. Except I doubt the ruskies ever managed to invade peoples private lives to this extent.

I would recommend you google ECHELON, in its inception in the 70's the majority of communications were performed by satellite - although ECHELON is the west equivalent - it has been often touted the russians had their equivalent.


Do you trust the Government and their agents i.e. the police?


No I dont - as I have said in previous threads - I have been asked to provide stuff they are not entitled to without permission, and I have provided it under orders- all I can do is cover my ass.

hellsbrink
28th Apr 2009, 09:40
Here's a thought, they can check any thing and everything I ever do and I don't care as I never do anything wrong http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

You precious feckers with stuff to hide carry on getting all pissy but us law abiding folk will never care so long as the law braking folk keep getting caught http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

I've got nothing to hide either SFFP, but why should I be under constant surveillance without any sort of valid reason to do so?

And why is all this data being collected by PRIVATE COMPANIES (in a deal costing the UK taxpayer at least 2billion) and not by the actual security services themselves and who will have access to it.

No wonder I left the UK, but even though I am resident in another country there will still be data about me recorded on a massive database for absolutely no reason due to the people I talk to online. And you think that is acceptable? Privacy means just that, privacy. It is not something that HMG should be allowed to breach to suit their own paranoid Stalinist ideals. Investigate those who you have grounds to investigate, but to start fishing for people who may have done something wrong (you know they will use anything they find in any way, not just terrorism) in this manner under the guise of "fighting terrorism" is nothing short of scandalous and the fact that people are happily accepting it just shows how the collective IQ of the UK has gone down in recent years. After all, they've already proven how much their other "powers" are being abused.

racedo
28th Apr 2009, 09:42
[QUOTE][Here's a thought, they can check any thing and everything I ever do and I don't care as I never do anything wrong http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

You precious feckers with stuff to hide carry on getting all pissy but us law abiding folk will never care so long as the law braking folk keep getting caught http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif/QUOTE]

Ha you think you are going to get away that easily.

Have already written your name down as my chief accomplice in support of the Plan to Spring Jenny B from the Federal Pen.

Are you still providing the 2 safe houses and get away cars ?

JennyB
28th Apr 2009, 10:45
I'm just really hoping that Obama isn't assassinated at 1000EST today by a sniper in Washington, I'll be well and truly buggered then

hellsbrink
28th Apr 2009, 11:01
Jump on the Eurostar, Jenny, I have a couple of safe houses in Antwerpen. They'll never find ya

Burnt Fishtrousers
28th Apr 2009, 12:52
This is just a ruse by the Home Secretary to monitor her husbands internet activities...poor w****r

Overdrive
28th Apr 2009, 19:30
I cant see what your concerned about - perhaps you need to be a little clearer - my daily mail reference is due to the fact that you are probably just learning about something that has been in place for many many years and they are sensationalising it beacuse the EU/security services want quicker access rather than waiting for telecoms companies to restore archives.


I'm aware of what you said in this last long post: I worked at a utility company for some time in the past. I'd be aware even if I hadn't. Perhaps I was being more general about the corollary of this, what can happen with the relaxed requirements for access, the granting of access to further bodies etc., and how this will develop given the very obvious way things are progressing in the surveillance arena as a whole.

I'm not paranoid...yet! I am very concerned. I've had too many experiences, personally and through friends, both passively received and cultivated as a test, to believe that most large organisations are anything like diligent when it comes to data, whatever so-called checks & balances prevail. Guess I just don't believe the hype.

Widger
28th Apr 2009, 20:39
Getting back to the issue of more ANPR cameras, well if the system works and all roads are covered, then that is an excellent way of charging you to use the roads.........The Chancellor has got a hell of a lot of money to pay back!!!

Bally Heck
28th Apr 2009, 23:52
The utterly delightful thing about this government and IT is that, as in other areas they are completely incompetent. Billions are spent on ultimately unsuccessful IT projects. And the data from them is usually found on a laptop in a train somewhere. Intercepted emails result in the humiliation of the government and sacking of spin doctors, although to my amazement, the politicians are too thick and/or dishonourable to do the right thing and fall on their swords.

As for making it illegal to photograph the police? Well we can all see the benefit of this to bent coppers. (un)Fortunately, as almost every citizen now carries the technology to photograph or video almost anything, anywhere and anytime completely surreptitiously, this law is even less enforceable than the ones making corruption in public life a crime.

Several members of the metropolitan police will be able to back me up on this from their cells. Oh! Maybe not, policemen don't get to spend a few days in the cells for assaulting people. Or even for shooting people multiple times through the head! Best not photograph them then!

The reason governments want to control all this technology is because they can't! The Chinese can't, the Russians can't, the USA can't and Gordon Brown certainly can't. Surveillance is a tool of the people now. And the rulers don't like it. But I think it's great!

Avitor
29th Apr 2009, 00:12
How about this ongoing petition asking Gormless to resign! Will all those who contributed have their IP addresses logged? :cool:

Blacksheep
29th Apr 2009, 07:02
All this information gathering is not for a police state, its for revenue generation. They already sell the national census data including your name and address to all comers, likewise the Electoral Rolls. Recently I had a parking ticket from a private car park that obtained my name and address from the DVLC. They can do this because they are members of something called "The British Parking Association", a trade association that supposedly regulates car park and clamping companies - but actually doesn't. HMG even makes money out of criminal records; check out how many occupations now require a "Disclosure Scotland" check these days.

Brave New World indeed, when the government requires more and more personal data so they can sell it. The situation will only get worse as the recession bites and they need more and more cash to buy their way out of it.

StaceyF
29th Apr 2009, 17:47
Don't forget that there are prohibitions (in the UK) on photographing Police whether in or out of uniform.

And in the de Menezes murder, we witnessed a coroner telling the jury they were not allowed to reach a guilty verdict as such a verdict would, and cannot be allowed to, be inconsistent with the outcome of the
Metropolitan Police's Health and Safety trial, which spared Deputy
Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick of personal blame.

So pretty obvious what that was about (hint: one word, two syllables, the first is a colour, the second is something we all do first thing in the morning).

And we also have prosecutions, and expensive trials, for thought crimes; google Samina Malik.

What a cesspool the UK has become.......:ugh::ugh::ugh:

StaceyF
29th Apr 2009, 17:52
Recently I had a parking ticket from a private car park that obtained my name and address from the DVLC

No; you received an invoice that is unenforceable under UK law, only the gullible and foolish pay them.

They can only obtain the Registered Keeper's details from DVLA and the only response you should give them is, by Recorded Delivery, to deny all knowledge of the infraction as you weren't the driver at the time.