May setting out plans to monitor internet use in the UK

[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17576745

The government will be able to monitor the calls, emails, texts and website visits of everyone in the UK under new legislation set to be announced soon.

Internet firms will be required to give intelligence agency GCHQ access to communications on demand, in real time.

The Home Office says the move is key to tackling crime and terrorism, but civil liberties groups have criticised it.

Attempts by the last Labour government to take similar steps failed after huge opposition, including from the Tories.

A new law - which may be announced in the forthcoming Queen's Speech in May - would not allow GCHQ to access the content of emails, calls or messages without a warrant.

But it would enable intelligence officers to identify who an individual or group is in contact with, how often and for how long.

And, given recent revelations about phone hacking and database disclosures, how long would such information remain secret ?

It would be the thin end of the wedge into a Big Brother world ..... :eek:

Nick Pickles, director of the Big Brother Watch campaign group, called the move "an unprecedented step that will see Britain adopt the same kind of surveillance seen in China and Iran".

The previous Labour government attempted to introduce a central, government-run database of everyone's phone calls and emails, but eventually dropped the bid in the face of widespread anger (see below).

:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

[joeysteele]

Labour tried to do this, and failed to pursue it due to massive opposition to it, oddly enough by the Conservative party then too,now they are advocating doing it.

If it was that much wrong before,for me it is still wrong now. I don't feel this policy can be trusted enough.

[Jack_]

As per usual, our civil liberties are being curbed in the name of counter terrorism :bored:

[Niall]

Tbh, if you have nothing to hide then you should have nothing to get flustered about. :idc:

[Omah]

Tbh, if you have nothing to hide then you should have nothing to get flustered about. :idc:

Everybody's got something to hide ..... :evilgrin:

[Kizzy]

I thought this was already in effect, its in the Civil Contingencies Act for counter terrorist measures.

[MTVN]

Tbh, if you have nothing to hide then you should have nothing to get flustered about. :idc:

You could use that to justify the most oppresive and intrusive measures though, I've nothing criminal to hide but that doesn't mean I'm comfortable with the state making such a blatant violation of privacy

[Jack_]

Tbh, if you have nothing to hide then you should have nothing to get flustered about. :idc:

That's what they'd like you to believe. Personally, I don't think I'm all that trusting that my information wouldn't end up in the wrong hands.

You could use that to justify the most oppresive and intrusive measures though, I've nothing criminal to hide but that doesn't mean I'm comfortable with the state making such a blatant violation of privacy

And this.

[arista]

Tbh, if you have nothing to hide then you should have nothing to get flustered about. :idc:


Won't effect all of us
business customers are at another level.

[arista]

I thought this was already in effect, its in the Civil Contingencies Act for counter terrorist measures.


Yes it is in that Zone

[Kizzy]

Won't effect all of us
business customers are at another level.

Why will it affect busines customers arista?

[King Gizzard]

So basically a lighter worded version similar to SOPA and PIPA?

Edit: Didn't read the warrant part, lul

[Kizzy]

Do you mean RIPA nathan, are you in the uk?

[King Gizzard]

Nope I'm in Trinidad

[Marc]

What a joke! They'll be monitoring my bowel movements next.

[arista]

What a joke! They'll be monitoring my bowel movements next.


Yes Germans
will do that.

[Shaun]

Because terrorists have hotmail accounts.

[Shaun]

blowitupbaby@hotmail.com wrote:
hey mohamed hows it goin cant wait to see u in chicago dont forget the chlorine! x

[Marc]

blowitupbaby@hotmail.com wrote:
hey mohamed hows it goin cant wait to see u in chicago dont forget the chlorine! x

sacrificingmyselftogod@msn.co.uk wrote:
I won't forget it, don't forget to pack your swim trucks Ahmed x

[Patrick]

Posted this ages ago, it's a joke.
Honestly, if you read 1984 and think about this - it's crazy.

[Patrick]

I honestly don't get why we don't unite and do something about it - like every country that this law is being put into action in.

That Kony Bollocks, the way that was hyped up - people should 'rebel' and sh*t the way they made out in that video, if people kicked up as big a fuss about this as they did over that Kony sh*te then maybe the government wouldn't feel they could get away with it so easily, because people just seem to take this lieing down.

[Marc]

Why do you feel the need to swear a lot

[Scarlett.]

Lets be sensible about this

61m people live in the United Kingdom
Around 60m people in the country will have a pretty boring internet history
The government will be interested in those who dont. The Government don't give a damn about what threads you are viewing on TiBB.

[joeysteele]

What a joke! They'll be monitoring my bowel movements next.

Don't give the Govt ideas Marc, they may not have thought of that one yet.:hugesmile:

[Omah]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8020039.stm

Communications firms are being asked to record all internet contacts between people as part of a modernisation in UK police surveillance tactics.

The home secretary, Jacqui Smith, Labour, 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.

Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling, Conservative MP for Epsom and Ewell, said: "The big problem is that the government has built a culture of surveillance which goes far beyond counter terrorism and serious crime. Too many parts of Government have too many powers to snoop on innocent people and that's really got to change.

"It is good that the home secretary appears to have listened to Conservative warnings about big brother databases. Now that she has finally admitted that the public don't want their details held by the State in one place, perhaps she will look at other areas in which the Government is trying to do precisely that."

I believe we are now seeing what is called a "volte-face" from the Tories ..... :rolleyes:

[Mystic Mock]

If they go ahead with this then all the terrorists have to do is speak in code,not to mention how close it is to George Orwell's 1984.

[Harry!]

Have they not heard of the hidden web? There are many sites that are impossible to track down via a Google search. These sites are where real criminal activity happens.

[Ryan.]

I thought this was an April fools day joke?

[arista]

Why will it affect busines customers arista?

It Will Not.

[arista]

If they go ahead with this then all the terrorists have to do is speak in code,not to mention how close it is to George Orwell's 1984.


They do now .



You will be Posting images of that Great Film V
next

[Omah]

If they go ahead with this then all the terrorists have to do is speak in code.

Like Navajo code talkers ?

[joeysteele]

They should just leave things as they are, this 'could' be a step too far and I thought the Conservative party was determined to remove this intrusion and poking into peoples lives that they regularly condemned Labour for doing.

Wonder if David Davies though does another campaign as to civil rights as he is dead against this I understand, I think so are a good number of Conservatives too, even my staunch Conservative friends don't want this and none of my Labour political friends do, I have no current friend who will admit to being a LibDem so cannot speak for them.

[letmein]

Tbh, if you have nothing to hide then you should have nothing to get flustered about. :idc:

The mating call of the Commie. :rolleyes:

[letmein]

Lets be sensible about this

61m people live in the United Kingdom
Around 60m people in the country will have a pretty boring internet history
The government will be interested in those who dont. The Government don't give a damn about what threads you are viewing on TiBB.

Talk about being naive!

[letmein]

Lets be sensible about this

61m people live in the United Kingdom
Around 60m people in the country will have a pretty boring internet history
The government will be interested in those who dont. The Government don't give a damn about what threads you are viewing on TiBB.

Talk about being naive!

[Jords]

The reasoning is ridiculous. Surely criminals/terrorists will just not use these methods to communicate? Duh.

I think its a massive violation of privacy, but meh.

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

blowitupbaby@hotmail.com wrote:
hey mohamed hows it goin cant wait to see u in chicago dont forget the chlorine! x

:joker::joker::joker::joker::joker::joker::joker:

[Me. I Am Salman]

The reasoning is ridiculous. Surely criminals/terrorists will just not use these methods to communicate? Duh.

I think its a massive violation of privacy, but meh.

[2]

[Vicky.]

Can picture it already, come 2-3 years time

'Mass panic as backup discs containing 10m peoples browsing history (inc. bank details for purchases made etc.) have gone missing from head offices' or something :joker:

Its easy enough to say if you have nothing to hide it wont affect you, but thats not the case tbh.

And the reasoning is ridiculous anyway. I highly doubt many terorrist attacks are planned over msn or whatever

[Jords]

I personally believe they are using 'protection against terrorists' as an excuse. The more likely reason is that the government just want as much "control" as possible.

[Mystic Mock]

Like Navajo code talkers ?

Im not up to date with all the codes,but if that's what terrorists use then yes they might use it to cover up there dirty plans.

[Omah]

Im not up to date with all the codes,but if that's what terrorists use then yes they might use it to cover up there dirty plans.

Using the Navajo tribe of American Indians to provide cipher service during WW2 was the brainchild of Philip Johnston, the son of missionaries who grew up on a Navajo Reservation. The Navajos were a fierce tribe of warrior stock and their language was oral only.

Johnston saw some Indian tribes used to encipher messages in WW1, so he took this proposal to the US Marine Corps in February of 1942, just two months after the Pearl Harbor attack. In March of 1942 he was asked to give a demonstration to Major General Clayton B. Vogel, the commanding general of Amphibious Corps, Pacific Fleet. He showed that under battlefield conditions, the Navajos could encipher, transmit and decipher a 3 line English message in 20 seconds compared to the 30 minutes required for the cipher machine in use at the time, the M-209. The first 29 Navajo code talkers were recruited in May of 1942 as a test of the program, which proved so successful 420 Navajo code talkers entered the Marine Corps.

The Navajos seem to take the rigorous Marine Corps boot camp training in stride, seemingly unaware they were being physically challenged. They did not have modern conveniences at home and were used to a life of deprivation and hardship. They were not used to the loss of freedom and close quarters of the military, however, but adjusted well. When the drill sergeants would yell at the recruits, "Anyone tired of walking can start running!", the Navajo did not understand sarcasm and would start running.

The Navajos played a significant role in every major battle of the Pacific from mid-1942 in the battle of Guadalcanal to the end of the war.

After the war, the Navajo cipher remained a secret in case it needed to be used again. And, in fact, the code talkers were called on again for use in the Korean War and at the beginning of the Vietnam War.


http://ciphermachines.com/navajo

[Mystic Mock]

http://ciphermachines.com/navajo

That's interesting,thanks for the info.

[Omah]

That's interesting,thanks for the info.

There's been a (not very good) film about it :

Windtalkers (2002)

Two U.S. Marines in WWII are assigned to protect Navajo Marines who use their native language as an unbreakable radio cypher.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0245562/

[Shaun]

And the reasoning is ridiculous anyway. I highly doubt many terorrist attacks are planned over msn or whatever

Someone hasn't seen the Zeta chatlogs :/

[Josiah.]

Its basically Big Brother watching over your emails and...stuff.

[Niall]

Because terrorists have hotmail accounts.

blowitupbaby@hotmail.com wrote:
hey mohamed hows it goin cant wait to see u in chicago dont forget the chlorine! x

:laugh3:

[Scarlett.]

Talk about being naive!

So you think police monitoring 61m people is possible? Monitoring internet activity isnt as easy and cheap as tapping a phone. All this is, is policy fluff, police will much prefer to go down the cheap and easy route of tapping phonelines and staking out houses rather than jump through hoops and dodge redtape to find out what the target has just googled.

[Jesus.]

If the police want to monitor my net usage, they're going to find themselves watching a lot of lesbians.

[Kate!]

I don't really care if the Government wants to read about what I get up to on Tibb, I've already got Nick Clegg signed up as one of the contestants on the Bachelorette, close your ears Mollie :hugesmile:

(awards Shaun and Marc a promotion up my most loved list for making me laugh in this thread :D)

[arista]

I don't really care if the Government wants to read about what I get up to on Tibb, I've already got Nick Clegg signed up as one of the contestants on the Bachelorette, close your ears Mollie :hugesmile:

(awards Shaun and Marc a promotion up my most loved list for making me laugh in this thread :D)


They will not
they know who to watch.

[joeysteele]

I think the Govt, with this policy in its present form, will have difficulty getting it though intact, especially with Theresa May plugging its case too, she must be one the worst Home Secretary's ever,
I wouldn't be trusting her as to signing warrants of any kind I'm afraid.

Another likely, 'have to think again' policy.

[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17595209

Chris Fox, former head of the Association of Chief Police Officers, said the move would be "a massive intervention by the state into people's private lives".

"If you are investigating crime you have targets... it just seems to be overkill and intrusive for the 99.9% of the rest of us."

He said the idea was "fraught with danger for the innocent vast majority", not least that of misidentification, which could result from genuine criminals disguising their communications as those of law-abiding citizens.

:idc:

[arista]

Nick Clegg has said they are drafts
and will not be as bad as it looks.

Ref : Radio 5

[Mystic Mock]

Nick Clegg has said they are drafts
and will not be as bad as it looks.

Ref : Radio 5

Of course his going to say that, his working for the scum that is David Cameron.

[joeysteele]

Of course his going to say that, his working for the scum that is David Cameron.

:joker:You don't care for David Cameron then jf,:joker:

[Mystic Mock]

:joker:You don't care for David Cameron then jf,:joker:

How did you guess?:joker:

[Vicky.]

Nick Clegg has said they are drafts
and will not be as bad as it looks.

Ref : Radio 5

If Clegg told me the sky was blue I would have to check to see that it was true.

Edit. Ooh thats like a miniture poem :D

[Harry!]

Infact it has been proven that during the August Riots last year more things were planned via BBM style apps more than Facebook and Twitter comments.

[arista]

If Clegg told me the sky was blue I would have to check to see that it was true.

Edit. Ooh thats like a miniture poem :D



Drafts takes years

[joeysteele]

If Clegg told me the sky was blue I would have to check to see that it was true.

Edit. Ooh thats like a miniture poem :D

:joker: Love this post,I know loads of people, myself included who think the same way as that concerning him Vicky.:joker:

[CharlieO]

I really do not care. They've had it in Singapore for years. If I don't know anyone personally who could see what I was doing it would not bother me at all.

[Marsh.]

Tbh, if you have nothing to hide then you should have nothing to get flustered about. :idc:

Well that's not really a good enough excuse.
If they had compulsory strip searches in the "name of terrorism", would you suggest that it is fair and you should be ok with it if you've got nothing to hide? People should still be entitled to their privacy.

[Scarlett.]

The bit people are ignoring

A new law - which may be announced in the forthcoming Queen's Speech in May - would not allow GCHQ to access the content of emails, calls or messages without a warrant.

[Omah]

The bit people are ignoring

They're just words - the Tories will say something today and the opposite next week ..... :rolleyes:

Last week, they said there was an impending petrol delivery drivers strike and they advised drivers to top up and store extra petrol at home - this week, there is no strike, the advice is to fill up normally and storage of petrol at home is not recommended ..... :hmph:

Once GCHQ have access to the proposed level of information, it is inevitable that that access will be abused - someone will sell off the info or leave a laptop full of it on the tube ..... :eek:

Analysis of those details of users' web access, email and internet phone calls containing the sender, recipient, time of communication and geographical location, would provide some very useful data for certain *interested parties* in, say, the marketing, communications and political spheres ..... :idc:

* Cameron's Cronies ..... :wink:

Critics have warned that any new law could end up being used more widely than originally intended - similar to the controversial Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, which has been used by local authorities to check on children's school catchment areas.

[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18434112

Details of internet use in the UK will have to be stored for a year to allow police and intelligence services to access it, under government plans.

Records will include people's activity on social network sites, webmail, internet phone calls and online gaming.

Home Secretary Theresa May said the change was needed to keep up with how criminals were using new technology.

The Communications Bill is to be published in draft form on Thursday - but the government faces a battle to get it through Parliament intact, with Lib Dem MPs and Conservatives such as Mr Davis calling for it to be watered down or abandoned altogether.

Under current legislation, communications companies must keep phone records and information about messages sent via their own email services for 12 months.

Officers would still need to obtain a warrant to gain access to the content of the online communication.

But the government would be able to request any service provider to keep data about internet usage, although initially it will involve about a dozen firms including BT, Virgin and Sky.

Tory backbencher David Davis, a former shadow home secretary who fought a by-election in the last Parliament on the issue of civil liberties, described the proposals as "incredibly intrusive" and said they would only "catch the innocent and incompetent".

It's not often that I agree with a Tory ..... :pipe:

[arista]

"It's not often that I agree with a Tory ..."


Spiffing

[Kizzy]

"It's not often that I agree with a Tory ..."


Spiffing

Do you have a comment on the subject arista or just out for a troll?
Thought this would come back into the public eye following the 'Habbo Hotel' revelations, I would have thought it was obvious that a chatroom full of teens would be a magnet for preditors?
It would have been far more intelligent to simply begin an operation to weed out the peadophiles using officers posing as kids?...
Rather than mute the site and have them all scurry back into the undergrowth?..