Return of the Snooper's Charter -police to view everyone's browsing history

[Stavros]

Next week, according to the Telegraph, the Home Secretary Mrs May will present a bill to Parliament that revives the 'snooper's charter' that was scuppered by the Liberal Democrats in the last Coalition government. The report says:
Police are to get the power to view the web browsing history of everyone in the country.
Home Secretary Theresa May will announce the plans when she introduces the Government's new surveillance bill in the House of Commons on Wednesday.
The Telegraph understands the new powers for the police will form part of the new bill.
It would make it a legal requirement for communications companies to retain all the web browsing history of customers for 12 months in case the spy agencies or police need to access them.
Police would be able to access specific web addresses visited by customers.
The new powers would allow the police to seize details of the website and searches being made by people they wanted to investigate.
They will still need to apply for judicial approval to be able to access the content of the websites.
.....
Under the plans, telecoms and internet service providers would be paid to log their customers’ emails, internet use and other correspondence so it could be easily searched by security officials.
Data would be held for 12 months and access granted to the police, the National Crime Agency, the intelligence agencies and HM Revenue and Customs.

The point of interest here is not related to terrorism, but could conceivably relate to the Escorts section if HM Revenue and Customs decide the information contained there offers evidence of tax evasion by escorts. All of this is hypothetical at this stage, but is a practical example of a law that to me is an unwarranted intrusion into my private life even if it does expose the extent to which modern communications has developed beyond the capacity of the law to police it. And it has to make it through Parliament before it becomes law.

The full article is here-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...t-history.html

[maxpower]

Whoa! Just who do you think you are...the U.S.?

[Stavros]

A week is indeed a long time in politics as Mrs May backtracks on the proposals...one wonders how the government proposes to tackle encrypted apps (see the latter part of the article linked below) and how these proposals will look a week from now, and the week adter that, before it even goes through Parliament.

Police will be able to see websites people have visited but not the specific pages they have viewed without a warrant, under new government plans.

Theresa May said the Investigatory Powers Bill will not have some "contentious" parts of the 2012 plan, dubbed a snooper's charter by critics.
The home secretary told the BBC there would be "world-leading" oversight of warrants to access digital records.
Labour said warrants should have to be approved by a judge, not politicians.
The new security bill, to be presented to Parliament on Wednesday, is the latest in a series of attempts to update the law to allow police and security services to access communications data, as more and more takes place online rather than on phones.
BBC political correspondent Ross Hawkins says that, crucially, police sources expect the new bill to require communication firms to retain data on website addresses for a year.
This will mean existing powers allowing authorities to see which websites people have visited become practical to implement for the first time.
Such data would consist of a basic domain address, and not a full browsing history of pages within that site or search terms entered.
For example, police could see that someone visited www.bbc.co.uk - but not the individual pages they viewed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34691956

[flabbybody]

I always thought folks like Google and Apple have been enthusicatcally keeping my keystroke history without any legal requirement whatsoever. It can't be a coincidence that my Facebook feed is filled with ads for erecticle dysfunction treatments and dental implements. A few months ago during a moment of boredom I was online checking 2016 SUV price quotes. Wouldn't you know now I'm seeing tons of new car promotions from dealers in my area?
They save our search habits to sell us stuff so I got no real problem with LE using it to catch tax cheats and bad guys.

[Stavros]

I always thought folks like Google and Apple have been enthusicatcally keeping my keystroke history without any legal requirement whatsoever. It can't be a coincidence that my Facebook feed is filled with ads for erecticle dysfunction treatments and dental implements. A few months ago during a moment of boredom I was online checking 2016 SUV price quotes. Wouldn't you know now I'm seeing tons of new car promotions from dealers in my area?
They save our search habits to sell us stuff so I got no real problem with LE using it to catch tax cheats and bad guys.

My sympathies...and if you ever forget where that post went, you could always google 'flabbybody hungangels'...one wonders just how much 'they' know...or maybe it is in a data bank and they haven't been motivated to sift through it with the appropriate algorithms...not yet anyway.

[runningdownthatdream]

My sympathies...and if you ever forget where that post went, you could always google 'flabbybody hungangels'...one wonders just how much 'they' know...or maybe it is in a data bank and they haven't been motivated to sift through it with the appropriate algorithms...not yet anyway.

As society becomes more plugged in to the worldwide web, we are relinquishing more and more personal freedoms. Thought spurs inquiry which in turn spurs action. Prior to the web, our inquiries were informed by friends, associates, or the library and could not easily be tracked or tabulated and thus analysed. With the web our inquiries are ALL logged and tagged to an IP address. When using smart devices (phones/tablets) it can be tagged to the unique MAC address of the phone. So our thoughts via our inquiries are now stored - and tagged to the IP/device, the owner of which can easily and readily be identified - and can be analysed for patterns.

Flabby mentioned seeing Google ads related to his browsing or search history - that was planned from the outset by the founders of Google. It was the basis for monetizing the application. In fact, did you know that Google scans your Gmail for key words which are then used to direct advertising to you? Who else might be interested in the content of your emails and how much would they pay for that content? Facebook does it and Twitter is doing it (although not quite successfully). Of the hardware manufacturers Apple does it best (why do you need to have an Apple ID if not to identify you and in turn identify everything you do on your Apple phone/tablet/desktop) and have recently launched their ApplePay which aims to replace your physical credit/debit card as a means of payment in-store and online. So Apple will not only have a history of your thoughts/inquiries but also of your purchasing habits (this was the impetus behind the creation of the Air Miles program btw) so you can see how easily the two can be linked, analysed, and patterns derived which can predict your actions.

Consciously or not, government and corporations are headed for a convergence with data which will impact the individual to such an extent that our very individuality will be compromised. I'm certain the 'rational' people out there will have doubts but try reading 1984 again and then assess what elements from that 'fictional story' are in place today and you might allow some irrationality into your thinking.

Here's another interesting read for those with doubts (pay attention to the part about forcing cash out of the society):

http://business.financialpost.com/bu...mic-experiment

[runningdownthatdream]

Addendum to my previous post.....

Privacy experts recommend using a VPN service whenever browsing or downloading from the web. VPNs are relatively inexpensive - starting from USD 30/yr - but using one makes it much much harder for you to be isolated as the originator of a web inquiry or download. They're easy to set up on your device be it laptop or smart device.

https://torrentfreak.com/anonymous-v...w-2015-150228/

You can also use the TOR browser which is freely available for download online which adds yet another layer of privacy when browsing or downloading.

https://www.torproject.org/projects/torbrowser.html.en

[Stavros]

An interesting article, although a microwave must be a hazardous place to store cash!

I think the difference must be between knowing that I visit Hungangels, and knowing what I do when I get here. If they can work out my ID that gives them a bigger insight rather than not knowing, for example if I was using escorts a lot and reviewing them in the Escorts section they would have an insight into my personal preferences (always allowing that reviews are genuine). The irony here is that I am not bothered if people find out my preferences, I have been seen out and about with transexuals on enough occasions for anyone who cares to, to notice it, and as far as I know, people don't care.
For me the anonymity issue has more to do with being free of trolling and online abuse. I have got used to the ads, but as I don't have gmail, or facebook, twitter, instagram or any other social media accounts (other than this one) I am not as harassed as maybe some of you are. I hope I don't come across as naive on this issue.

I guess the key question is, are we worthy of the intelligence services algorithms? We may be part of an exabyte of data, but are we important other than as a source of revenue? Hungangels is run very well, I should add, so that it does not attract the kind of attention that, for example, Reddit received when it published hacked photos of celebrities. On that basis I tip my hat to the managers and moderators who I think do a good job in a fluid and treacherous environment.

[runningdownthatdream]

I sense that you have an analog - rather than digital - preference. If your web activity is restricted to reading about books, movies, news, and TS then whatever data that exists about you is fairly harmless. Or maybe not. Perhaps you want to get an Islamic perspective on current affairs and end up visiting the website of the Kavkaz Centre. Unfortunately for you, it also happens to be a rather strident voice for radical Islam and suddenly your innocuous quest for knowledge has lead you through a hole in the wall into the Warsaw Ghetto and you're now a person of interest to the Gestapo. What then?

The issue isn't one of whether you're doing right or wrong but rather whether it is the right of a government or corporation to monitor and store ad hoc data which can then be used in a specious manner by malicious apparatchiks. The internet is so ubiquitous now that our browsing habits can be deemed to be thoughts and those records of our thoughts can be assembled and - through the same flawed reasoning that results in people being convicted of crimes they did not commit - be used for or against us in whatever way suits those who have access to that data. In the case of corporations that data is used for targeted marketing. But what interests Government? Keeping peace and order. And the easiest way to do that is eliminate anything that is seen as a risk to peace and order. So you visiting the Kavkaz centre website taken with that inquiry on how gas masks work taken with that inquiry about camo gear all done over an extended period of time can possibly be assessed as suspicious and flagged.

Think of every software application you use including those on your smart phone and understand that they all have a database in the background storing data that is unique to you. Now picture all of that data being made available to some third party. What might they construe about you - right or wrong - that could jeopardize your freedom?

[trish]

We are the Borg.