Surveillance

[AN DU RU FOX]

Did you know that there is a full floor used by the cia at the bbc center and has been for years also no bbc staff at all are allowed access to it.and if there is anyone monitoring my ****,they are wellcome to it.

 

[Pine Marten]

They must be really bored now that it's all been turned into flats. Did anyone knock on the door to tell them?

 

[McKenzie]

No offence taken! But you may be in trouble when GCHQ tells Theresa May that you confused her with me. Mostly though I'm pleased that so far, no-one has given me any new material for my signature.

Self-effacing wishy washy hand-wringing diversified all encompassing liberal.

 

[EccentricJackal]

AN DU RU FOX, I have no idea whether you're winding me up or not, but if you're serious then no, I did not know that!

There is literally nothing I need to hide, I just despise the "one rule for us, another for you" attitude of a government that rejected a Bill with 400 votes when it applied to them, and then passed it unanimously (except SNP and 1 or 2 independents/small parties) when an amendment allowed them to be exempt.

The world of petitions and law making is largely a mystery to me, but the Bill received Royal Assent this morning, and from how the papers have reported it, it seems to render the petition moot. From what is being reported, the only hope now is various legal challenges currently moving through the proper channels. At least we tried!

Cheers anyway,

Ryan

 

[Pine Marten]

So here you go, essentially everyone who knows anything about this has been opposed to this project and its' predecessors, except for a few people in government (of which the current PM) and the security agencies, but most people don't understand the material including MPs, or their constituents. My MP has failed to respond to any of my communications on this topic. Finally, everyone's been far too busy worrying about Brexit and Trump to spend any time working through this with any sort of due diligence, so there we go.



Tim Berners-Lee has said it creates a "security nightmare".
Edward Snowden has described it as the most extreme surveillance in the history of Western democracy.

 

[AN DU RU FOX]

It was true not any longer as p/m said bbc building has gone i think but for many years they (MEN IN GREY)WHERE ENSCONSED IN THAT VERY BUILDING but their own staff couldn,t use that complete floor,and anyway they listen to all your phone calls etc through your mobile pearphone,apple banana whatever thats why i only use this hollow log and two sticks,

 

[User00025]

Hi fourth Horseman,

There is nothing to stop fishing, and the broad access seems to almost promote it.

Maybe this isn't as off topic as I initially thought - how long until it is included in Firearm Licensing background checks?



Just a thought.

Ryan

Hi Ryan
Just hope certain elements are not bearing grudges. I continue to do so, so my message to them is "I'll be waiting, as usual !!!"

 

[Brimfire]

On the other hand, thanks to the new laws I plan on getting a VPN just as my own little protest, so in a way in has probably improved my privacy slightly!

No, it makes you more suspect for deliberately hiding! What are you hiding, eh? Of course the proper answer that most people would understand face to face would be "Well it's none of your bloody business, is it?".

Getting a VPN is not much different from non-involvement of facebook ****ter and any other useless social media websites where people freely divulge al the ins and outs of their lives.... me, I prefer an element of privacy which is exactly what a VPN does. The busy bodies really do need to find a better hobby than spying on the people of the country.

 

[Taff]

Can someone explain how VPN works ? As I see it just as a money making scheme directed at the paranoid , unless you set up a completely independent server to the country that does not spy on there citizens LOL, your content will already have been monitored before arrival, as to the country's that don,t monitor there citizens, as far as I know it is irrelevant as this traffic, can still be monitored by third party countries , ie GCHQ and the American equivalent.

 

[Woodsmoke]

The only person I need to hide my internet history from is my fiancee

 

[EccentricJackal]

Hi Taff,

VPN isn't just a money making scheme, done correctly (and with much more effort and inconvenience) it is a part of the system the serious undesirables use to avoid detection. Using a VPN alone means that your Internet Provider (the people obliged under the new law to record your usage) sees that you contacted your VPN server at X time. From this point on, everything transferred between your computer and the VPN is jumbled nonsense without the correct decryption; think enigma machine style jumbling and un-jumbling at either end. A part of the new law requires companies to un-jumble data for Gov agencies on request, but obviously this can only be done to UK based companies (or if you're really dodgy and worth international surveillance, companies based where the UK has surveillance arrangements).

Of course as I said above, this is only part of the system used by criminals; to truly avoid detection they have designated computers that have never had their private data typed on them, connected to a VPN that is paid for in untraceable gift cards or bitcoin, and uses a special browser that hides your ID. My point is that if you are genuinely dodgy, it takes more than a VPN to hide you!

For people like me who have no actual dodgy stuff to hide, any VPN, with the possible exception of UK based ones who can be ordered to decrypt your info, provides enough protection for me to make it inconvenient to spy on me, and lets me feel like my petty little protest is worthwhile!

Ryan

 

[Pine Marten]

Just to add to that, VPN's aren't used exclusively for nefarious purposes. They are used almost as a matter of course by companies to protect their email servers, especially of they have a lot of staff on the move. So having a VPN doesn't necessarily set off the "DODGY GEEZER" light. Essentially for a private user it just means that they can't easily spy on you as part of mass surveillance. It requires an extra effort. No need to make it easy for them, eh?

Oh, I've received a response from HMG on the petition to this. It's lengthy, but if I summarise and paraphrase it says: "Having consulted far and wide with all sorts of people on this, and in view of the now standard unprecedented levels of terrorism and cyberthreat, we've decided than on balance, none of your concerns on civil liberties and privacy are valid".

And now in full for those interested:

The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Repeal the new Surveillance laws (Investigatory Powers Act)”.
Government responded:

The Investigatory Powers Act dramatically increases transparency around the use of investigatory powers. It protects both privacy and security and underwent unprecedented scrutiny before becoming law.
​

The Government is clear that, at a time of heightened security threat, it is essential our law enforcement, security and intelligence services have the powers they need to keep people safe.
The Investigatory Powers Act transforms the law relating to the use and oversight of Investigatory powers. It strengthens safeguards and introduces world-leading oversight arrangements.
The Act does three key things. First, it brings together powers already available to law enforcement and the security and intelligence agencies to obtain communications and data about communications. It makes these powers – and the safeguards that apply to them – clear and understandable.
Second, it radically overhauls the way these powers are authorised and overseen. It introduces a ‘double-lock’ for the most intrusive powers, including interception and all of the bulk capabilities, so warrants require the approval of a Judicial Commissioner. And it creates a powerful new Investigatory Powers Commissioner to oversee how these powers are used.
Third, it ensures powers are fit for the digital age. The Act makes a single new provision for the retention of internet connection records in order for law enforcement to identify the communications service to which a device has connected. This will restore capabilities that have been lost as a result of changes in the way people communicate.
Public scrutiny
The Bill was subject to unprecedented scrutiny prior to and during its passage.
The Bill responded to three independent reports: by David Anderson QC, the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation; by the Royal United Services Institute’s Independent Surveillance Review Panel; and by the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament. All three of those authoritative independent reports agreed a new law was needed.

The Government responded to the recommendations of those reports in the form of a draft Bill, published in November 2015. That draft Bill was submitted for pre-legislative scrutiny by a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament. The Intelligence and Security Committee and the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee conducted parallel scrutiny. Between them, those Committees received over 1,500 pages of written submissions and heard oral evidence from the Government, industry, civil liberties groups and many others. The recommendations made by those Committees informed changes to the Bill and the publication of further supporting material.
A revised Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 1 March, and completed its passage on 16 November, meeting the timetable for legislation set by Parliament during the passage of the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014. Over 1,700 amendments to the Bill were tabled and debated during this time.
The Government has adopted an open and consultative approach throughout the passage of this legislation, tabling or accepting a significant number of amendments in both Houses of Parliament in order to improve transparency and strengthen privacy protections. These included enhanced protections for trade unions and journalistic and legally privileged material, and the introduction of a threshold to ensure internet connection records cannot be used to investigate minor crimes.
Privacy and Oversight
The Government has placed privacy at the heart of the Investigatory Powers Act. The Act makes clear the extent to which investigatory powers may be used and the strict safeguards that apply in order to maintain privacy.
A new overarching ‘privacy clause’ was added to make absolutely clear that the protection of privacy is at the heart of this legislation. This privacy clause ensures that in each and every case a public authority must consider whether less intrusive means could be used, and must have regard to human rights and the particular sensitivity of certain information. The powers can only be exercised when it is necessary and proportionate to do so, and the Act includes tough sanctions – including the creation of new criminal offences – for those misusing the powers.
The safeguards in this Act reflect the UK’s international reputation for protecting human rights. The unprecedented transparency and the new safeguards – including the ‘double lock’ for the most sensitive powers – set an international benchmark for how the law can protect both privacy and security.

Home Office
​

 

[EccentricJackal]

Oh, I've received a response from HMG on the petition to this. It's lengthy, but if I summarise and paraphrase it says: "Having consulted far and wide with all sorts of people on this, and in view of the now standard unprecedented levels of terrorism and cyberthreat, we've decided than on balance, none of your concerns on civil liberties and privacy are valid".

And now in full for those interested:

When I got that email I honestly got 2 paragraphs in before I was too frustrated with the fact that a copy-paste press release was all they could muster as explanation of their actions for 140,000 people, to continue reading...

 

[AN DU RU FOX]

They allways throw back to security/cyberthreat its rubbish,its just a governments way of keeping their eye on you and me going about our daily business incase we all throw our arms up and start asking for bread instead of cake!!

 

[aris]

Can someone explain how VPN works ? As I see it just as a money making scheme directed at the paranoid , unless you set up a completely independent server to the country that does not spy on there citizens LOL, your content will already have been monitored before arrival, as to the country's that don,t monitor there citizens, as far as I know it is irrelevant as this traffic, can still be monitored by third party countries , ie GCHQ and the American equivalent.

https://www.cyberghostvpn.com/en_gb/advantages/what-is-vpn

 

[aris]

The terrorists have won

 

[Taff]

Just to make you a little bit more paranoid, how do you know that the VPN company is just not a government agency, set up to attract people who may have something to hide.

 

[aris]

Just to make you a little bit more paranoid, how do you know that the VPN company is just not a government agency, set up to attract people who may have something to hide.

All of them - in every country?

To be honest, if the 3-letter security agencies want to target an individual - they can get all the info they want. What I object to is a wholesale dragnet collection of private information and with poor oversight on who has access to it. They may as well be opening my post.

 

[Fishpond]

What would concern me is with the exception of the intelligence agencies I'd be surprised if any of the others listed would be in a position to make meaningful use of the data. Let them snoop but Tesco probably has a better idea of my lifestyle based on what I buy when I shop than anyone looking at my browsing history!

richard

 

[Psyxologos]

This is extremely scary. I saw it the other day. But look at the way they did it. Whilst the public is preoccupied with other business, they went on and fastracked an idea that has been bitterly opposed for over 18 months...