Slashdot Mirror
Canadian ISPs Could Take On Big Brother Role
QGambit writes: "C|Net is reporting that the Canadian Government is considering a proposal that would force ISPs to keep logs of web browsing for up to 6 months, allow police to get search warrants allowing them to find 'hidden electronic and digital devices' and ban the possession of computer viruses.
Canada and the U.S. have both endorsed this proposal, contained in a cybercrime treaty of the Council of Europe. Both countries are non-voting members of the Council.
George Radwanski, Canada's privacy commissioner has not yet commented on the proposal."
So, here's the question. Why do they need to keep logs of web page accesses?
I think the idea is to add to their list of possible violations to write someone up for.
They do a bust at a "warez site" and could then slap more charges against them. Or to take down some grey hat security site. More rules to hit people with.
We are keeping Internet logs.
(We are at war with Eurasia.)
We have always kept Internet logs.
(We have always been at war with Eurasia.)
Ignorance Is Strength? Maybe.
But who is made the stronger through ignorance?
I mod down anyone who uses M$ in their posts. I like to live on the edge.
I guess it's pretty obvious, I need to set up as many old crufty computers as I can on my home network, and set them to relentlessly spider across the whole damn web. A few automated processes on a 3 megabit pipe ought to generate some pretty nifty monthly logs.
If the goverment is gonna search through my web-surfing logs, they're gonna at least have a hell of a hard time finding anything incriminating among all that pr0n! Nosy bastards, that'll teach them. If I feel particularly vicious I'll set one or two to recursively spider through Celine Dion's website. They'll go blind before they hit any good stuff.
"So on one hand, honey is an amazingly sophisticated and efficient food source. On the other hand it's bee backwash."
Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Which section does it violate? Section 8: "Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure." is the only thing that comes close. I don't know if data retention counts as unreasonable search and seizure. And you will note that Section 33 (a/k/a "the notwithstanding clause") can exclude section 8, but I doubt that they would try to use it for this garbage proposal.
Do you truely think so? Ever wonder why books are still seized at the border for some sex shop in quebec? Wonder why the CRTC told cable and satillite providers that they must block out american TV and commericals and replace them with canadian content? Does that not also go against the charter of rights and freedoms?
The wool has ever so nicely been pulled over the eyes of canadians. If the goverment disagrees with what your doing your nailed, the newspapers and TV channels are owned by what two? three people? There is no freedom in having all the same things on all the channels.
Now they support the idea to log every place you visit? Sounds like china to me, how long before we get our own "Great Firewall of Canada" that changes the content? Or blocks it because it goes against what the goverment is telling the people.
Think...and you'll see that were already waist deep in shit, and slowly drowning. And unless we find a branch, were all screwed.
Om, nomnomnom...
Actually, it is harder to get Student Visas now. I know someone who was screwed around by us [Canada] when trying to get a re-entry visa last year. In Hong Kong, she was able to have the staff there provide the visa on the normal schedule without problems.
I'm with you on that Kyoto thing, and this proposed law will not take effect since it is not domestically brewed. We'd prove the voting populace is a snivling bunch indeed if we allowed that sort of loss to our constitutional rights. I don't mind the ISPs keeping logs, just as long as no one looks at 'em. The RCMP now, and always should have iron clad reasons to obtain a proper search warrant before invading a citizen's privacy.
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
Well then thank God for pr0n. It's a sad comment on North American society that it's only the makers of commercial sleaze who are willing to stand up for our rights. You're right about it, most people wouldn't give a shit about restrictions on privacy or free speech if it wasn't for dirty little secrets. And the porn industry knows it, and laughs all the way to the bank. The sex industries have been at the forefront of free expression and privacy battles mostly because they directly concern their profits. But at least somebody's trying to draw a line in the sand. It's just too bad so few are willing to draw such lines on the principles involved, which are far more important than your (admittedly important) right to look at goatse man in the privacy of your own home, or to buy a lap dance....