Secret Irish Data Repository Uncovered

topgold writes "During an initial public meeting yesterday, the Irish Justice Ministry revealed that for nearly a year, the Irish government has mandated all telecommunications operators store traffic information from every landline, fax and mobile phone call for at least three years. Irish Times journalist Karlin Lillington offers insights regarding this secret data retention regime in several national newspaper columns. A considerable citizen reaction is at the boiling point, stoked by a civil liberties discussion board and the rejuvenation of the Electronic Freedom Ireland citizen group. By law, the Irish government can deep-six any Cabinet discussions related to the 'deliberative process' and since this decision to retain phone records happened at Cabinet level, it could have remained hidden for more than five years."

Comments

No mention of network traffic

[upside]

And it's only traffic information, not the actual data that gets passed. I would have thought they'd keep that kind of information anyway. If *access* to the gathered information is regulated properly, I don't see a problem.

Re:No mention of network traffic

[cobyrne]

But I don't care if `losing a freedom` means someone keeps a note of who I phoned 7 months ago?

Even if who you phoned 7 months ago was a mistress that you had a one week affair with? Or a business off whom you bought viagra but which has since diversified into cocaine and other illegal narcotics?

Do you keep 7 months of receipts? 7 months of bills? Because if law enforcement can use 7 months worth of your communications patterns in court against you, you would better have at least 7 months worth of documentation with which to defend yourself.

probably madly swapping tapes

[The Tyro]

That's a truckload of data, even if it was just "traffic information."

I wonder just what that means... "traffic information." Surely time, date, duration, initiating and receiving parties. I can't see them having too much beyond that... It should be a logistical impossibility to have any information about the content of all those messages... way too much data to sift through and catalog.

Interesting that this was reportedly done by fiat.

Now-

[katalyst]

The Irish have something in common with the Americans. BUT, America takes the cake. For a country, where one doesn't know whether their president was killed by a fellow countryman or a foreign traitor, where they don't know wether Area51 is a top secret UFO something or a big joke, where national secrets are too big to tell to the president himself, it has done remarkably well. Probably, 99% of USA's problems would be solved if the government is frank, honest and open to its citizens ;)

Re:Ooh

[alanp]

And what do you think the RIP act does ??

It's being going for 2 years in the UK !

And no it's not Northern Ireland but what difference does it make ? Do you think terrorist organisations colude via the internet or phone ?
Don't think so, down the local apache-land bar for that...

Re:Better to be open about it, or not?

[meringuoid]

Ireland is an interesting case because a few years ago it became public knowledge that the Brits had been covertly monitoring all calls between Ireland and the UK for years.

With good reason. Terrorism wasn't newly invented in 2001; Irish nationalist groups had been causing trouble in Britain for decades. Eavesdropping on transmissions from Ireland to the UK probably allowed a great many plots to be foiled.

I'd keep it secret, of course, but not out of fear of worrying the public; I'd want the IRA to think their phone communications were secure, the better to exploit this intelligence source. If word gets out that phone calls are routinely tapped, then the bad guys will switch to some other communication; encrypted snailmail, perhaps, which cannot be so easily compromised.

Advantages to this type of data retention

[popoutman]

I knew about this retention for a long time anyway, I thought it was public knowledge.

This type of retention can be used to trace stolen mobile phones and can also greatly assist in the process of criminal investigation - some crime investigations have gone on past the 6 month retention time prevalent in other countries. See the Guerin investigation, or the Omagh bombing for examples.

I have no problem with this retention as long as it requires a court order or equivalent for the release of the information to the relevant authorites, and never to a non-govermental agency.

Re:Is this new?

[blanch]

Its very worrying to see such things happening. The EU Directive on privacy in telecommunications in 1997 specified that personal data could only be retained by telcos, ISPs etc. for billing purposes and must destroyed after its usefulness has passed.

This was clearly a decision made on the side of personal freedom and civil liberties. It's worrying that the Council of Europe (a parallel organisation that is comprised of heads of state from around the continent) proceeded to adopt a stance opposite to that of the above directive, and began to mandate all ISP's and telecommunications companies to retain data. The stark contrast between the positions of these two organisations -- one democratic, the other a cabalistic gathering of prime ministers and presidents -- makes the difference in their motivations quite apparent.

The retention of data that has been uncovered here in Ireland is related to the Council of Europe's decision, and we can be certain that something similar is occurring in all the other states.

Re:Creeping fascism

[ratamacue]

Power is corrupt by definition, because power requires the initiation of force (power is defined by coercion, rather than voluntary association). Logically, the individuals most interested in gaining power are those with a desire to control others. Peaceful individuals -- those who respect the concept of personal liberty and personal responsibility -- tend to be the ones who don't want anything to do with political power.

Re:deep six

[Ryano]

"The explanation given for deep sixing cabinit records for five years is that many of them relate to the peace process.

"Yesterday the government proposed to be allowed increase this time to 15 years, given this on the same day we find out the've been snooping us is very disturbing"

Up to now, cabinet records have remained confidential for thirty years. However, under the 1997 Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, individuals are now entitled to seek discovery of records relating to cabinet decisions that are over 5 years old. As the act only came into operation 5 years ago, cabinet records from that time are only now coming under the provisions of the act. As far as I'm aware pre-1997 cabinet records cannot be subject to FOI requests.

So the "deep sixing" of cabinet records for five years is not a new measure brought in to protect sensitive documents relating to the peace process, rather it represents a considerable liberalising of the old system. This is why the government is proposing rolling back on these provisions: they're only now being faced with the practical implications. Whereas previously cabinet members could rely on their deliberations being kept secret until after they retired, now they are faced with the prospect of controversial documents being released while they're still very much in power.

I don't think the peace process is a factor at all: these sort of documents could probably be kept secret under the heading of 'national security' or some such thing.