UK's MI5 Wants Oyster Card Travel Data

Boiled Frog from a Nation of Suspects writes "The Oyster card, an RFID single-swipe card (which was recently cracked), was introduced to London's public transport users purportedly to make their lives easier. Now, British Intelligence services want some of the benefits by trawling through the travel data amassed by the card to spy on the 17 million Britons who use it. The article notes, "Currently the security services can demand the Oyster records of specific individuals under investigation to establish where they have been, but cannot trawl the whole database. But supporters of calls for more sharing of data argue that apparently trivial snippets — like the journeys an individual makes around the capital — could become important pieces of the jigsaw when fitted into a pattern of other publicly held information on an individual's movements, habits, education and other personal details. That could lead, they argue, to the unmasking of otherwise undetected suspects."

Comments

Acid Test

[WarwickRyan]

They should make records like this for all MPs and their families pubically available, updated daily and hosted on the interweb.

After 6 months, they can decide if they *REALLY* want the intelligence services (and anyone who picks an MI5 laptop up on a train) to have the same.

Everyone is a suspect then.

[Mactrope]

What the honest hope to unmask is criminals by considering everyone a suspect.

What they will do is discover and harass political opposition. Dark times for the UK.

Re:Everyone is a suspect then.

[Mactrope]

It will be worse than E. Germany, so it must be stopped now. Amateur law enforcement through paranoid informants is a part of any police state but centralized tracking like this was beyond the means of E. Germany and other previous tyrannies. The other thing that makes it worse is that there's no large free state left for escape or rescue. Once the ability to identify and quash dissidents is established, the laws will be changed to make it easier to round them up.

If they have their way, there will be no way to travel in the UK that can't be tracked. Roads and air are already tracked, now they are going for rail. Dissidents will be locked to stone age techniques of walking/biking to meetings where no one can carry a cell phone.

Re:Everyone is a suspect then.

[joss]

I'm with you on the spying/freedom thing. Gas prices on the other hand:
its good that we pay so much tax on the damn stuff, gas should be expensive.
The fact that gas is so expensive means we have vaguely working public
transport and fuel efficient vehicles. You're paying $4 a gallon.. good,
you should be paying at least that, its just a shame you haven't been
paying that much for decades. If you had your infrastructure would have
developed in saner ways and you might be in a better position
to face peak oil. As it is, so many people live > 20 miles from where
they need to work, and food/goods distribution is so energy intensive
its really going to get ugly.

Re:Everyone is a suspect then.

[Stanislav_J]

Really? You'll still be able to buy single (or multiple) trip tickets for cash, surely? Any "person of interest" will be sure to be doing that from today, if they weren't already. So as usual, the people the measures are supposed to catch will easily evade them, meanwhile millions of innocent commuters will lose another piece of their privacy.

Give them time.....I'm sure eventually they will do away with currency, probably sooner in the U.K. than in the U.S., but inevitably. The people in power (not to mention divorce lawyers and the like) would absolutely love to be able to know where every penny of your income goes (or comes from, in the case of the tax folks). Here the "Green Dot" and similar refillable debit cards are being hawked in ads everywhere, so eventually more and more poorer folk will be tempted into plastic, under the guise of "security" and "safety" ("Don't carry all that cash around.....") and "convenience." Not to mention those ubiquitous VISA ads that show traffic through some commercial establishment flowing like clockwork, with people waving their smart cards at that infernal little machine, until some nimnul pulls out cash and brings everything to a screeching halt.

Eventually, most Americans will be conditioned to see cash as "slow," "unsafe," and (the worst!) "old-fashioned" and the only citizens left clinging to their dead presidents will be the ignorant, the homeless, and those damned pointy-headed paranoia-spreading, conspiracy-theory nonconformists. It would be rather smooth at that point to phase out the use of currency altogether. Oh, it might be that some private transactions could still go on, perhaps in the form of barter/exchange, or some form of private scrip (which would be clamped down on pretty quickly), or for larger transactions hard metal such as gold (the private ownership of which will no doubt eventually be criminalized), but for the most part we are rushing towards a point at which any transaction involving any commercial enterprise will be logged, stored, and available for the data miners.

Re:Everyone is a suspect then.

[fredklein]

You'll still be able to buy single (or multiple) trip tickets for cash,

If you show up at an airport in the US with a ticket paid for with cash (especially a One Way ticket), you are marked SSSS for extra security. I'm sure the UK can do something similar. After all, only those trying to avoid surveilance would use cash, Right?

*sigh*

[theaceoffire]

"That could lead, they argue, to the unmasking of otherwise undetected suspects."

Translated: We want to be able to spy on you. We are not sure why yet.

I predict a new business coming

[zappepcs]

Here is my pass, and an additional 100 pounds Sterling. Now, just travel around London for the next 7 days, sightseeing or whatever you like. When you are done, mail it back to me. Wow, now that is a really good tourism plan. What? Why am I being arrested at the airport? No, I did not rob a bank. No, I am not muslim. Oh, that's why? hmmmm

Or better, stick it inside someone else's bag and you look like you were traveling with them. The downfall of all of this is that there is no physical link between the tag and any human being. This is just stupid. Tracking people will not work, and will ONLY inconvenience the stupid criminals and honest people. When will governments learn?

Re:I predict a new business coming

[overshoot]

The downfall of all of this is that there is no physical link between the tag and any human being. This is just stupid. Tracking people will not work, and will ONLY inconvenience the stupid criminals and honest people. When will governments learn?

So do the obvious thing and require that everyone in the UK (including those changing planes at Heathrow) get an RFID implant. Problem solved, identity theft a thing of the past [1]

[1] At least as long as the Forces of Evil don't figure out how to remove/transplant the suckers. Don't worry, they're not smart enough to figure that out.

Re:I predict a new business coming

[TheWizardTim]

The downfall of all of this is that there is no physical link between the tag and any human being.

Shhhh don't give them any ideas! Next thing you know they are going to implant chips for you to travel, or go work, or get your chocolate ration for the week. I hear it's up to 20 grams!

Re:I predict a new business coming

[fastest fascist]

Your idea of a criminal appears to be someone who has already committed a crime. To the government, a criminal is someone who might commit a crime, also known as a citizen.

Pervasive surveillance

[realmolo]

Spying on everyone, and having everyone spy on *each other*, is a fabulous way to run a civilization. As we all know, the former Soviet Union and China are the closest we've come to paradise-on-earth.

What the fuck is wrong with England? I mean, Orwell *showed* them in "1984" how bad it could be, but they keep moving towards it. It's very strange.

Re:Pervasive surveillance

[overshoot]

As we all know, the former Soviet Union and China are the closest we've come to paradise-on-earth.

I believe that the DDR (former East Germany) holds the record with something like 30% of the population keeping tabs on the rest. Their status as a workers' paradise is left to the reader to judge.

Re:Pervasive surveillance

[Colin Smith]

What the fuck is wrong with England? I mean, Orwell *showed* them in "1984" how bad it could be, but they keep moving towards it. It's very strange. It's only strange if you believe that government exists to serve the people.

Re:Pervasive surveillance

[ScrewMaster]

I mean, Orwell *showed* them in "1984" how bad it could be, but they keep moving towards it. It's very strange.

Not at all. The people in power are generally immune to any consequences, which is why they can do this and not care. The United States Congress was originally structured in such a way that the lawmakers would serve their term of office (a civic responsibility, much like jury duty) and then return to their previous lives to live under the very laws they instituted. That very powerful negative feedback loop was opened (to our detriment) when the idea of "career politician" was born. Now, I don't know enough about England's governmental structures to know if there were any similar controls that have also since lapsed into uselessness. If so, it would explain a lot.

Two problems with that

[Jane Q. Public]

First, apparently what they are asking for is not "anonymized" data. Second, as was very clearly demonstrated by the AOL data-release scandal, it is sometimes possible to get an awful lot of personal data on people by putting enough "anonymous" data together.

Pay as you go variant.

[Angostura]

... and I have to say that stories like this are exactly the reason why I opted out of using the original Oyster where you have to register and hand over personal details. I use the anonymous pay as you go version. Though, thinking about it, I'm sure with a little effort they could associate the card id with the debit card payments used to top it up.

Why link it to the individual at all?

[sakdoctor]

Shanghai metro for one has an oyster type card that is anonymous. To top it up you pay cash at the ticket office.

There are logs, and you can check them yourself by inserting the card into a reader; same for your wife who took your card to see where you've been. It is anonymous in that your personal details are not tied to the card ID, so no fishing expeditions by the authorities.

Feature creep

[Mac Degger]

And this is why you should be wary of ANY data collection scheme...just like it used to be that any application would eventually evolve to a point where it incluided a webbrowser/IRC client/email reader, data collections like thses evolve until the government wants it.

And what happens when the database gets hacked (this is INEVITABLE) and your personal data is online, never to go away? Jack shit is what. The government won't reimburse you, the data will never dissappear (like they say, real men don't do backups, they archive to the internet!) and identity theives (including, you guessed it, terrorists) will have a field day with easily used personal data which can't be 'taken back'.

This is one of those cases where the certain (not potential, this shit is ionevitable) consequences are much worse than any 'problem' you are trying to solve.

Personal data will hit the net, identity thieves will have fun and you actually make tracing terrorists MORE DIFFICULT.

God, people are dumb sometimes.

Shock!

[ZorbaTHut]

Oh man, I never saw this coming! Did you? Such a surprise. And here I thought they'd stop at the public cameras! Ha ha ha, boy is my face red.

Oh well. I'm sure this time they'll be satisfied with their new powers.

That's not good enough.

[inTheLoo]

People in power really don't have as much to hide. Political dissidents, on the other hand, have to watch out for reprisals. Would you risk having anything to do with an opposition group if you knew your affiliation would be noted? Symmetry of information is not always the same as symmetry of power.

The best way to oppose this is to note that there's no real law enforcement benefit.

Re:That's not good enough.

[MoonFog]

People in power really don't have as much to hide? I know of a certain New York governor that is evidence to the contrary, and I don't really believe he's a one of a kind.

Re:That's not good enough.

[jgarra23]

People in power really don't have as much to hide.

Wow, that is the most naive statement I've heard in well... as long as I can remember!

Re:That's not good enough.

[moosesocks]

Well, his case is an argument for transparency, rather than against it... Really.... is it?

There's no doubt that what he did was wrong, and represented a massive conflict of interest. I have very little sympathy for him.

However, politicians have done much, much worse, kept their positions, and in some cases even been re-elected. (For crying out loud, the Valerie Plame incident could easily be construed as treason)

By all accounts, he actually was doing a fairly decent job governing the state compared to his predecessors. His own personal life had very little bearing on his actions while in office (ditto to Bill Clinton).

Do we want a President/Governor who steals candy from convenience stores? No. However, if he's doing an apt job of managing foreign affairs and the economy, it might do considerably less damage to ignore it, and turn your head the other way.

Re:That's not good enough.

[mi]

You are arguing for selective enforcement — a form of tyranny and, when the law-enforcer is himself a criminal, of hypocrisy. As prosecutor Spitzer hunted down "prostitution rings" (instead of advocating the legalization of the practice, for example) and — as Governor — just recently signed the law extending incarceration of "johns" from 3 to 12 months.

Although many politicians have, indeed, committed crimes, those who were caught have gone through major troubles. That Spitzer had to resign, unlike another infamous "star" of Democratic Party, is the sign, that he was not doing his job that well, i.e. "I'm a fucking steamroller, and I'll roll over you," — is not how a governor is supposed to speak/act...

By all accounts, he actually was doing a fairly decent job governing the state compared to his predecessors. His own personal life had very little bearing on his actions while in office (ditto to Bill Clinton).

No, that's not true — his tenure as a governor is just too short to judge. Many consider him a hero of public service for "going after" the financial firms as the State's chief prosecutor. But what those people don't realize, is that he has not won a single trial — only settlements. And those of his targets, who chose not to settle, have all won in court...

If such was the case of, say, anti-terrorism prosecutions, you would, I think, claim, the entire "terrorism" thing was drummed by the gubermint in order to put your favorite government evil here...

You seem to agree, he should've been thrown out, yet you come up with silly excuses and "yeah-buts". There aren't any — not in this case.

Do we want a President/Governor who steals candy from convenience stores? No. However, if he's doing an apt job of managing foreign affairs and the economy, it might do considerably less damage to ignore it, and turn your head the other way.

You know, you could've used this argument to, say, defend Michael Jackson: "should we not look the other way, if a great artist molested a few boys for inspiration," — or something like that. "His contribution to culture may outweigh the harm done to these kids." I would not necessarily agree, but that could be a valid opinion — if not regarding the actual molestation, than certainly regarding drug abuse, for example...

Yet in case of a politician, hypocrisy and absence of integrity are immediately disqualifying — a politician simply can not be deemed to be "doing a decent job", if he violates the law(s) he is there to uphold. Ditto Bill Clinton.

The TERROR!

[Richard W.M. Jones]

From TFA:

The fear of cyber-warfare has climbed Whitehall's agenda since last year's attack on the Baltic nation of Estonia, in which Russian hackers swamped state servers with millions of electronic messages until they collapsed. The Estonian defence and foreign ministries and major banks were paralysed,

Except that these were done by some Estonian script kiddies, so it wasn't "CYBERWARFARE!!!11@@!"

Rich.

The lab called

[overshoot]

Your sarcasmometer is overdue for recalibration.

data trawling is ineffective

[Nomen Publicus]

Unless you are already tracking a suspect, data trawling is ineffective. The bigger the database, the less effective it is as more and more false positives occur and have to be investigated. This wastes huge amounts of time and resources and starves real investigations that could well turn up real suspects.

Re:data trawling is ineffective

[soren100]

Unless you are already tracking a suspect, data trawling is ineffective. The bigger the database, the less effective it is as more and more false positives occur and have to be investigated. This wastes huge amounts of time and resources and starves real investigations that could well turn up real suspects. It depends on what you are trying to do with the data.

If the methods being applied look very much like Orwell's 1984, then one obvious conclusion are that the motives of the authorities are very similar to the motives of "the Party" in 1984: political control.

Take for example the current downfall of NY democratic governer Eliot Spitzer just as he was fighting the gifting of massive amounts of public funds to the big financiers. By tracking financial records and listening to phone calls, the authorities were able to uncover a "crime" that many would consider harmless (having sex) and assert political control by making him resign. This frees them to continue their original agenda unimpeded and take down a rival in the process.

So once all the records of travel (license plates, rail, air, onmipresent cameras) are monitored by the authorities, then you can look at the movement patterns of politically active people and use indirect methods of control without ever revealing the true purpose, and without having to assign full-time agents to follow each person and record their activities. You could track large numbers of people without ever leaving the central office and just place a convenient call to a policeman to pick up the person for whatever crimes you uncover along the way, or arrange an "accident" if you want to be more thorough.

Re:D Filter error: You can type more than that for

[digitig]

It's already anonymous if you want it to be. You can buy an Oyster card over the counter for cash without giving any personal details. You can optionally register the card, so you can top up the pre-pay online and so on, in which case it ceases to be anonymous, but the default is anonymous.

Of course, if you really have something to hide, you buy individual tickets, which would only be traceable with a lot of work correlating the CCTV images (no change from the present). Ok, it's £4 per Zone 1 journey instead of £1.50, but I bet the terrorists can afford it. In other word, this isn't a measure against the terrorists -- it's too easily circumvented: it's just more monitoring of the ordinary reasonably law-abiding citizen.

Re:D Filter error: You can type more than that for

[TheRaven64]

There are two versions of the Oyster Card. The kind most commuters have is tied to a credit card. Whenever it becomes empty, it is automatically topped up. The other kind (which I have) can be bought for cash (technically I think it's a deposit and can be returned if you give the card back) and topped up for cash. When it is empty it stops working until you put more credit on it (by credit card or cash). If you ever top it up with a credit card then they can presumably tie your name to the card.

It's a silly thing to ask for, since any terrorist who isn't a complete idiot is likely to use the anonymous version. Of course, anyone willing to blow themselves up is probably some kind of idiot to start with...

Re:6. Not of numbers, but of free men.

[fastest fascist]

Honestly, my main worry is not that criminals or other external parties will misuse the information a government gathers, but that the government itself will misuse that information. It should not be forgotten that an individuals liberty and a government's authority are always in conflict with each other, which is the whole reason modern, so-called free societies have systems to limit the powers of government. Many people seem to have lost sight of the importance of those limits, and would be willing to grant almost unlimited powers to the state, since they do not believe the state would ever misuse those powers.

It's a lovely display of trust, of course, but a woefully misguided one. If in any governmental system there is potential for abuse, then sooner or later there will be abuse. Simple probability. The more power a government has over it's citizens, the more potential for damage there is in cases of abuse. And any government will take all the power they are given, that is why they must actively be kept in check.

It was only today I read someone seriously wondering why people would complain about the police keeping a register of DNA samples and fingerprints of all citizens - their express point of view was that if it helps catch criminals, anything goes. At times like that, I tend to feel like I'm an atheist debating the existence of God with a deeply religious person. It's as if there were no common ground at all, no common logic to be found. Hopefully it isn't so.