Slashdot Mirror


Passport Required To Buy Mobile Phones In the UK

David Gerard points out a Times Online story that says: "Everyone [in the UK] who buys a mobile telephone will be forced to register their identity on a national database under government plans to extend massively the powers of state surveillance. Phone buyers would have to present a passport or other official form of identification at the point of purchase. Privacy campaigners fear it marks the latest government move to create a surveillance society. A compulsory national register for the owners of all 72m mobile phones in Britain would be part of a much bigger database to combat terrorism and crime. Whitehall officials have raised the idea of a register containing the names and addresses of everyone who buys a phone in recent talks with Vodafone and other telephone companies, insiders say." We've recently discussed other methods the UK government is using to keep track of people within its borders, such as ID cards for foreigners and comprehensive email surveillance.

7 of 388 comments (clear)

  1. It's always been required... by wellard1981 · · Score: 5, Informative

    When signing up for a new mobile phone contract, you're pretty much asked for two forms of identifications, such as a driving license, passport, utility bills, etc. so this is nothing new. The new part is the national surveillance database. Thank god I'm moving out of this country.

    1. Re:It's always been required... by sakdoctor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      1. Buy a PAYG phone
      2. Don't bother registering it
      3. Buy top-ups using cash
      4. Anonymity

      Irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. The most powerful vote you have is indeed to leave.

  2. Re:no privacy here, no privacy there by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I just don't understand it.

    Both countries have rich and deep histories of democratic values.

    Where is this coming from? The wealthy? Have they "won the game" and now want to lock it in?

    Or has the military/security complex gotten too big?

    These are now a much bigger threat than terrorism- which might at most kill a few thousand people. If the government goes bad while possessing all these powers, the death count will be much higher. And then you add in the "torture is okay/not really torture" right wing meme that's been building (Thanks! Liberals behind "24" for helping too with that!) -- it gets damn scary.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  3. We told you so! by Lord+Kano · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It was over a decade ago when they were getting happy with CCTV cameras in London. We talked about how creepy that was and that they should be careful that they were not sliding down a slippery slope. We were dismissed, we were laughed at, and now look. We were right.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  4. Cell phones and terrorists by qbzzt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    However, if you're planning $LARGE_SPECTACULAR_JIHADIST_ATTACK, and you steal a phone, it makes you a little more likely to be caught/fail.

    You don't. You get a sympathizer to buy one for you, and then claim it was stolen. Enough phones are stolen anyway that this won't look suspicious.

    Open societies are going to be vulnerable to terrorism. We can accept that, give up our freedoms, or be so scary nobody will want to mess with us.

    --
    -- Support a free market in the field of government
    1. Re:Cell phones and terrorists by ATMD · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > Open societies are going to be vulnerable to terrorism.

      Mod parent up, this is the most insightful thing I've seen on Slashdot in a good while. When you scale that familiar security/convenience trade-off up to national governments, it morphs into security/civil liberties. Since absolute security can never be achieved, (be it for computer or country), the march towards that end of the spectrum must be halted before citizens of the Western world have no more freedom than denizens of 1970s Cambodia.

      --
      Nobody else has this sig.
    2. Re:Cell phones and terrorists by Peter+Greenwood · · Score: 5, Informative

      >>They used anti-terror laws against Iceland, who are not at all terrorists.

      >When? Do you have a cite on this?

      It's well known. Google "iceland terror" and - among lots of others - http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=a9R6kEktPff0&refer=europe

      The government wound in some "independent" reviewer of anti-terror legislation to claim the bit of the Act they used wasn’t really anti-terror legislation. You can judge how independent he is by the fact that the same man stood up in Parliament a few days later to argue in favour of a (now defeated) proposal to allow the police to lock "terrorist suspects" up for 6 weeks at a stretch.

      We used to sneer at all those tinpot Balkan dictatorships where you had to carry identity papers everywhere, the police could lock anyone up on a whim, and the only telephones you could buy were designed to allow Them to monitor you. And they used to make unbelievably weird claims about the evils of foreign governments. Then we went and elected a Labour government ...

      --
      freedom, n. Allowing people you don't like to do things you disapprove of.