UK Government To Monitor All Internet Use

nk497 writes "The UK government has further detailed plans to track all communications — mobile phone calls, text messages, email and browser sessions — in the fight against terrorism, pedophiles and organized crime. The government said it's not looking to see what you're saying, just to whom and when and how. Contrary to previous plans to keep it all in a massive database, it will now let ISPs and telecoms firms store the data themselves, and access it when it feels it needs it." And to clarify this, Barence writes "The UK Government has dropped plans to create a massive database of all internet communications, following stern criticism from privacy advocates. Instead the Government wants ISPs and mobile phone companies to retain details of mobile phone calls, emails and internet sites visited. As with the original scheme, the actual content of the phone calls and messages won't be recorded, just the dates, duration and location/IP address of messages sent. The security services would then have to apply to the ISP or telecoms company to have the data released. The new proposals would also require ISPs to retain details of communications that originated in other countries but passed over the UK's network, such as instant messages."

Comments

1984

[tritonman]

Ok I guess Orwell was about 25 years off

Re:1984

[NetDanzr]

Not all that ironic; he was in the best position to see where Britain was heading. Since then, many other British writers described the future Britain as fascist. All these people simply observed certain trends and extended them to their logical conclusion.

Re:1984

[damburger]

Conservatives are not supporters of freedom - its all a big lie. When they talk about 'freeing' the market they mean 'handing it over to their pals from Eton/business partners.' The debate over whether the state or 'private' enterprise should run things is completely irrelevant because, in the UK at least, the business and political elite are in collusion, and in many cases are the exact same people.

Re:1984

[BrokenHalo]

What I don't get is why mostly conservatives support this kind of thing.

It's because what they aim to conserve is all that is parochial, small-minded and nasty. The trouble is, Britain's Labour party used to have a policy of supporting social justice. Now that has been totally abandoned, and they are dominated by raving Thatcherites. No bloody wonder the actual "Conservative" party hasn't a clue what to do to regain power - their philosophy has been entirely subsumed by their opponents.

Great

[Tx]

I'm honestly sure who I trust less to securely maintain a database containing large amounts my of private data. The government have consistently proven themselves incapable of managing large scale IT projects, or of taking privacy seriously. On the other hand, I don't trust my ISP either - will they be prevented from outsourcing any part of the chain involved in collecting and storing this data, for example, or is my data going to be available for $1 in Delhi anytime soon? It's a lose-lose situation.

Re:USA-style solution:

[vux984]

Laugh all you want but here in the US our Government can't compel us to turn over an encryption key and detain American citizens for 45 (or is it 90 now?) days without charges.

The US can't torture prisoners either. Oh wait...

Your argument assumes the government is constrained by the laws it passes. Given that its happy to exceed those constraints at will, and is not held accountable even after the fact, even after a change in administration, its a pretty false sense of security.

And we still have our guns ;)

They will be worthless until the revolution comes. And even during a revolution you'll be relying on the military fragmenting (both to weaken the state and to arm your side). That will be far more important than your personal small arms. To put it bluntly, if the military doesn't fragment it won't be much of a revolution. (And you'll need to pray NATO/UN allies... etc, etc doesn't send additional forces to bolster the state side.)

And if you pull that gun out by yourself before the revolution you are just a criminal shooting at the police. That will just compound your problems... and you won't get much public sympathy either.

More false security.

Re:Counterproductive

[Hurricane78]

Where did you get the idea that this has anything to do with catching the bay guys? ^^
And why do people always equate politicians not doing what you expected with them being stupid?
I don't think they are stupid. It just looks that way, because their actions are so completely counterproductive of what they say are their goals.
Well, every person that has lived trough the change in tone before and after an election, should know not to believe one word of that. ;)

So... if they are lying, and if they are not stupid, then why do they do this?
Simple: Everything people do, because someone has someone has something to gain from it.
Find that one, and you got your reason.

But I guess we all knew this before. :)

Re:Foolish thought. Not enough space for that.

[Whammy666]

I agree. The only reason they are not storing the content now is technological limitations. Once that barrier is removed, they will certainly take the next step.

Wholesale surveillance is not limited by good will, it's limited by technology.