Slashdot Mirror


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."

15 of 446 comments (clear)

  1. Porn Database by notarockstar1979 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The UK is just putting together the biggest porn database in the history of the world to provide a search engine along with relevant advertising to bring in some extra cash.

  2. 1984 by tritonman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ok I guess Orwell was about 25 years off

    1. Re:1984 by NetDanzr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:1984 by damburger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    3. Re:1984 by BrokenHalo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    4. Re:1984 by DustCollector · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually, according to our govt database, George Orwell turned over twice within an hour of this slashdot posting.

  3. At least its for the Children!!! by hemp · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, I am not going to feel safe until *everyone* is in jail. That is the only way to make sure there is not a criminal free somewheres.

    --
    Skip ------ See the latest from http://www.anArchyFortWorth.com
  4. Great by Tx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Oh no... it's the future.
  5. Re:Good news for the Royal Mail by neokushan · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm sorry, but if I want to write my address as "1337 Drive, Leetown, HAX X0R" simply because it sounds a lot cooler than "123 Main Steet, Liverpool", I bloody well will and it's your job to make sure it gets there!

    --
    +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
  6. Re:USA-style solution: by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  7. Escaped Nazis rename Third Reich to 'New Labour' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Jacqui 'Jackboots' Smith is definitely a Nazi. This moron is one of the most stupid, ignorant, and illiberal people ever to assume power in the UK (with a feeble minority, it has to be said)
    New Labour have done more to dismantle the fundamental fabric of British society than any previous regime. Even the Tories under Maggie 'Madcap-Psychobitch' Thatcher never did such damage to people's fundamental rights (although she was probably more evil in other ways)

    What does it mean to be British?:
    - The right not to have to carry papers or ID cards
    - The right to privacy, and to know that it is illegal for the state to spy on me.
    - The right to protest anywhere I like, without being confined to a police cordoned area to keep me away from the war criminals and terrorists who are running this country.
    - The right not to be beaten to death by the police.
    - The right to be able to venomously criticise all religions, without them being granted 'special rights', just because certain religions (islam, and judaism) seem to be particularly prone to particularly psychotic levels of violence, and can't accept that their behaviour and beliefs should be scrutinised by sane people.
    - The right to access to good public services, unpolluted by private sector profiteers, greedy lobbyists, and corrupt public private partnerships.

    New Labour have taken all of these rights, and are consequently anti-British Enemies of The People, who have granted victory to terrorists worldwide, by curtailing the rights of our people in the name of 'fighting terrorism'.
    I suspect that their attack on our rights, in reality, has much more to do with protecting the status-quo, as any terrorist can just mow down a busy street in a stolen car, if they really want to kill, without resorting to elaborate bomb plots, or mixing chemicals in the basement.
    Fortunately for us, most terrorists are nearly as stupid as New Labour (they'd have to be, to be infected with religion!)

  8. Re:Counterproductive by Hurricane78 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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. :)

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  9. Re:Foolish thought. Not enough space for that. by Whammy666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    --
    When all else fails, run.
  10. Re:And in other news by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That depends on the issue, doesn't it? The last eight years seemed pretty sane for gun rights -- Clinton's gun ban expired, Heller was rightfully decided, DoJ issued memos saying that the 2nd amendment protects individual rights, retired law enforcement officers can now carry in any jurisdiction, etc, etc, etc.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  11. Re:Counterproductive by StrategicIrony · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Oh pffft.

    In national surveys in the US, MORE THAN 50% of people subscribe to the "If I'm not doing anything illegal, what do I have to hide?" theory.

    Did you know that in a recent survey, only 22% of British people surveyed could properly name the 3 countries that makes up Great Britain.

    On an unmarked map, almost 90% of Americans could not identify any of Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. 51% could not find New York State. 68% could not find Japan and 20% could not actually find the Pacific Ocean.

    Sure, the number of people who are actively opposed to database surveillance has risen from 5% to 20%, but that doesn't mean the "general public" deserves anything.

    I do notice the western countries with the strongest privacy laws happen to also be the countries with the highest test scores amongst kids.

    Places like Finland, Belgium, New Zealand, Switzerland, Canada.... They aren't known for government surveillance or overbearing police forces.

    I don't know, is this ironic? Or a result of the "liberal agenda" in these places? :-)

    sorry to turn that into a political rant, but... It's just too easy.