Slashdot Mirror
In Canada, No Expectation of Privacy On the Net
The_AV8R writes "In a recent interview, Peter Van Loan, the new Canadian Public Safety minister, says ISPs should be able to provide private user information without a warrant. (The only example he gave was cases of child pornography; the interviewer pointed out that in these cases ISPs are already at liberty to divulge customer information without a warrant, but that the proposed rules would make that mandatory whenever the police ask.) He was adamant that in regard to IP addresses, names, cell phone numbers, and email addresses: '...that is not the kind of information about which Canadians have a legitimate expectation of privacy.' The minister denied — even when presented with an audio clip proving otherwise — that his predecessor had promised never to allow the police to wiretap the Internet without a warrant."
This Harper government becomes more fascist every week it seems. Thank GOD they don't form a majority of seat in parliament.
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
Ok, but tell me, your ISP knows who you are right? Should your ISP be giving out your IP and your confidential information? I don't think so. This is what its talking about that the government/big businesses now know who XXX.XXX.XXX is and everything about them. This isn't that Facebook knows that IP XXX.XXX.XXX corresponds to profile Joe Sixpack, but rather that anything is now open to suspicions such as the ISPs looking at your IP address to figure out you are FudRucker then giving whoever wants the information your name, address, etc.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
Amendment
----------
Contact information for Peter Van Loan:
Constituency Office
45 Grist Mill Road, Unit 10
Holland Landing, Ontario
L9N 1M7
T 905-898-1600 or 1-877-738-3748
F 905-898-4600
E vanlop1@parl.gc.ca
Obtained from:
http://www.petervanloan.com/contact.asp
Send him a letter, or give him a call, let him know your thoughts. Please, be polite.
Hi, I Boris. Hear fix bear, yes?
the courts will very likely find the Minister to be incorrect in his interpretation of the constitution, and that everything he is proposing violates Section 8 of the Charter, "Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure."
I would point out the Supreme Court has ruled that that whether information is subject to protection by Section 8 is not at the whim of the government, but whether a person has a "reasonable expectation of privacy" of information which could "reveal intimate, personal information", in that particular situation.
It is not particularly difficult to envision a situation where linking an IP address to a name would potentially reveal personal information to the state. Imagine a woman posting on a support forum for victims of sexual assault which tracks posters by IP...
Since IP addresses and so on are identifying information, and this being information people would reasonably expect their ISPs to keep private, I suspect that this entire thing is just begging for a Charter challenge and to have the courts clearly specify that a warrant is required.
CanLII has a very interesting brief on section 8 of the Charter here.
I guarantee you the Liberals and NDP will back this up. No political party has a monopoly on the never ending quest for power.
Don't be so sure.
here is some information from Canadian providers -- none of them specifically state what information they will or will not provide when requested or what is specifically logged. Most pages include contact information for a privacy rep. I suggest you contact that person(s) and see what information you can opt out of having tracked.
I have excluded TELUS because they are wh0r3ish and don't listen anyway.
From http://www.shaw.ca/en-ca/AboutShaw/PrivacyPolicy/Index
3.3 How does Shaw obtain your consent? Consent is required for the collection of Personal Information and the subsequent use or disclosure of the Personal Information. Consent can be either expressed or implied. The form of consent sought by Shaw may vary, depending upon the circumstances and the type of Personal Information. In determining the form of consent to use, Shaw takes into account the sensitivity of the information and the reasonable expectations of the Customer, Employee or Web Site User. Shaw generally seeks express consent when the Personal Information is likely to be considered sensitive. Implied consent is typically appropriate when the Personal Information is less sensitive. In exceptional circumstances, as permitted by law, Shaw may collect, use or disclose Personal Information without a Customer, Employee or Web Site Userâ(TM)s knowledge or consent.
In general, the use of products and services by a Customer, or a Web Site User, or the acceptance of employment or benefits by an Employee, will constitute implied consent required by Shaw to collect, use and/or disclose Personal Information for the purposes identified in this Privacy Policy.
Consent may be withdrawn by Customers and Web Site Users at any time, subject to legal or contractual restrictions and upon providing Shaw reasonable notice. If you wish to withdraw your consent to certain collection, use or disclosure of Personal Information, please contact Shaw at privacy@shaw.ca.
and of course Rogers http://your.rogers.com/privacy1.asp
"i lost my dignity on a slippery wiener"
"The government would not "love to lock you away" for that. Imprisonment is expensive as is identifying and prosecuting criminals."
The US government has found that keeping about 1% of it's population imprisoned is a lucrative business. It keeps a huge number of people employed, it justifies a number of bonds and taxes, and it keeps a number of "worthless" people off the streets. Keeping people imprisoned is so lucrative that private industry has gotten into the act. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_prisons
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Getting someone's name, address, cell phone number, and email addresses is not the Internet equivalent of wiretapping. The Internet equivalent of wiretapping would be getting the content of your emails and other data that you send and receive.
I'm not a fan of this bill to give these powers to police over ISPs, but it isn't as bad as too many of it critiques make it out to be. It isn't allowing police to warrantlessly get the contents of your email or other data that you send and receive - they can already get that information with a warrent and this bill does not seek to change that requirement.
Atheism is a religion to the same extent that not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Bill C-61 (separate from this proposed legislation) would make it illegal to use a proxy or any other means of obfusctation on the internet.
Your ISP will have a log of everything you've ever done, everything you've ever looked at, every post, and it will all be tied into your real life name and address forever.
Everything. And this law would force them to hand it to any police officer for any reason. Did you make a video of them tazing a Polish man? Well, if you don't want your browsing history on the first page of the Globe and Mail, you're going to destroy the only copy.
At home, I have a reasonable expectation of privacy. I don't expect that at work.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
Not entirely so.
I have had a search warrant executed on me by a false tip by a former employer. Once the legal mess all settled, I found out that the employer was stealing cash drops from the safe, and purchasing cocaine with the money. The Franchise owner audited him, and in an attempt to create a smokescreen, blamed me for the theft. He called the cops, gave this total sob story, and a warrant was executed. My house was destroyed inside from them looking for something I never had in the first place.
In this post 9/11 world, even my poor Canada is becoming a police state, and when it comes to law enforcement, even the "Innocent" need to be wary. I did nothing wrong, yet I was treated like a criminal until the truth finally surfaced. nothing will ever fix that.
Simple search turned up his home address and phone numbers. Nice pool.
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo