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."
i dont expect anything on a computer or the internet to protect my privacy, so i take matters in to my own hands, i dont ever post my real name anywhere, i never upload a photo of myself, people need to protect their own privacy if they want their identiy off the internet/websites, --without-facebook --without-myspace even this user account on this PC is named anyuser which is an anonymous brand websites give to unidentified computers/people.
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Anywhere, anytime, it seems.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I wonder how long it will be before all of this bozo's personal information will be scraped from the web and posted for all and sundry? I give it about 3 days, tops.
Sometimes, real fast is almost as good as real-time.
As a Canadian I expect that ALL of my communications are untapped without a warrant, whether or not they are in the clear, except those to public sites, like this one. I expect ALL corporations to withhold account information unless provided with a warrant.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
I'm seriously getting to the point of configuring my router to run all traffic through an anonymous proxy somewhere, but I'm concerned what kind of performance hit that would mean in day-to-day use.
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
Supposedly Canada is a liberal democracy... clearly the powers that be think differently... Sieg Heil Harper and the Queen! The brand of fascism that is sweeping Canada is spooky for sure.
My parents and grand parents didn't fight off the Nazi's to have the likes of the new Canadian fascism take hold.
I'm sorry to tell the government boobs but yes we Canadians don't like them interfering with our private lives or spying on us.
Take your delusion of government power and shove it up your where the sun don't shine.
Peter Van Loan, the new Canadian Public Safety minister can suck on my big fat ___.
It's assholes like Peter Van Loan that give government a bad name and make the entire notion of government an idea whose time has past into the dust bin of history.
I guess I'll be having a knock on the door in the middle of the night tonight and be taken away because I expressed the view that governments are simply groups of power grubbing nobs who don't have anything better to do with their time than attempt to control the minutia of people's lives. Come through my door without permission and I have a surprise waiting government brown shirts.
The SearchEngine podcast has a nice summary of the issue and interview with the Minister in charge.
You can listen to it Here
Oh look, uniformed voter in the ranks.
Let me enlighten you on the voting process and how it works:
1)Take traction issue one. Apply to minority parliament. Wait for bill to die, or be defeated by opposition.
2) Await for opposition to pull something to cause parliament to collapse.
3) Get general election call.
Start running ads:
4) Take legislation from step 1.
5) Note ads, and apply these to the opposition and how they failed to uphold Canadian values.
6) Note polls, and apply ads as need be to key riding's. Hope it's not another minority win/loss.
7) Success/Fail
8) Repeat at step 1 in 1-2 years if we're back at step 6.
9) Use voter apathy and pissed offness about repeated minority governments and $300m elections
All political parties want power. No party can get power without creating traction, the only way to create traction is by creating issues in many cases. Welcome to Canadian politics. I am Canadian, I do study politics, and yes I've got a pretty good idea of when we're going to have our next election. Either this fall, or this upcoming spring.
It should be noted that the Liberal party isn't any different then the Conservatives on Law and Order. They only differ slightly on social policy. If you think differently you haven't studied either parties platforms(and in the case of the Liberals) how little they've put up.
Om, nomnomnom...
Van Loan is one of the neo-cons currently blighting the Canadian political stage. They've been wandering around like lost sheep ever since Obama was elected in the US, and this kind of wholesale destruction of personal privacy is just their version of pigging out on comfort food when things go wrong.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
It is extremely difficult to not break the law.
In BC if you are driving along the highway at 80kph and the speed limit is 80kph, but if everyone else is going 90kph, you are actually breaking the law because you are driving at an unsafe speed in relation to the cars around you. If you speed up to 90kph you will now be breaking the speed limit, but are no longer breaking the unsafe speed law.
There are quite a few of these catch 22s. Even the most law abiding people they've found are breaking laws inadvertently. Sometimes there is no way not to break a law.
Now in the right hands the powers of this proposed bill would not be a problem, but our Police time and time again have shown themselves to be less than honest and upright. Even if they were now, what's to say the people replacing them would be?
Requiring the warrent provides that extra check to try to make sure that the Police are not fishing for information, because if you look in anyone closet, you'll find things no matter how clean it is.
Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
You are using the English definition of "expectation" (i.e. something that one believes/predicts will happen) rather than seeing it as technical legal jargon.
In technical legal jargon, an "expectation of privacy" basically means a desire for privacy, to such an extent that some (though not all) governments go to the trouble of creating an unnatural right that broadcasts of information, which passes through countless intermediate systems (literally countless, since most users simply have no idea what all is involved), where no efforts are made by the users to keep the information private (not even a 30-year-old 56-bit cipher), will be treated as though it were private. You labeled the information with the recipient's name, so everyone who reads your "private" information knows who to forward it too, and we all know that gentlemen do not read one another's mail.
Many misunderstandings and flamewars have been caused by the stupid lawyers who coined the term "expectation of privacy" in such a way that created that vast chasm between their jargon and plain speech.
Anyway, yes, nobody really believes that information that is recklessly spread without regard for who might see it, will remain private. But that's now what anti-crytography privacy advocates are talking about. They're saying that we have created a social convention where we have all agreed to pretend that recklessly transmitted information is private, and in the .0000000000001% of the instances of pseudo-privacy "violations" where someone finds out that it was violated, then the convention will be enforced.
The message to spies is this: don't get caught. As long as you don't get caught, nobody has a problem with what you're doing, and everyone knows that you're doing it. We've agreed to look the other way, because acknowledging the ridiculousness of our policies would be too embarrassing. But if you get caught, that's even more embarrassing because it just points out how stupid we've been. We get trapped into gritting our teeth and saying things like "I didn't know anyone could read my email," while everyone else points and laughs at us, seemingly ignorant that their own reputation for having common sense might be sacrificed next. ("When they came for the reckless fools, I didn't say anything...")
The Canadian government has decided to take the position that this convention is so unrealistic and counter to every single person's experiences with networks, and that the awkward situations described in the previous paragraph are so awkward, that they're no longer on board with the convention anymore. It was a fantastic convention while it lasted, maybe too fantastic.
But that's Canada. Back in the US..
Well, you should. How can we violate your privacy, if you don't help? Please, start expecting the unexpected. It's for your own good. It's Your Rights Online -- the right to be reckless with your own safety without facing the consequences. We're all here to stick up for your rights.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
So what happens when the ISP shares your dynamic IP address with the pedo around the block who has the same ISP ?
Would you like your information tied to his web searches ?
Better yet, I could be running an open wireless point, or a TOR end-point, which could contain god knows what traffic on it ?
how about during the time you have your computer off, I happen to spoof your ip address and you would never know about it.