Slashdot Mirror


The UK Is About to Legalize Mass Surveillance [Update] (vice.com)

From a report on Motherboard: On Tuesday, the UK is due to pass its controversial new surveillance law, the Investigatory Powers Act, according to the Home Office. The Act, which has received overwhelming support in both the House of Commons and Lords, formally legalizes a number of mass surveillance programs revealed by Edward Snowden in 2013. It also introduces a new power which will force internet service providers to store browsing data on all customers for 12 months. Civil liberties campaigners have described the Act as one of the most extreme surveillance laws in any democracy, while law enforcement agencies believe that the collection of browsing data is vital in an age of ubiquitous internet communications. "The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 will ensure that law enforcement and the security and intelligence agencies have the powers they need in a digital age to disrupt terrorist attacks, subject to strict safeguards and world-leading oversight," a statement from the Home Office reads. Much of the Act gives stronger legal footing to the UK's various bulk powers, including "bulk interception," which is, in general terms, the collection of internet and phone communications en masse. In June 2013, using documents provided by Edward Snowden, The Guardian revealed that the GCHQ taps fibre-optic undersea cables in order to intercept emails, internet histories, calls, and a wealth of other data. Update: "Snooper's charter" bill has become the law. The home secretary said:"The Investigatory Powers Act is world-leading legislation, that provides unprecedented transparency and substantial privacy protection. "The government is clear that, at a time of heightened security threat, it is essential our law enforcement and security and intelligence services have the power they need to keep people safe. The internet presents new opportunities for terrorists and we must ensure we have the capabilities to confront this challenge. But it is also right that these powers are subject to strict safeguards and rigorous oversight."

16 of 394 comments (clear)

  1. Doubleplusgood! by rantrantrant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of civil society :)

    1. Re:Doubleplusgood! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You know what makes you so pathetic? The fact that we've got the closest thing to a moderate entering the white house (you have researched his actual positions and not just taken CNN at their word, right?) that we've had in a very long time, and you're going all godwin just because he's not particularly PC. Should we start calling Churchill a nazi as well since he wasn't particularly PC?

    2. Re:Doubleplusgood! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      calling pussygrabbing not Pc is a bit of an understatement.

    3. Re:Doubleplusgood! by Wycliffe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      calling pussygrabbing not Pc is a bit of an understatement.

      As opposed to Bill Clinton, Kennedy, etc... who are actually documented as womanizers? Yes, Trump might be a womanizer but you would be hard pressed to name a president that wasn't. Really the only difference between Trump and most other former presidents is that he says in public what other presidents say and do in private. That's what most Trump supporters realize that the left doesn't seem to understand. Sure, Trump is an asshole but so were all the other presidents. They were just better at hiding it.

  2. And us too - soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    FBI and NSA Poised to Gain New Surveillance Powers Under Trump

    All because you sheeple want to feel safe.

    "People want to be slaves" - Academy Award nominated director I work out with.

    Face it, the people don't want to really be free. They want to feel safe above all else. They are so afraid of terrorism when the fact is they are most likely to die from complications of their obesity or from a car accident because they were distracted while they were updating their facebook page.

  3. Encrypt everything! by Freischutz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Encrypt everything! ... They may be able to crack the encryption in the end but it will make their lives much, much, much more difficult.

  4. Benjamin Franklin by zifn4b · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

    --
    We'll make great pets
  5. Bad for the UK, but good for the world by nightfire-unique · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think this is something that will ultimately hurt a lot of innocent people in the UK over the coming years.

    However, it will also help the Internet mature with new encryption and canary protocols, and more ubiquitous deployment of them, to ensure privacy and protection from all threats.

    --
    A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
  6. Re:This is what happens... by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Whooosh

  7. Re:Encrypt! by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Talking about putting people in boxes. If you use Tor, expect the government to be looking at you a little closer. Surely you must have something to hide if you have Tor.

    It's like putting a box in the break room with a note saying "do not peak" written on it. Everyone is going to open the box. Use Tor and the government is going to want to see what you're doing.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  8. Re:Encrypt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You and I don't need to invent anything. We can create our own encryption keys, exchange them, and securely communicate.

    The problem is the HTTPS infrastructure is broken by design, which is what the original poster was talking about.

    The absolute irony is that visiting a site with a self-signed certificate shows the user a warning error (I understand why, don't worry) yet the resulting HTTPS exchange is actually immune to any and all eavesdropping. When visiting a site with a cert authority signed certificate, no error is displayed, yet this connection is vulnerable to anyone who has broken/intercepted the chain of trust. This includes state actors, but also businesses, and anyone that can get their certs onto your system, or can influence the signing authorities to give them the keys.

    At this point some rabid net admin for a large corporation will chime in with "it's my network" etc... but the point is that we have been training users for years to interpret HTTPS as being "secure" and "safe" when it actually isn't. Just like we have been encouraging users to update Windows, yet now Microsoft have broken that trust with their forced updates and broken/mislabeled updates. The internet is currently broken and indeed has been broken maliciously by state actors. Are we going to just accept that as "good enough" and live with it? What exactly was so terrible about the internet in 1990 or 2000, before the NSA got their hooks in and started fucking everything up?? Can we point to a global reduction in crime, violence, terrorism, or child pornography, due to the valliant efforts of the NSA and similar outfits abroad?

    At the **very very least** prior to this bill in the UK passing, anyone with half a mind should take note of the current state of UK society and crime. In ten years time, once the full ramifications of these new laws come to pass, look around again and make a comparison. My prediction, for what it's worth, is everything will be exactly the same (in which case what was the point?) or it will be much much worse.

  9. Re:There's No England Anymore by richardkettle4 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    wow, you clearly have never been here. If you have no facts or experience, a blind ignorance helps.

  10. Re:Encrypt! by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm not disagreeing with your statement. I'm just saying, by going out of your way to hide, "the man" is going to want to snoop all that much more- they're going to jump to assumptions. That's what the man does.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  11. UK class system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

    Indeed, and you might notice that Franklin was one of the founding fathers of a country specifically established to escape the tyranny of the British ruling class.

    The UK has never had an American style democratic system. Despite pretending it does to the outside world, and going around trumpeting its special relationship with the USA like they are brothers in arms, the UK is still well and truly under the control of a pseudo-hereditary ruling class that is closely associated with ancestral land ownership. Until you live here (if you are from another country) it is hard to understand just how insidious it all is. For example, the great leader of the people, Winston Churchill, grew up in the fabulously extravagant Blenheim palace that his ancestors were gifted for their actions at the battle of Waterloo. Was he a great leader? Sure. But don't kid yourself that Britain selected the best man for the job in a sort of American hopes and dreams way. They simple had the ruling elite select the best of their mates at the London smoking club. You only have to look at the last government (the Bullingdon club crew) to see how the Eton system is still alive and well, and remarkably effective at controlling power.

    I have lived here for five years now (originally from New Zealand) and it still just amazes me how many British working class people simply do not believe they can do things beyond their 'lot in life'. It is deeply ingrained into them that because, for example, they didn't go to Oxbridge, they are too dumb to understand any of this government stuff, so don't even try and just shrug their shoulders and say there is nothing they can do about it anyway. It is a sort of cultural deference to power that I do not think exists in any other western country.

  12. Re:Not just law by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the extreme-left BBC

    You've never watched the BBC, have you?

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  13. Re:When the info leaks.... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Of course they will. This way the people in charge of the information gathering can ensure that the elites keep in line and keep approving more snooping powers or else all that embarrassing information might "accidentally" be revealed to the world.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.