Feeds

back to article Web snooping bill an 'odious shopping list of new gov powers'

Tory backbencher David Davis has described the government's draft communications surveillance law as an "odious shopping list" of new powers demanded by the Home Office. He told MPs and peers at a joint select committee hearing on Wednesday afternoon that UK spooks were "looking for a pin" but instead "creating a field of …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Thumb Up

Well done Mr Davis

Hopefully you can find more like you to kill the bill.

37
0
Anonymous Coward

"The idea of a black box organised at a central level has not actually yet been done in a democratic country,"

Since when has britain ever been demoractic? Your kidding.

Civil servants rule (no matter which coulour is leading), and the British are too dim to understand/care.

I'm astounded that a tory minister is standing up for what is right! It's a breath of fresh air in the stagnant Tory party.

20
3
Anonymous Coward

re: Obviously!

<joke>

How can you be so sure he doesn't have some vested interest? perhaps a board membership for a company with a differing system wanting preferred access to contracts?

</joke>

0
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: re: Obviously!

True, very true. It is the torys we are talking about alfter all.

1
11
Anonymous Coward

United KINGDOM

The clue is in the name, now get back to work serfs, or we'll set the dogs on you and burn your hovels! :)

4
0
MJI
Silver badge

Re: re: Obviously!, Obviously!

Well shows how much you know.

David Davis is well know for libertarian attitudes and being more traditionally Conservative.

He is a big believer in privacy and against the big brother society.

I still think the wrong David won the selectrion process those years ago

14
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: re: Obviously!, Obviously!

And I stand by what I had said MJI, "I'm astounded that a tory minister is standing up for what is right! It's a breath of fresh air in the stagnant Tory party." (Notice, Chris, that i'm not name calling anyone!)

3
5
Anonymous Coward

Re: "David Davis is well know..."

Jeez.

* well-KNOWN

It might also be valuable for many to learn that there is probably spelling checker functionality built into your browser.

0
3
Silver badge

Liberal Tories

"I'm astounded that a tory minister is standing up for what is right!"

This is far more likely than a Labour MP doing so. Though party distinctions have blurred, Conservatism has traditionally been about being given the freedom to stand on your own two feet, while Labour is all about "Big Government" and the welfare state.

Having said that, Cameron's "Conservatives" have shown themselves to be more like New Labour in their control freakery.

3
5
MJI
Silver badge

Re: "David Davis is well know..."

know passes spelling checker

know is known with the n not typed - we all do it!

1
0
Stop

Re: United KINGDOM

The clue is not in the name;

Practically every single liberty UK subjects enjoy, was created by unelected monarchs and lords (e.g. Trial by Jury)

Practically every single liberty that has been taken away, or attempted to be stolen, has been via the House of Commons. (e.g. scrapping of double jeopardy by previous goverment)

I would also remind you that England'ss one and only military dictator was an MP (Cromwell), whoose rule was so appalling that the King was invited back, as a better alternative to the tyrany Cromwell inflicted.

12
3
Anonymous Coward

Thanks...

...for your invaluable and fascinating input :)

0
0
Thumb Down

Re: United KINGDOM

Practically every liberty was extracted forcibly by the barons or middle/merchant classes from the unelected monarchs, because they were autocratic bastards. That the liberties were gained for all was probably an accident or a necessary default for the sake of expediency.

That those classes then tried to put those liberties back in the box, as far as the plebs were concerned, is a predictable outcome of the initial exuberance, as they might see it.

For all it's faults, I think I prefer the possibilities of the current subdued but inclusive class war to the few accidental scraps of benefit that fall out from a theological dictatorship conflicting with croneys, thanks.

0
1
Thumb Down

Re: United KINGDOM

Every single monarch without exception before the Glorious Revolution was a military dictator. Cromwell was a scrupulously honest man and a democrat. Installing his idiot son as a successor was a mistake, but not one he had any part of, being dead at the time.

1
2

Re: United KINGDOM

@despairing

You need to do more history revision. And maybe be a little more optimistic. Remember that at the time Britain only had a history of family succession of military coup. Britain's elite at the time put up Cromwell's son then invited a Stuart back because there was no tradition of doing anything else. Electing someone? What? Never heard of that one, it'll never work. It took the successes of the libertarian and mercantile classes the next 200 years to gradually wrest control from monarchs and deliver the constitutional monarchy system of government we have today. Plus, democracy is the worst kind of government except for every other form.

0
0
Big Brother

Guilty until proven innocent?

Sounds like it's time to get the old packet radio network going again.

7
0
Big Brother

Quote: "collection of data by ISPs through Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) probes - colloquially dubbed black boxes - had only been implemented on a national scale in China, Iran and Kazakhstan."

I guess our politicians seek out their own kind...

Being prejudiced is a perfectly normal human trait after all.

8
0
Anonymous Coward

"Being prejudiced is a perfectly normal human trait after all."

Don't agree.

Live and let live, I've no prejudices. These are a learnt/taught concept usually picked up from the parents/peers.

2
8
Silver badge
Facepalm

"I've no prejudices"

Says the person who has just condemned all Tories (sp) as bastards. Self-awareness isn't your strong suit, is it?

12
4
Anonymous Coward

Re: "I've no prejudices"

"Says the person who has just condemned all Tories (sp) as bastards. Self-awareness isn't your strong suit, is it?"

Prejudice and political views, I can't reconcile your argument.

Having a political view is hardly prejudice.

Sorry, your thinking needs adjustment. Maybe your parents/peers have skewed your views?

3
10
Silver badge

Re: "I've no prejudices"

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

I'm not sure you've quite grasped the concept of 'thinking' either.

5
1

"Normal" doesn't mean "known without being taught"

Normal just means within a reasonable average set. If everyone has a prejudice, then having a prejudice is normal.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

No prejudices, really?

Haha... what, not even towards, say, Paedophiles, for example? I'll bet my bottom dollar....

0
1
Happy

On prejudice...

Not liking (or liking) cheese is a prejudice, though I would agree that the young learn things from their parents...

...Mind you, they usually do the opposite!

0
0
Silver badge
Big Brother

sometimes, people dont realise ...

Pickles also warned that, under the proposed law, protesters outside Parliament might, for example, be more easily rounded up and identified by police who could access the comms data sent between individuals in that area.

I rather think this is the whole point - not some unintended side effect.

16
1
Big Brother

Re: sometimes, people dont realise ...

So you are walking across Parliament Square on your way to work and you see the half dozen protestors, one of whom is female and wearing a silly t-shirt with a clever slogan. You take a picture on your mobile to send to the guys at work (nothing to do with the size of her breasts, honest). Next day, you get a vist from the boys in blue.

You were there, you took a picture; now explain why! Innocent until proven guilty? Don't think so sir; not in the democratic people's republic of Airstrip 1!

This is just yet a further extension of the attempts to do away with our civil liberties. If we allow it to happen, we deserve everything that happens to us.

14
0
Anonymous Coward

The political maverick is not dead

Glad to see a backbencher sticking it to their own party, I thought the last of these had disappeared with Tony Benn, Alan Clark and co with them eventually being replaced by Blair's robots.

Go D.D.

14
0
Thumb Up

Re: The political maverick is not dead

You should read Douglas Carswell's blog if you want to see an MP sticking it to their own party...

http://www.talkcarswell.com

0
0
Big Brother

It'll be law

with the added bonus you'll get to pay for it.

The political class couldn't careless you have your choice, pay income tax till you drop dead or sign on and become an alcoholic/obese and die early, just remember to drop your blue or red token in the box marked democracy and we'll do the rest for you.

3
0
Anonymous Coward

let's go for it

"The idea of a black box organised at a central level has not actually yet been done in a democratic country," he added."

we can't be No 1 at anything else, from education to broadband speed, at least we got a chance now to be a No 1 snooping democracy. After all, what's that little black box and profiled intelligence, compared with, say, daily bombings and shootings which we face otherwise?

"The notion of British taxpayers paying private companies to hoard communications data on behalf of the UK government was unpalatable, he added."

just lie down and think of Britain. And the children. And the children's children.

6
0
PT
Big Brother

Re: let's go for it

There are at least two, maybe three, companies that make a good living selling DPI equipment for exactly this purpose, and their best customers include central government agencies in English-speaking countries most of us would consider democratic. If Mr Hosein is correct, I imagine the gear was just purchased to use up surplus departmental budget money at the end of the financial year, and the telcos use the waste heat from the secret rooms to keep their offices warm.

1
0
Silver badge
Mushroom

How long

How long before the black boxes get pwned, and all our data becomes available to precisely the people we don't want to have it? (Don't want to have it even more than we don't want the government to have it, that is).

I voted against Labour last time to kill ID cards. Who do I vote for next time? What's UKIP's policy on spying on the populace?

8
0
Go

Re: How long

No party is deeply attached to the idea. Write to your MP and express your views (nicely !) : http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/cdb

1
0
MJI
Silver badge

Move to Haltemprice and Howden

And vote for DD

0
0
MJI
Silver badge

Re: How long

My MP wrote back - seems somewhere in the middle and he is a bit of a rebel.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: How long

I have. Twice.

The first reply told me to think of the children and the terrorists and how important it was to be able to see who's communicating with who over IM and VOIP services!

I am still awaiting a reply to the second asking how they will be able to record endpoints in proprietary and secure IM/VOIP services. It now appears they expect Google/Facebook/MS to provide that data for them! HA (hopefully)!

This is such an almighty waste of money! Glorious leaders, please listen to Tim Berners-Lee who is utterly against this..

4
0
Bronze badge
Big Brother

Re: How long

There's also:

http://www.writetothem.com/

Which will let you email your MP directly. I recommend doing this every once in a while just so they don't forget who they're supposed to be representing.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Write to them?

The problem is that communicating with anyone in officialdom is likely to get you on some sort of watch list. Who can say what the powers that (will) be can use that information for in the future?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: How long

I'd write to my MP but unfortunately my MP now happens to be David bastard bastard bastard Blunkett and let us be honest I don't think writing to him is going to be of any sodding use at all given his previous form.

5
0
Anonymous Coward

At least the police will be able to see if politicians are talking about them, would that be a police state in some way?

I guess there'll be some kind of slip somewhere and some newspaper will somehow discover that some politicianorother has been talking to some mediatycoonorother (while some admin somewhere trips off to Barclays with enough money to embarrass Bob Diamond

oh no, that'll never happen

1
0
Anonymous Coward

And the data will always be 100% true and never tampered with by anyone, a black box can't lie

Obviously the only validity in a black box is that it's always going to tell the trutth otherwise it wouldn't be worth having

We all know nothing weird ever appears in any kind of log files ... ever

0
0
Big Brother

Of course not

They will ensure that their communications are exempt from interception, this law will only apply to the unwashed masses

0
0
Bronze badge

Is this camouflage and diversion?

Data storage by ISPs is for the benefit of relatively low level snoopers such as local councils and plod. It takes some of the cost of surveillance off the government. It also leaves the heavy duty spooks clear from the overhead of intrusions in which such gauleiters indulge. And it diverts public attention from the deeper monitoring of the internet which goes largely unnoticed and unquestioned.

There have apparently been fibre splitters in exchanges for some while now. See, for example, the diagram in the article by Chris Williams in 2008 and the comment by mikus.

www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/29/phorm_documents/

... or maybe it's the thin end of another wedge.

0
0

David Davis consistently votes against bills and articles violating the right to privacy. One of the very, very few people willing to stand up for personal dignity [in this respect].

We're not all guilty, and hiding these bills behind the OMGPAEDOS defence is starting to wear thin. They are nothing to do with that, and everything to do with controlling a medium they're afraid of.

15
2
Anonymous Coward

Paging Mr. Orlowski

Cue Orlowski in all of five minutes telling us that piracy causes terrorism and these measures don't go anywhere near far enough, and are a slap in the face to the content industries and rightsholders...

5
0
Anonymous Coward

Britain

I'm getting out of here as soon as I can.

NZ or Canada are looking increasingly attractive.

3
0
Silver badge
Unhappy

Re: Britain

I'm starting to think that you'll need to find somewhere small, less developed, more chaotic. The Cape Verde islands, maybe? Costa Rica? Iceland? The Swiss have a good attitude but a lousy location. The bigger and more centralized the state, the worse the techno-surveillance will be, and the worse things will be when the trap closes.

0
0
Silver badge

Hypothetical...

Let's say we discovered (Hogwarts Style) magic; there would be no limit whatsoever to the amount of surveillance you could do. Where would our politicians draw the line?

This is the question that should be asked of every Home Sec, prime or cabinet minister: If it were possible to intrude entirely into the lives of every citizen, how much do you think is appropriate?

2
0
Silver badge
Mushroom

Re: Hypothetical...

The question that politicians must ask themselves, is whether they are really happy to have the legislation and the infrastructure passed down to the worst possible successor government they can imagine.

A lesson from history. At the time of German Unification (under Bismark - 1890s) everyone happily traipsed off to fill in a simple form to claim their citizenship of the new German state. Bismark also created the most efficient beurocracy that the world had ever known.Those records were well-preserved, well-copied, well-indexed. Roll forwards 45 years. The parents may already have passed on, but the single word "Jewish" under "religion" sealed the fate of their children and grandchildren and even great-grandchildren.

Do you *still* want the entire map of everyone you, your parents and your children ever communicated with to available to *all* future governments?

0
0

Mixed message

So we need all these powers on the web to watch us and monitor for our own safety?

Because we need to fear the terrorist and the like.

If they are such a credible threat, what cock ordered group 4 security to protect us during the olympics then?

I mean either the snooping laws reasons are massively over exxagerated for some nefarioous reason, or there's going to be a massacre at the velodrome.

1
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.