GCHQ would not conduct mass surveillance - they would just get the US NSA to do for them.so no ECHR oversight.
141 posts • joined 6 Feb 2008
I've yet to ask Cortana a question (windows phone) and get a spoken answer - all she delivers is a Web search so why bother porting her to anything. Currently I consider her a gimmick.
Re: And YOU thought...
Don't know about the other airports but if you enter the US through LAX, on a passport you have previously entered on (and gone though the photo finger print process), you are allowed to use the automatic gates which are signed for Americans.
I discovered this by accident on my last visit in August - it saved me a 60 odd minute wait in the queue for "first time" processing.
Re: And YOU thought...
Visit (or just transit at the airport) the US and that is exactly what they get - you are photographed and fingerprinted by the "very welcoming" (sic) Immigration officer. As a return visit (on the same passport) does not require that process it's reasonable to assume that that is because your statistics have been kept on record from the previous visit.
"He added that Schrems was not required to prove that his own data had been spied upon in order to make a complaint."
Maybe not when the game started but I'm sure Schrems data will be spewing out of NSA printers at a great rate now.
Re: @Barrie: A Morons perspective
My bad then - I'm in Australia so have not kept up to date on all aspects of the Data Protection laws/scope.
A Morons perspective
Councils are expected to protect public money - thus there is a presumption by the rate payers that Councils will investigate if there is a belief that someone is rorting the system. As said in a later comment the misuse of sick leave in the public service is perceived as high by many people.
As for the "data" - I'm no lawyer but I was under the impression that it used to be that information in written records was outside the purview of the Data Protection Act until it became "held in electronic systems". Of course if a digital camera was used by the PI then I guess the photography is captured by the Act. (If there is another "Privacy" Act that the ICO is responsible for then there may be infringement but the report said Data Protection Act.)
And Yes I would authorise investigation if I believed an act of fraud was taking place. If that makes me a moron then I'm happy to be one.
I'm having difficulty understanding how the covert "spying" breached the Data Protection Act.
Despicable as some may think it is has an employer not the right to determine if an employee is rorting the system? It may be an invasion of privacy but I really don't see where data is involved.
Seems to me like the ICO extending it's sphere of influence and assumed power. Or has the report been under-reported and other matters were involved?
Odd how when they get their gong and transit from the Lower to the Upper house they tend to start making the occasional "common sense" statements.
Perhaps Laws should be formulated in the Upper House and sent to the Lower House for approval?
FTC tells 'scan to email' patent troll: Every breath you take, every lie you make, I'll be fining you
....... but it's the law.
It may be the law but what idiotic Patent Office granted a Patent on a obvious process.
What prey is "innovative" in taking a picture of a document and adding an address to it and dropping it in the Interweb ether for delivery. It's just an electronic mailing machine.
We need to ban handset subsidising
It's hi time handset subsidies were outlawed.
All they do is create drawers full of perfectly good handsets and a waste of world resources and increased usage costs for all. The 1/2 year contract imprints the need for a new phone to users who would, if they had to pay the going rate for a handset, think twice about such a regular "upgrade".
Handsets subsidies were fine to kick start the industry when handset costs were high, All they do now is force operators to keep usage costs high, to offset the subsidy to "new" handset owners at the expense of those happy to retain their older handset.
Why should I pay the same usage costs as someone who has just got a new subsidised handset? If operators want to subsidise handsets then they should also be forced to offer SIM only service at appropriately reduced usage costs.
Re: So where the f*** is this coming from?
Could they be from those who trawl the internet looking for VoIP system to hack into? I see similar IPs attempting to access my VoIP box.
Since everyone else seems able to get my metadata why can't I get a copy? Maybe I could try a request under FoI as is being attempted in Australia.
As I see it they are trying to hose down the public outrage.
They don't need to know from your ISP that you visited www.naughtysite.com IF they have a warrant to monitor the traffic of www.naughtysite.com.
They know from the legal monitoring of www.naughtysite.com what IP addresses accessed it, so it's simple to trawl their ISP stored "free access" metadata to find out who that naughty person was.
In other words so long as they monitor the IPs of connections made to a site for which they have a legal interception warrant they will know who accessed it. Sort of reverse engineering!
No amount of hosing down will change this.
They don't trust anyone who doesn't speak American as a native language.
Equally (currently) you could just type his name into Google-dot-another country or just com.
More common sense than the other House
+1 to the un-elected house.
Not tarred with the need to garner votes or bend to influence from corporations and other world governments they have made a very common sense statement. Lets hope the lot at the other end of the corridor take heed.
Lord Denning, and his friend on the Clapham Omnibus, would be impressed.
When comparing product cost between countries it may be better to compare in BigMacs i.e. the local price of the product divided by the local price of a BigMac. :-)
Problem is easily getting the daily cost of a BigMac (without visiting an outlet) is not easy as they have not yet got onto the financial commodity market lists.
They had to replace their routers as the old ones did not have a wide enough NSA back door.
ha Ha Ha
All the naughty boys are now using Yahoo to avoid the NSA Hahaha - the NSA are already there waiting with the decrypt keys.
I seem to remember that the handset subsidy was allowed by the the Regulator at the start up of mobile phone Networks. Handsets were so expensive, as portion of average monthly earnings, that there would be very slow uptake and carriers would effectively have no business model.
That has now changed and handsets are far less expensive but carriers have held onto the subsidy model so they can capture punters with contracts for the "latest and greatest" - effectively distracting punters from assessing the best airtime deals around.
This is now distorting the business as those who don't bother to upgrade to the latest iThingy are still paying for the privilege (through airtime costs) of others who do upgrade through the inflated call costs under pinning the subsidy. Carriers are not charities they just off set the cost of subsidy over the airtime costs to all. Ask yourself why if you go for a SIM only deal do you still pay the same per minute as others who have a new iThingy subsidised handset?
In my view carriers should offer airtime contracts not tied to handset purchase (after all that's all the current arrangements are) then we will see competition in the airtime costs as opposed to the current "I give you the latest and greatest" selling rather than the cost of operating the phone.
"But you already have an account with them, therefore you won't be subject to having a filter pre-configured to 'On'. And even if you did, the answer is as simple as clicking 'Off'."
Not what their email says - I have to go and manager the B thing. While to you it might be as simple as "turning it off" to me it's an unnecessary imposition on me because of other people failings. People should be free to opt in NOT have to opt out.
I want Sky to know that a policy of applying the filter in a preconfigured "On" state and then expecting me to "manage" it is absolutely abhorrent. I'm an adult and should not have to be inconvenienced by others bad parenting skills.
More importantly I am totally opposed to government censorship or censorship by any other "well meaning" groups as none of these organisations can be trusted and scope creep is inevitable.
Increasingly the only avenue left to us is to vote with our pound and leave.
How do I find an ISP that does not impose this unwanted filter? I want to move away from Sky ASAP
All Networks would have a presence on the box.
....configurer one or more base stations as needed, which one controls, so that they provide good coverage of the protected area.
This would require the operator to hold a license for the spectrum - which is owned by the carriers who would not be keen on releasing spectrum for the purpose of a company blocking their signals.
If there was suitable spectrum then a GSM in a box installation like http://openbsc.osmocom.org/trac/ would suffice.
I would have thought that a credible solution would be for the mobile carriers to install a base station in the prison (with Tx's serving each carrier) and for the carriers equipment to advise the prison authorities when a phone within the cell coverage was in use. This would allow more phones to be detected.
Carriers should also be able to arrange for calls from mobiles via the cell to be blocked from connection to the PSTN or just rerouted to the NAS/GCHQ :-)
A white list would allow official Warders phone through.
Re: More than just monitoring machines
Sure they still do AND some serve WiFi out if you buy a drink from them. The one on North Sydney station platform would serve free movie clips and I think WiFi access (for a short period). Not sure if it's still doing it at present
Corrections to the Telstra Statement (i.e. Guilt by omission)
“Telstra does not routinely collect or store our customers’ telecommunications data to undertake mass surveillance on behalf of Australian national security agencies." - we leave that to the Security Agencies that we permit to access our equipment.
"Telstra does not use any traffic monitoring system to conduct mass surveillance on behalf of Australian national security agencies." - We let them collect the data themselves using the equipment we have installed.
"We comply with the law and only collect and disclose information to these agencies only when we are legally required or permitted to do so." - which enables the Agency to present the information they have previously harvested as legally obtained evidence
A little late
The magnetic strip is very much on the way out - replaced by the chip - I doubt that the financial institutions will "facilitate" transfer of the chip coding to a multi vendor card arrangement.
I'm in the DAB+ world of Sydney and while the paper comparison says DAB+ is better than DAB it's still worse than FM and even MW!! On a clear day I could see the top of the DAB transmission tower for Sydney yet the DAB+ signal is far from error free. It drops out and error distorts if I have the receiver anywhere but by the window.
Sydney Talkback stations are on MW (and AM Stereo - but I've never seen a receiver!) which at least is a stable signal even when the set is in the bathroom for the morning swill - something the DAB set cannot deliver.
As for portable use waste of time - batteries give up sooner than the next advert break - maybe the real advocates of DAB are Duracell / EverReady?.
As others have said the use of FM is probably more in cars than homes and the UK's excellent RDS Traffic service should not be lost - on the rare occasions I drive in the Sydney rush hour I wish we had it here!!!
"Documents obtained by the ABC also reveal that the Attorney-General at the time, Mark Dreyfus, was advised that the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) does not have backdoor access to the National Broadband Network."
"I see pigs flying overhead - no wait - they don't need backdoor access if the NSA and China already have it.
Ground the pigs!
That's correct -- everyone in the World is subject to American Laws, and the UK Authorities are happy to oblige with enforcement.
Re: The new battlefield...
".......which limits the speed to 25mph when there's no valid GPS signal ......."
How would that work in a road tunnel? Traffic would come to a virtual standstill.
Just move your street view man onto the road shadow and miraculously the building appear - Bad google!
Re: Billy Bookshelf...
More Scope Creep
"Federal forces protest that they have been outfoxed by moves such as the shift to https and messaging encryption,"
And they will continue to be so. If if they are outfoxed what is the point of additional laws? The crims they are after will always be one step ahead and the "Federal Forces" know that - but it seems like a good excuse for having laws which will scope creep so that the whole, nominally law abiding population, can be monitored and their privacy invaded..
Re: Perhaps you can point us in the direction of this magic software
Start at http://www.nuance.com/for-business/by-solution/customer-service-solutions/solutions-services/inbound-solutions/voice-authentication-biometrics/spid/index.htm
"Nuance S.P.I.D. (Speaker Identification and Detection) is a comprehensive audio processing system that efficiently searches for a target’s voice within a large volume of intercepted calls, "
Not magic and if this much information can be published on the interwebs you can bet that more sophisticated tools are available at GCHQ.
Ignoring the obvious why do they need to keep it for so long just how can Apple claim that the data is anonymised?
They may not store metadata with it like the IMEI / IP you were using but given the advances in voice recognition there will always be the ability to scan the data looking for conversations that match Joe Bloggs voice print.
"It initially phones home to its masters by establishing a HTTP connection to what appear to be a command-and-control server. "
So who is at the end of the address it phones home to?
Smart meters or not joe public will not save money as the supply companies will not want to see current revenue decrease. So the cost per kW will just rise to match the reduction in consumption. In other words it's heads they win tails we loose
Well there is another problem with Streetmaps the links don't link to what you have on the screen. I was trying to show how bad Streetmaps was at showing where Park West Place, London, City of Westminster, UK was.
Horses for Courses
I grew up with OS 1:50,000 maps they are clear and easy to use (and I used Streetmaps to view them) but they don't have individual street names. Streetmaps then zooms into other maps which just don't cut it for me.
When you are looking for particular streets Google are "streets ahead". As an example find Park W Place on Google - clearly visible
as opposed to Streetmaps
Every DMCA request should require a physical seal/stamp or similar to demonstrate that it has been generated by a human after a due diligence process has been completed.
Having a robot trawl through the interweb results of a search engine and throwing millions of DMCA requests out is plain wrong. Using the DCMA process to censor a transparency report is also wrong and sets a dangerous precedent for governments to use similar tactics to hide their ever increasing surveillance/monitoring of our activities.
While I'm at it the crime is copyright theft or similar is not "piracy" - I wish the enlightened (i.e. not in studios pockets) Press would start using that term as the studios have "pirated" the term to add a touch of evil to the crime. IMHO each individual act of copyright theft is a minor civil offence (and should be treated as such) but I agree that the collective impact of a number of acts may damage an industry - to date I think that "Cried wolf too much" gives a better understanding however.
I wonder if the banks will send out DMCA requests to Google claiming that even mentioning their name and addresses (never mind street view issues) encourages bank robbers to steal from them??
What has happened just to the south of Kings Cross St Pancras? - a load of houses look as though the ground has folded up around them taking the foundations with them.
"........he's almost certainly wrong, humankind being humankind. "
Do we really need this level of Political Correctness in a technical article? The word MAN (Hu man kind) is still in it so it still presents an insult to those who have issues with (their view) sexist language - mankind has served us well lets keep it going.
Leave the English language alone lest we all fall down a humanhole in the road.
End of PC rant.
The advantage of being able to move the SIM from a broken phone (or one with a flat batter) to a working friends or second phone will be lost and I can't see the Networks being keen on allowing other Networks to be added to the hardware "SIM" in the phone.
Damn silly idea designed to give what little control consumers still have back to the networks.
Re: I'm sorry...
czsaloco writes; "If France keeps this up they'll find themselves shut off to the modern world as companies refuse to talk to them anymore"
That is probably what the french government raelly want - it would halt the dilution of the french language/culture/way of life/values etc.
Re: CMOS "Button cells"?
Mage say's "Mercury based thermometers and blood pressure are long obsolete."
Not at two GP's I visit or the ward of a Hospital on another visit for blood pressure monitoring. When I asked "why" I was told that it's a cheap, reliable, accurate instrument that does not need power, calibration or significant maintenance.
If you have tried one of the "cheap" home blood pressure monitors you will find it difficult to get 3/4 successive readings even approaching the same numbers.
Time for change
"Guaranteeing a price until 2015 is tough, but when that money is needed to subsidise the cost of the latest iThingy, it's even harder. "
"free/subsidised" handsets should be banned. The concept was designed 20 years ago to get people onto the new networks. As virtually everyone now has a handset there should be no need for linking into the service provision cost.
Networks should be forced to disconnect the costs of handset purchase from service provision - the current linking creates an unfair cross-subsidy for those on SIM only deals. If people really must have the newest iThingy then let them go get finance in the open market to buy it. There would also be the benefit of less old iThing's sitting in draws and maybe the iThingy manufacturers will think about getting their costs down to consumer acceptable levels as opposed to the inflated levels they can convince a network to pay - a Network that knows it can squeeze money without effort from the final customer.
While I'm ranting can the Register start a Save Our SIM (how does one start this on Facebook?) campaign to stop the American iThingy manufactures locking our phone to them and chosen Networks with wired in SIMs - I want to roam Europe and the world swapping my SIM as the plane lands - not having to negotiate with a walled garden about which carrier they will let me use.