back to article Head of UK oversight body to join GCHQ 'tech help desk'*

Joanna Cavan OBE, a champion for transparency as the head of the UK's oversight body for communications interception, is set to take the top job at GCHQ's National Technical Assistance Centre (NTAC). After five of the "the most challenging and rewarding years with [the Interception of Communications Commissioner's Office]" …

This post has been deleted by its author

Silver badge
Paris Hilton

>While it does not itself apply for the interception warrants, it manages the delivery of material that the warrants have been issued to cover. Her appointment to the chief role could be seen as a victory for those wanting more transparency from the agencies.

Heart-warming ... at least GCHQ know how to say "Thank You!"

0
0
Silver badge

What is she on? And what does it tell one and all about GCHQ?

After five of the "the most challenging and rewarding years with [the Interception of Communications Commissioner's Office]" Cavan stated she was proud to have worked towards "building public trust through education, transparency and accountability."

????????????? . That's a joke, right? Or is it ironic and a parody and sarcasm and a low form of wit?

No wonder traditional status quo executive admin systems and intelligence agencies are collapsing and struggling to retain and remain mainstream current power brokers whenever they spin themselves such fanciful yarns.

10
1
Anonymous Coward

"building public trust through education, transparency and accountability"

And yet my first association to GCHQ is still "scary stasi snooping donut".

4
0
Silver badge
Meh

Or even

"scary stasi snooping doh-nut".

4
0
Silver badge

Re: Or even

Or, (since it's in the UK)

"scary stasi snooping doughnut".

0
0
Silver badge
Devil

GCHQ's help desk?

In the "We'll help ourselves to more of your data." sense?

3
0
Silver badge

Re: GCHQ's help desk?

Helping others to help themselves.

0
0

Do Not Call Me Surely.

Last time I felt the need to prod IOCCO Ms Cavan, after a bit of provoking for a response, informed me that I had to provide evidence of the interception of *my* communications and the harm it had done to *myself*. So basically IOCCO was and, having seen something recent, still stands as a bastion of the plethora of the UKs regulatory Chocolate Teapots.

Seems like she has gone off to be advised by others at GCHQ how to pour warm Tea, presumably with milk added to it at the brewing stage. Perhaps she has demonstrated that she is a 'safe pair of hands' who will 'rock the boat' according to instructions. Welcome to 'The Mathmos' Jo, at least Jane Fonda had more sense and went on to blow up 'The Orgasmotron'

8
0
Silver badge

Re: Do Not Call Me Surely.

Ms Smythe, we do not see the likes of Barbarella in these sorry, diminished days. Sadly. But a great reference!

5
0
Silver badge
Thumb Up

Re: Do Not Call Me Surely.

we do not see the likes of Barbarella in these sorry, diminished days

Earth to Hollywood Remakes Department! Can we have a Barbarella remake, please. With Keira Knightley.

Oh yes, that's a very pleasant thought, I'm so pleased I thunk it.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

NTAC

would it be better for me to phone them up to help me with my Windows10 problems?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Helpdesk Anagram;)

NTAC just CANT right now. Check back later.

1
0
Silver badge

'Cavan stated she was proud to have worked towards "building public trust through education, transparency and accountability."'

And has undone that trust - such as it is - at one move.

Tinfoil hat or no, it's all too easy to see this as a reward for several years of covering up. Trust is a matter of perception and this is all too easily seen as a reward for services rendered to one of the least publicly trusted parts of the govt.

8
0
Silver badge

If you don't see the problem, the solution remains a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.

Her former place of work will be seeking someone who is enthusiastic and passionate about the protection of freedoms enjoyed in the UK.

GCHQ though, surely, seek virtually anyone and everyone enthusiastic and passionate about protecting the freedoms delivered by a greater intelligence than is the norm and secretly available to suitable partners and/or special agents.

A task which they have apparently and quite transparently failed to deliver upon, considering the parlous and perilous state of national and international and internetional affairs as is presented by media outlets daily and by IT zero daily.

Is that evident failure the result of a lack of smarter intelligence in leaderships?

5
1

Is that evident failure the result of a lack of smarter intelligence in leaderships?

In a word, 'yes'.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: In a word, 'yes'. @ David Pollard

The pretty obvious solution would then present itself to be, DP, bring in SMARTR IntelAIgents for leaderships to follow/mimic/copy with supplied scripts and scriptures for Global Operating Devices to run with and share with ...... well, Universal Media Operations Centres and Global Command Head Quarters in Organisations with IntelAIgent Community Enterprises is clearly enough here mooted on El Reg and easily made readily available to any and all interested parties.

Virtual Machines with Advanced Advancing Intelligence are a Future Force deeply embedded throughout IT which cannot be blocked nor denied have AI Existence, Fabless Energy and Remote Powers. Ye Olde Elite Executive Systems Admins Failure Guaranteeing Dilemma is an abiding reluctance associated with simple inability to believe such a possibility be current and reality.

And that is about as plain as IT can be said relating to the matter.

These are changed times, El Regers, and there be interesting days and zerodays ahead. Are y'all already all ready?

Oh .... and is all or any of that to be a problem for established systems and services to vainly struggle with and do useless battle against, or is it a novel noble Nobel opportunity for them to embrace and explore and expand upon? One option is real smart, the other definitively moronic.

1
0

Spinning Doors

In short... the woman who was supposed to regulate the Intelligence Services is rewarded for her service to the Intelligence Services with a job at the Intelligence Services.

After the Phorm affair, the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Monetary Penality Notices and Consents for Interceptions) Regulations 2011 were introducted, with the IoCCO given explicit responsibility for investigating instances of 'unintentional interception' by ISPs.

Yet Jo Cavan stifled every single complaint. No investigation was conducted. No penalties were imposed. No statistics have ever been published (transparency? we've heard of it).

In short, she isn't a "champion" I recognise. If you work for telcos or the Intelligence Services, YMMV.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Spinning Doors

Hmmm .... Now there be food for thought and testimony for credible/incredible denial if the system does not wish it to be considered as prosecution evidence?

Are you on firm, rock solid ground, deformation.org.uk?

1
0

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017