Government to monitor Internet Use - Page 6

papa smurf · 08-04-2012, 16:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fawkes

Hackers 'target Home Office site'

Peaceful protest of government plans to monitor the internet or playing right into the governments hands, justifying the very thing they are protesting against?

or is the gov behind the hack

Fawkes · 08-04-2012, 16:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

or is the gov behind the hack

No, they don't work weekends.

Mactire · 08-04-2012, 19:42

Prevention is better than cure.. is all Im sayin'

**Stuart** · 08-04-2012, 21:06

The more I think about this, the more I am concerned.

Not actually so much by this law, but by what happens afterward..

Why am I not concerned about this law? Simply because I don't believe it will work. Why don't I believe it will work? Well, the government has made it public. An act that will tell every terrorist group and criminal that their electronic communications are likely to be monitored. As such, they are going to switch to encrypted communications that are bounced off many proxies.

GCHQ may catch a few terrorists, but how many of the really competent (and therefore dangerous) ones are they likely to get?

No, my concern is this... They introduced the last law saying it was to catch terrorists. Clearly it hasn't worked as well as they want, as they want the new law. What will they want in three years time when this fails?

**Hugh** · 09-04-2012, 08:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mactire

Prevention is better than cure.. is all Im sayin'

Might be a bit difficult to close down the Internet......

Gary L · 09-04-2012, 08:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart

As such, they are going to switch to encrypted communications that are bounced off many proxies.

Or just use an open wifi connection. there's 1,000's out there.

because it's being 'monitored' you'll probably get loads of people messing about by connecting to an open wifi and saying where they're going to put the bomb.

then we'll have that much distruption that someone will smack Dave's head and say DOH!

**Matt D** · 05-05-2012, 12:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fawkes

Guess what Matt?

Refused.

The Home Office has failed to respond to my request, despite the law stating that they must respond promptly and within 20 working days.

So... I've requested an Internal Review

WhatDoTheyKnow.com - "Theresa May's Internet History"

Fawkes · 05-05-2012, 13:53

That's so not like the Home Office to miss a deadline!

**Matt D** · 05-05-2012, 14:24

Yes, they do seem to have a problem with using calendars

**Damien** · 09-05-2012, 10:45

The government has included this in the Queens Speech. They look like they are going to try and do it.

Anonymouse · 09-05-2012, 12:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart

No, my concern is this... They introduced the last law saying it was to catch terrorists. Clearly it hasn't worked as well as they want, as they want the new law. What will they want in three years time when this fails?

Well spotted there, Stuart.

It hasn't worked at all as far as I can see. And, three years? I doubt they'll even wait that long. They'll have to get it in before the next general election, especially as I read somewhere that the Lib Dems are talking about leaving the coalition.

**Matt D** · 09-05-2012, 17:40

So, the Home Office finally replied to my FOI request asking for Theresa May's Internet History... and surprise surprise, they claim they had no records of my original request!

Funny, that...

Quote:

We are confident that we have carried out the necessary checks and have found no records of your original request on any of our systems

As such, the clock has been reset, and they are taking the 4th of May as the official start date, which gives them another month to avoid answering...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

The government has included this in the Queens Speech. They look like they are going to try and do it.

Yep

"Queen's Speech: Internet monitoring plan to have 'strict safeguards' "

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBC News

Plans to make it easier for the police and intelligence agencies to monitor e-mails, phone calls and internet use have been unveiled, but with promises of "strict safeguards".

The Draft Communications Bill would update existing procedures for allowing access to "vital" information.

This includes phone numbers and e-mail addresses but not content of messages.

Civil liberties groups said they were dismayed by the plan, which they described as a "snooper's charter".

(snip)

Bloody ridiculous, this and the porn blocking. One of the few things I liked about the Coalition two years ago was that it seemed that it may actually be better than New Labour regarding civil liberties... But noooo... they've turned out to be just another bunch of authoritarian nanny-state arses

From the same article, David Davis (the only Tory MP I like or respect) had this to say...

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBC News

And former shadow home secretary David Davis, a frequent critic of the extension of state powers, said the proposals would be costly to implement and were "very similar" to the last Labour government's plans for a communications database dropped following Tory opposition.

He told MPs it would be "pretty straightforward" for terrorists to avoid scrutiny under the plans by using proxy servers and multiple phones.

"We will create something which will not be effective against terrorism but which will be a general purpose surveillance on the entire nation."

**Damien** · 09-05-2012, 17:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt D

Bloody ridiculous, this and the porn blocking. One of the few good things about the Coalition two years ago was that it seemed that it may actually be better than New Labour regarding civil liberties... But noooo... they've turned out to be just another bunch of authoritarian nanny-state arses

.

That it isn't it? It's not just that you expected better from the Liberal Democrats but both them and the Tories were strong critics of Labour's authoritarian policies. Now, just two years into power, they are advocating measures that go beyond that Labour tried to do. Their monitoring plan is the same policy they both attacked Labour for when in opposition, it goes further than that even.

Politicians and governments lying is nothing new but the sheer audacity of introducing the same policy so near to the time you opposed it is remarkable.

martyh · 09-05-2012, 18:01

I wonder if Labour will now reverse their stance officially and start oposing this,or will they stay quiet hoping that the coalition will do their dirty work for them

Fawkes · 09-05-2012, 19:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt D

Bloody ridiculous, this and the porn blocking. One of the few things I liked about the Coalition two years ago was that it seemed that it may actually be better than New Labour regarding civil liberties... But noooo... they've turned out to be just another bunch of authoritarian nanny-state arses

Well Theresa May was against the nanny state in opposition in 2004:

Quote:

Mrs May said families did not need a nanny looking over their shoulder and "tutting disapprovingly every time they make a decision that does not meet with government approval".

Mrs May told BBC Radio 4's The World at One: "At least Mrs Hodge has admitted what many have been saying for years, that the government is intent on interfering and controlling every aspect of our lives.

"Families want the freedom to make their own choices over how they run their lives."

From news.bbc.co.uk