Government to monitor Internet Use - Page 10

nomadking · 22-04-2013, 10:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

What the stupid government do not understand is anyone doing anything seriously wrong will have methods in place so they can not be traced anyway. Hacked WIFI networks Burner phones with internet access tethering to these devices Tor VPNs and methods far more advanced than this. All they will ever snoop and trace is the petty criminal and Joe Public with nothing to hide. A total waste of money

Knowing that somebody has been taking such extreme measures is useful in itself. How would they be able to have an indication of what somebody was doing just an hour earlier if they didn't record this sort of info? They are not going to be randomly picking somebody to look at in detail. If they identify someone that they need to look at, then they need to be able to what has been going on previously, not just from that point onwards.

**Damien** · 22-04-2013, 10:40

Besides as soon as a Minister gets their head around the concept of a VPN they'll probably try and make it illegal to use one. Problem solved.

tweetiepooh · 22-04-2013, 15:42

Big terror threats are more autonomous small groups working more independently. Even the goals could be different they just happen to be travelling the same bit of road at this time. Hey, even if they don't actually get to "do" anything think of the expense in trying to stop them.
---
And the government aren't (all) stupid. They can get a good head of steam worked up and then

1)Abandon the change - we do listen after all
2)Something happens or is prevented from happening - hey what a good idea this really is.

What they can't do is nothing. In the case of 2) then they get it in the neck of if you could have stopped it by ... why didn't you?

**Damien** · 22-04-2013, 16:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh

What they can't do is nothing. In the case of 2) then they get it in the neck of if you could have stopped it by ... why didn't you?

Well at the moment they could stay they don't track all of the Internet all the time and that would be acceptable. Leaving aside any 'special' abilities GCHQ have to monitor for troubling behavior the security services can already access some information about possible suspects by querying the providers for whichever service they want to check. The difference is the level of effort involved, multiple providers, you need a warrant, you need a reason.

This is to change that so it's a lot quicker. They would still need to specifically look a person up but the ease of it and the lack of a warrant means the checks can be speculative and be done by a wider range of people. Not to mention the dangers in having this all centralised and cross-referenced.

Uncle Peter · 22-04-2013, 16:52

It's reasonable to speculate that our friends in the West have the capability to, at very least track endpoints for any traffic passing via these shores given the proximity of certain facilities to cable landing points (Morwenstow, Scarborough etc). That would put the likes of backhaul links from TAT, FLAG, UK-Germany etc.. within the scope of covert monitoring. Not to mention INMARSAT, INTELSAT etc.

22-04-2013, 17:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

Besides as soon as a Minister gets their head around the concept of a VPN they'll probably try and make it illegal to use one. Problem solved.

they can not possibly do that as far to many businesses rely on VPNs to operate so not problem solved

oh and making something illegal to use to stop someone who is doing something illegal is not going to work either

**Damien** · 25-04-2013, 12:27

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...legg-agreement

Quote:

Nick Clegg has vetoed Theresa May's rewritten 'web snooper's charter', killing off the home secretary's last remaining hopes of getting any communications data legislation in the Queen's speech.

Mmmm...cautiously pleased. Well done Clegg. I still don't trust him not to u-turn on it or simply let it happen with a different name but anything that can be done to kill it for now is welcome. I imagine it will keep coming back though.

Don't understand the big deal about the Queen's Speech however. The Government can introduce bills whenever it wants can't it?

**Damien** · 25-04-2013, 14:16

We haven't heard from the Conservatives yet and I don't expect we've heard the end of this. Someone is lobbying for this hard. It reared it's head under Labour and now Conservatives and will it come up again. Need to constantly be aware and ready to crush it each and every time.

Anonymouse · 25-04-2013, 14:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

Knowing that somebody has been taking such extreme measures is useful in itself. How would they be able to have an indication of what somebody was doing just an hour earlier if they didn't record this sort of info? They are not going to be randomly picking somebody to look at in detail. If they identify someone that they need to look at, then they need to be able to what has been going on previously, not just from that point onwards.

I must point out - again - that this business is about the difference between a desire for privacy based on nothing more than not wanting the government to know what you're doing because it;s none of their bleeping business, and having something to hide. If it takes extreme measures to achieve privacy, then people will take them.

The government does not have an automatic right to know what its citizens are doing online. That is not why they are in government. They are appointed to protect, not remove, peoples' rights. It's high time they remembered that.

(Hi, Echelon, snooping and should-be-illegal malware that you are!)

**Hugh** · 25-04-2013, 18:55

What Anonymouse said...

**Maggy** · 25-04-2013, 19:10

Thirded.

Tezcatlipoca · 25-04-2013, 19:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

We haven't heard from the Conservatives yet and I don't expect we've heard the end of this. Someone is lobbying for this hard. It reared it's head under Labour and now Conservatives and will it come up again. Need to constantly be aware and ready to crush it each and every time.

Oh, I'm sure there will still be a push for it...

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35510436-post127.html

**Damien** · 25-04-2013, 21:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt D

Oh, I'm sure there will still be a push for it...

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35510436-post127.html

You do get the sense it's just a matter of time before it comes up again.

Chrysalis · 02-05-2013, 00:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...legg-agreement

Mmmm...cautiously pleased. Well done Clegg. I still don't trust him not to u-turn on it or simply let it happen with a different name but anything that can be done to kill it for now is welcome. I imagine it will keep coming back though.

Don't understand the big deal about the Queen's Speech however. The Government can introduce bills whenever it wants can't it?

what about this, apparently we broke and in austerity.

Quote:

Davis said it raised the question as to why the Home Office spent more than £400m developing the proposals when it clearly never had enough support within government to go ahead.

and this is a reason why the government needs to get its act together on ipv6. As realistically every device cannot have its own internet ipv4. Instead we have isps testing the dreaded carrier grade NAT, presumably because they see it as cheaper tech. Certianly static ips are better for security as well yet the big isp's like BT have dialup style dynamic ip's.

Quote:

Clegg's only concession during the interview was that the government should look at whether there should be an internet protocol (IP) address for every device, which police and security services have lobbied for. Further work is expected on how new legislation might be introduced to deal with the limited problem faced by the police in matching IP addresses with individual mobile phones or computers.

---------- Post added at 00:55 ---------- Previous post was at 00:50 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt D

Oh, I'm sure there will still be a push for it...

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35510436-post127.html

Of course, when government changes often the advisors do not. This I also believe is a reason why we see many proposals stick around even when governments change.

Fawkes · 08-05-2013, 18:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

You do get the sense it's just a matter of time before it comes up again.

Well that didn't take long: 'Fresh proposals' planned over cyber-monitoring

Quote:

The government says one of the problems is IP addresses are shared between a number of people, or devices.

"In order to know who has actually sent an email or made a Skype call the police need to know who has used a certain IP address at a given point in time," it says.

They government says it is "looking at ways of addressing this issue... it may involve legislation".