Privacy and the State

[Richard Barrett]

Good points all

... however informed they might be by an obsession with seeing the personal-taxation implications of everything that happens in the world... but surely supporting a Supreme Court in devoting the necessary time and effort to discussing matters of this kind is a completely appropriate use of taxpayers' money.

[ahinton]

... however informed they might be by an obsession with seeing the personal-taxation implications of everything that happens in the world... but surely supporting a Supreme Court in devoting the necessary time and effort to discussing matters of this kind is a completely appropriate use of taxpayers' money.

Of course it is; I would never think to suggest otherwise. What strikes me as a waste of taxpayers' money, however, is the inevitable consequence of having two taxpayer-funded judges at the respective levels of these ones in their profession spouting forth views that reveal what appears to be a loggerheads situation that should surely never have arisen; the law is the law and it is surely most odd that two such senior figures in the US judiciary take such opposing sides in a matter of such importance? What worries me is that, when it all does get to that Supreme Court (as indeed it must), will it be possible to trust the ultimate outcome when the current situation appears already to incite such divisive interpretations of the law at such high levels?

But OK, let's leave the taxpayer funding out of the argument, then and refer not to "taxpayers" but to American citizens subject to US laws; what kind of impression does it give to them when two such apparently expert legal figures assume diametrically opposed stances on the interpretation of a matter of law on whose importance we agree?

[amateur51]

Another chilling set of revelations about NSA's data-gathering activities ...

"The National Security Agency has collected almost 200 million text messages a day from across the globe, using them to extract data including location, contact networks and credit card details, according to top-secret documents."

"The untargeted collection and storage of SMS messages – including their contacts – is revealed in a joint investigation between the Guardian and the UK’s Channel 4 News based on material provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.

The documents also reveal the UK spy agency GCHQ has made use of the NSA database to search the metadata of “untargeted and unwarranted” communications belonging to people in the UK."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/16/nsa-collects-millions-text-messages-daily-untargeted-global-sweep

So is it only 'left-wing obsessives' like me who worry about this?

Apparently not, as is revealed by Vodafone's statement ...

"A GCHQ spokesman refused to comment on any particular matters, but said all its intelligence activities were in compliance with UK law and oversight.

But Vodafone, one of the world’s largest mobile phone companies with operations in 25 countries including Britain, greeted the latest revelations with shock.

“It’s the first we’ve heard about it and naturally we’re shocked and surprised,” the group’s privacy officer and head of legal for privacy, security and content standards told Channel 4 News.

“What you’re describing sounds concerning to us because the regime that we are required to comply with is very clear and we will only disclose information to governments where we are legally compelled to do so, won’t go beyond the law and comply with due process.

“But what you’re describing is something that sounds as if that’s been circumvented. And for us as a business this is anathema because our whole business is founded on protecting privacy as a fundamental imperative.”

He said the company would be challenging the UK government over this. “From our perspective, the law is there to protect our customers and it doesn’t sound as if that is what is necessarily happening.”

The NSA’s access to, and storage of, the content of communications of UK citizens may also be contentious in the light of earlier Guardian revelations that the agency was drafting policies to facilitate spying on the citizens of its allies, including the UK and Australia, which would – if enacted – enable the agency to search its databases for UK citizens without informing GCHQ or UK politicians."

It's all way out of control and Obama and Cameron need to be held accountable to the electorate. Obama seems to be aware of this, but Cameron, who I suspect is way out of his depth on all this, is keeping schtum and letting GCHQ take the flak, such as it is.

So much for the parliamentary security oversight committee chaired by Sir Malcolm Rifkind. Does it make you sleep any more soundly that he is the principal overseer of the whole surveillance enterprise?

[teamsaint]

not even making the front screen on Google news tonight.
Now there's a thing.
one day we will stop putting up with the appalling way our governments are treating us. It will happen, sooner or later, and the breathtaking arrogance of the powerful will rebound on them.

[amateur51]

"Internet service providers from around the world are lodging formal complaints against the UK government's monitoring service, GCHQ, alleging that it uses "malicious software" to break into their networks.

The claims from seven organisations based in six countries – the UK, Netherlands, US, South Korea, Germany and Zimbabwe – will add to international pressure on the British government following Edward Snowden's revelations about mass surveillance of the internet by UK and US intelligence agencies"

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/02/isp-gchq-mass-surveillance-privacy-court-claim

We don't hear much about Edward Snowden these days, do we

[ahinton]

"Internet service providers from around the world are lodging formal complaints against the UK government's monitoring service, GCHQ, alleging that it uses "malicious software" to break into their networks.

The claims from seven organisations based in six countries – the UK, Netherlands, US, South Korea, Germany and Zimbabwe – will add to international pressure on the British government following Edward Snowden's revelations about mass surveillance of the internet by UK and US intelligence agencies"

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/02/isp-gchq-mass-surveillance-privacy-court-claim

We don't hear much about Edward Snowden these days, do we

No, but I don't doubt that we will and that he's lying low for the time being for a good reason or set of reasons.

That said, it's surely rather worrying that GCHQ appear to be able to employ this malware to do what they're aiming to do but its victims appear not yet to have developed effective software defences against it, wouldn't you say? OK, this would clearly not be a job for Malwarebytes Pro, but one would assume that development and constant maintenance and updating of a high level equivalent thereto would be high on the minds of the IT guys at the organisations being targeted? Anyway, I wish them luck in their actions.

[amateur51]

No, but I don't doubt that we will and that he's lying low for the time being for a good reason or set of reasons.

That said, it's surely rather worrying that GCHQ appear to be able to employ this malware to do what they're aiming to do but its victims appear not yet to have developed effective software defences against it, wouldn't you say? OK, this would clearly not be a job for Malwarebytes Pro, but one would assume that development and constant maintenance and updating of a high level equivalent thereto would be high on the minds of the IT guys at the organisations being targeted? Anyway, I wish them luck in their actions.

Yes indeed.

Y'know, I almost miss Mr Pee at a time like this.

I did write "almost"

[P. G. Tipps]

Yes indeed.

Y'know, I almost miss Mr Pee at a time like this.

I did write "almost"

Shameful.

[Tony Halstead]

Yes indeed.

Y'know, I almost miss Mr Pee at a time like this.

I did write "almost"

I do indeed miss Mr Pee in a sort of 'tepid' way ( which reminds me, when I was about 19 I received my very first 'slap in the face' from my then girl-friend. I had told her in a sort of naive way that I was 'tepidly in love' with her...oh dear, wrong word..

[ahinton]

For those who've joined the forum since Mr Pee departed it and might not otherwise know, his typical response to this kind of issue was to trot out the tired (not merely tepid!) cliché that "if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear" - which, to be believable, should perhaps read "if you've done nothing wrong you have everything to fear"...

[french frank]

Perhaps there needs to be something of a corrective here. Although I disagreed with the said member on all the main current affairs topics on which he expressed an opinion, he was excluded from this particular forum (he is not banned) because, being a minority party, his presence simply started silly abusive so-called discussions which were precisely the reason that Politics & Current Affairs was moved away from the main forum. Many members here seemed to enjoy these 'battles' but since they are still publicly visible (and therefore all forum members can join in) they were left alone by all but the small handful who post here regularly.

In fact, I felt very uneasy about choosing Mr Pee to exclude - as I told him - but it was clear that, as the others whose views seemed to 'create problems' here had themselves chosen to have their accounts deleted (Scottycelt, Resurrection Man, An Inspector Calls), it was largely Mr Pee's presence that continued to make the forum seem (in my view) like a primary school playground. I felt that debates between people who disagreed would become more civilised among people people whose primary aim was not to attack others for their views, rather to attack the views. I think that has been the case.

As a reminder - this is not a platform for free speech on anything and everything. I'm sure such platforms exist elsewhere.

[amateur51]

Obama's done it again ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28171416

[ahinton]

Obama's done it again ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28171416

Well, I don't think that Obama himself's done it but he has to take the rap for it, of course.

[amateur51]

Perhaps there needs to be something of a corrective here

Other interpretations and analyses are available

[teamsaint]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28237111

So, under the new law, the government definitely won't be able to intercept your personal communications.
Not unless it wants to.
In which case, it can.
Great.



On which, my favourite quote was the young man who commented about the possiblity of his mobile phone being tapped said " Well I hope they are getting all the texts from Dominos Pizza".