[Chapter-delegates] FW: Giant database plan 'Orwellian'
Tricia Drakes
tricia.drakes at x2all.com
Wed Oct 22 03:40:28 PDT 2008
-----Original Message-----
From: Tricia Drakes [mailto:tricia.drakes at x2all.com]
Sent: 22 October 2008 10:19
To: 'Christian de Larrinaga'; 'patrick at vande-walle.eu'; 'Veni Markovski'
Cc: 'Chapter Delegates'
Subject: RE: [Chapter-delegates] Giant database plan 'Orwellian'
Many thanks Christian!
The recent report by the National Academy of Sciences "Protecting Individual
Privacy in the Struggle Against Terrorists: A Framework for Assessment" is
relevant reading!
"In this report, the Committee on Technical and Privacy Dimensions of
Information for Terrorism Prevention and Other National Goals examines the
role of data mining and behavioral surveillance technologies in
counterterrorism programs, and it provides a framework for making decisions
about deploying and evaluating those and other information-based programs on
the basis of their effectiveness and associated risks to personal privacy."
It is available to read free on the site below, and a free PDF summary is
also available for download. (Also attached!).
http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12452#toc
With many good wishes.
Tricia
+44 7768 517567
-----Original Message-----
From:
chapter-delegates-bounces+tricia.drakes=parvil.demon.co.uk at elists.isoc.org
[mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces+tricia.drakes=parvil.demon.co.uk at elists.is
oc.org] On Behalf Of Christian de Larrinaga
Sent: 22 October 2008 09:47
To: patrick at vande-walle.eu; Veni Markovski
Cc: Chapter Delegates
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] Giant database plan 'Orwellian'
Since my reply below the UK's Director of Criminal Prosecutions has
also joined a growing chorus of concern to make a public warning about
the huge extensions being proposed to surveillance and its impact on
society.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/21/dpp_civil_liberties_speech/
Christian
On 20 Oct 2008, at 17:46, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
> It is a nice theory to believe that privacy directives will be able
> to manage privacy in practice but I think the BBC story should be
> taken a bit more seriously.
>
> see http://www.openrightsgroup.org/
>
> The British Information Commissioner has expressed many times his
> disquiet over the way things are developing towards a surveillance
> society.
>
> http://www.ico.gov.uk/about_us/news_and_views/current_topics.aspx
>
> The precedent of the conduct by the UK government with previous UK
> legislation such as RIPA where promises of limited applicability
> made by ministers were broken within a couple of years and the even
> more recent massive data losses of personal data that the Government
> makes for a justifiable scepticism.
>
> There are some links here http://www.fipr.org/policy.html
>
> What I think needs to be understood is that the proposal is
> intelligence led by GCHQ not the police (ACPO). The Home Office is
> itself divided. The police just want to be able to tap phones and
> stuff when then want.
>
> The reaction on this list that users deploy encryption is telling.
> However the data they want to record is traffic data not the content
> itself. So encrypting your emails won't stop the authorities from
> drawing the inevitable conclusion from who your talk to, who they
> talk to and what websites you visit and so forth.
>
>
> There have to be consequences from the combination of separate
> pervasive surveillance and recording measures for fishing
> expeditions rather than focusing resources to develop ways to assist
> targeting serious criminal investigations.
>
> My concern is governments today see electronic communications not as
> a better way for society to find the bad eggs but as justification
> for government to know everything we do so they find the bad eggs.
>
> The consequence of this is massive information centralisation at the
> risk of deteriorating the public's desire and ability to act in its
> own defence.
>
> This is odd when the Internet architectures are at there best
> supporting decentralisation. It also makes for a much worse life due
> to the inconvenience and unpredictability of being placed under
> continuous investigation without cause by people we cannot in any
> significant way influence because we cannot know what they are
> actually doing.
>
> An oped by Bruce Schneier 2007 How To Not Catch Terrorists is worth
> the read http://www.schneier.com/essay-163.html
>
>
> Christian
>
>
>
> On 18 Oct 2008, at 12:01, Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
>
>> I think some background is needed here. The Beeb article draws a
>> unnecessary dark picture by forgetting to mention that all this data
>> retention is also regulated by other directives regarding privacy of
>> personal data, which are considered the most stringent ones in the
>> world.
>>
>> As Veni mentions, the UK is only transposing an EU directive. The
>> directive itself harmonizes an,d updates what member states have been
>> doing for years. Even before the Internet became a major
>> communication
>> tool, telephone call listings were used in support of police
>> investigations.
>>
>> We are fortunate enough in Europe to have democratic governments
>> under
>> permanent scrunity from their parliaments. So I think we are pretty
>> safe
>> that an Orwerllian plan could not be deployed unbeknownst of
>> anyone. I
>> would point out that countries who do -or previously did- large scale
>> monitoring of their population usually do not even bother passing
>> laws
>> to allow that.
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>> Veni Markovski wrote, On 17/10/08 18:48:
>>> These requirements are part of EU Directive 24 / 2006, so I don't
>>> see
>>> anything to worry about. Yes, they could store the data could have
>>> been
>>> 6 months (the minimum), or 24 (max). PGP will not help, if you are
>>> committing a crime :)
>>>
>>> veni
>>>
>>> At 03:45 AM 10/18/2008 +1200, Franck Martin wrote:
>>>> Time to use PGP and IPSec
>>>>
>>>> This link came up in the IGC mailing list... Posted here for
>>>> discussion.
>>>>
>>>>
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7671046.stm>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/
hi/uk_politics/7671046.stm
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Excerpts from this UK news:
>>>>
>>>> Details of the times, dates, duration and locations of mobile phone
>>>> calls, numbers called, website visited and addresses e-mailed are
>>>> already stored by telecoms companies for 12 months under a
>>>> voluntary
>>>> agreement.
>>>>
>>>> The data can be accessed by the police and security services on
>>>> request - but the government plans to take control of the process
>>>> in
>>>> order to comply with an EU directive and make it easier for
>>>> investigators to do their job.
>>>>
>>>> Information will be kept for two years by law and may be held
>>>> centrally on a searchable database.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Chapter-delegates mailing list
>>> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>>> http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Patrick Vande Walle
>> Check my blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Chapter-delegates mailing list
>> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>> http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
_______________________________________________
Chapter-delegates mailing list
Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: NAS 12452_EXS.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 190886 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20081022/d3eb11dc/attachment.pdf>
More information about the Chapter-delegates
mailing list