Facebook, Bebo and My Space could be monitored by the government.

mewbie_2

It might be fairly easy and cheap to monitor for certain key phrases like "build a bomb", "selling coke", "child pornography". Although I object to some aspects of privacy invasion I don't really think that a bunch of sad losers who choose to spend their time posting inanities on internet sites can complain if someone wants to monitor them. They, er we, should be flattered.

Rochdale_Pioneers

Graham_Devon wrote: »

All the more reason to get the tories in quick sharpish then.

You think the Tories propose to leave the EU then?

Wookster

StevieJ wrote: »

A European Union statutory order, called the Data Retention Directive, already proposes that internet service providers in member states store communications and traffic data for one year.

However this is not what Labour is proposing is it? They are proposing a gigantic database, stored (indefinitely) on government servers that will mine information and build dossiers on everyone.

This is a far cry from the requirement of of ISPs & mobile networks to store communications & traffic data for one year.

Another prime example of Rochdale stretching the truth...

mewbie_2

Wookster wrote: »

They are proposing a gigantic database, stored (indefinitely) on government servers that will mine information and build dossiers on everyone.

... coming to a car park, laptop on train, or snail mailed cd's near you very soon.

Wookster

mewbie wrote: »

... coming to a car park, laptop on train, or snail mailed cd's near you very soon.

Free with the Metro at Waterloo :rolleyes:

Rochdale_Pioneers

Wookster wrote: »

However this is not what Labour is proposing is it? They are proposing a gigantic database, stored (indefinitely) on government servers that will mine information and build dossiers on everyone.

This is a far cry from the requirement of of ISPs & mobile networks to store communications & traffic data for one year.

Another prime example of Rochdale stretching the truth...

No, they are proposing the Intercept Modernisation Programme. This will formalise what has already been going on for years with ECHELON by adding the EU Data Retention Directive into law. This allows for a variable period of data retention of between 6 months and 2 years. The main difference between the EU directive and the UK plan is that instead of having ISPs hold the data for the government to be able to search, the government will provide a central repositry where the ISPs will deposit the data. That way the cost is footed by the state rather than from Internet users.

Plenty of information about this here if you can be bothered to go look at it. Did you read what I posted to you about Echelon? The idea that Sigint is a Labour invention is laughable - nor have I heard anything from the Tories that they plan on rolling back any of these powers used by governments of both parties for so long.

Wookster

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

No, they are proposing the Intercept Modernisation Programme. This will formalise what has already been going on for years with ECHELON by adding the EU Data Retention Directive into law. This allows for a variable period of data retention of between 6 months and 2 years. The main difference between the EU directive and the UK plan is that instead of having ISPs hold the data for the government to be able to search, the government will provide a central repositry where the ISPs will deposit the data. That way the cost is footed by the state rather than from Internet users.

So actually (quoting above), Labour are proposing a gigantic database, stored [STRIKE](indefinitely)[/STRIKE] for two years on government servers that will mine information and build dossiers on everyone.

And we get to pay for it all (again).

This is a far cry from the requirement of of ISPs & mobile networks to store communications & traffic data for one year.

Rochdale_Pioneers

Wookster wrote: »

So actually (quoting above), Labour are proposing a gigantic database, stored [STRIKE](indefinitely)[/STRIKE] for two years on government servers that will mine information and build dossiers on everyone.

And we get to pay for it all (again).

This is a far cry from the requirement of of ISPs & mobile networks to store communications & traffic data for one year.

The requirement is for all ISPs to store data for between 6 months and two years. Whilst stored it will be accessible by state authorities at any time. What difference does it make if its held centrally or held locally - its still held. And with the authorities already having the free ability to intercept any communications they like I don't see what particular difference this makes.

What "dossier" do you think they'll build on you or me? What it sounds like you suggest is some army of government inspectors out to catch us breaking the law. Logically then you need an army of police to come arrest us and then a huge increase in courts and jails to process us.

If (rightly) you aren't allowed to hold terror suspects for too long - and both parties have it wrong with their support for 28 days, it should be 14 and no more - then you need to be able to build a case and quickly. Which is why the EU is requiring everyone to put all internet data where its easy and quick to get at.

Like I said. Happy to talk to you about signals intelligence on a factual basis. If all you have is slur and innuendo then you might as well just put your tin foil hat on.

Wookster

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

What difference does it make if its held centrally or held locally - its still held.

Jacqui Smith said (not too long ago) that if information wasn't on a server connected to the internet it was safe :rolleyes:

What is the government's track record of keeping data safe?

Or do you think there are minimal risks to data being stored by the government given their *wanderful* track record.

Rochdale_Pioneers

Wookster wrote: »

Jacqui Smith said (not too long ago) that if information wasn't on a server connected to the internet it was safe :rolleyes:

What is the government's track record of keeping data safe?

Or do you think there are minimal risks to data being stored by the government given their *wanderful* track record.

lol with the amount of data being lost by the government - and banks and others BTW - in transit, its probably safer to stick it all in one place to start with rather than keeping it locally and transferring it out to officials who want to look at it.