Government spying

kwikbreaks

The records for anybody using a VPN are going to be pretty tedious - just the one place visited and that's a foreign owned server that promises not to keep any records. Probably worse for TOR users - lots of different dead ends.

Sounds to me to be a way to increase costs without much in the way of value.

System

Hi

Well I don't like people looking over my shoulder, this probably started when I started school.

When I was a lad, and Shep was a pup, we had all sorts of stuff about our person, like a penknife, string etc etc. Now of course that is highly illegal.

During the course of my work I used and carried all manner of sharp objects, now legally cannot.

So, once upon a time I thought I had freedom of thought, now I see that May may soon make that illegal as well.

Anonymity only comes a millennia after your demise it seems, so I await my writing out of history.

On a side note, how hard should I work to, either hide my obvious criminal tendencies, or slide into oblivion?

musafir05

50Twuncle wrote: »

So the government intends to spy on us all - logging every single website that we access
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34715872
Do they not know of the simple task of changing your IP address to hide your true identity and location ?
I am sure that any IS sympathizers will know how to do this ...

Its called tails OS on a bootable USB stick. It uses the tor network to surf the net.

95% of the proxy/vpn keep log files and hand it over upon a warrant.

musafir05

This is all a result of Bush. If the american public didn't elect him in office, 9/11 wouldn't have happened.

#BushDid9/111

dannyrst

Is it not true that almost every site you visit is already logged by marketing companies?

KxMx

It's the 2015 version of the Police or security services getting an itemised call history from a telephone provider.

As I understand it it won't be reading of emails (recording calls) but looking at the IP to IP activity.

While initially alarmed about this bill, the more I think about it the more I know surveillance lags behind modern technology, at times woefully. The more I think this does need updating.

Criminals are moving away from the traditional methods of communication and onto the internet. Hence the need for updating.

GCHQ are also rumoured to have been gathering GBs and GBs of data for years now. Rumoured to be so much not even their top of the line super computers could not possibly process all of it in a timely manner.

So, anyone thinking this bill is not a continuation of what's been going on for years, is naive.

Yolina

Meh, I just assume they're already doing all that and more anyway.

kwikbreaks

dannyrst wrote: »

Is it not true that almost every site you visit is already logged by marketing companies?

Every site logs all visitor IP addresses. I think you are getting confused with tracking cookies which is something completely different

The question is can "the man" identify every web site you "the suspect" visits without the need for a court order. With this new legislation the answer to that is yes unless you take some steps to obfuscate your movements by using something such as the TOR proxies or a VPN. Even then given the incentive I imagine you probably could be tracked but the vast majority never will be even if they do absolutely nothing.

My gripe about this is that it is going to cost the ISPs plenty of money (guess who'll be paying that) and most of the information they collect is going to be pretty useless to "the man" if "the suspect" does decide to take steps to make tacking harder which you can be sure any potential criminal/terrorist/kiddie fiddler will after all the publicity this is attracting. Then "the man" will have to go back to what they've been doing for years anyway - sifting through the mass of data they collect 24x7 and piecing stuff together. In fact as this will encourage more secure communication methods and encrypting stuff exchanged online it's probably all a waste of time and money.

dannyrst

kwikbreaks wrote: »

Every site logs all visitor IP addresses. I think you are getting confused with tracking cookies which is something completely different

The question is can "the man" identify every web site you "the suspect" visits without the need for a court order. With this new legislation the answer to that is yes unless you take some steps to obfuscate your movements by using something such as the TOR proxies or a VPN. Even then given the incentive I imagine you probably could be tracked but the vast majority never will be even if they do absolutely nothing.

My gripe about this is that it is going to cost the ISPs plenty of money (guess who'll be paying that) and most of the information they collect is going to be pretty useless to "the man" if "the suspect" does decide to take steps to make tacking harder which you can be sure any potential criminal/terrorist/kiddie fiddler will after all the publicity this is attracting. Then "the man" will have to go back to what they've been doing for years anyway - sifting through the mass of data they collect 24x7 and piecing stuff together. In fact as this will encourage more secure communication methods and encrypting stuff exchanged online it's probably all a waste of time and money.

Are tracking cookies not far more intrusive than anything the ISP's will introduce? And given that the companies using them aren't bound by anything other than DPA, they can keep the data for as long as is "reasonable".

RumRat

I suggest people read the actual bill rather than relying on headline sound bites to determine that they are happy (or not) with it.