There's a lot worse than child porn, murder and drugs
Yeah they got a whole library of Des O'Conner records down there!
Police 'to be given powers to view everyone's entire internet history'
- Thread starter opethdisciple
- Start date
Yeah they got a whole library of Des O'Conner records down there!
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2014
- Posts
- 3,927
- Location
- Oxon
Can't they already do that?
There's a lot worse than child porn, murder and drugs
My point was that you don't have to go to that stuff if you don't want to.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
I am going to assume you don't have first hand experience of this.
If you do have first hand experience, i will just assume you are just as evil and vile as whatever you found, simply because you went to find it.
Last edited:
There's a lot worse than child porn, murder and drugs
Its not like you can just stumble across it. You have to go looking really.
Think about the poor sod that reads your browser history.
They'd have a hard time trying to deduce what the hell I am.
It's easy to come up with a solution to this.
Let's say all your data is encrypted twice. Once using a key that can be decrypted by the target website, so e-commerce can be performed.
Then again (the same data) encrypted with a government key and sent to government servers for real-time processing. All done transparently by your router, maybe.
And it's a criminal offence not to use a government approved router, or to use software encryption.
There's always a solution, if you are a government that really wants to see inside all our data. Not saying this is likely, but who knows what's coming. The road to total surveillance is walked in small steps.
For a government that failed to set up a remedial attempt at blocking websites I highly doubt well ever get to the extent of your description. Although if they managed to actually get an IT project off the ground correctly then I'm sure some genius will work out a way past it.
People are all the more dangerous with what they dont understand.
Indeed. To be honest I'm probably overconfident in my vpn for all I know its government owned and logging everything 
.
They'd have a hard time trying to deduce what the hell I am.
People are all the more dangerous with what they dont understand
.If they all do that, the argument that the stuff in the OP would lead to a risk of people having their internet history ~hacked~ seems to be worrying about the horse after it's already bolted.
Indeed
. To be honest I'm probably overconfident in my vpn for all I know its government owned and logging everything .
Last edited:
The one problem for Government is the communications via Google twitter et al. I am sure that they do not really want your back hisory on sexual proclivities however fascinating, but who you may be communicating with.
To do this, they have to unencrypt the servers from all of the above and I can guarantee that if the US Gov. is not given blanket access, the UK Gov. will not have it either.
Everything you post originates on your PC or your phone. There is no communication between twitter users, etc, that can't be intercepted as a communication between you and twitter.
They don't need twitter to give them access to their servers /if/ they go down the route of processing every packet originating from your PC/phone.
This is obviously not something we're going to see in the near future. For now, as you say, it's much more practical to forge relationships between government and twitter, than it is to monitor all the world's traffic
But in future? Who knows. I'll admit it's unlikely. Or is it? Yes, it is.
Everything you post originates on your PC or your phone. There is no communication between twitter users, etc, that can't be intercepted as a communication between you and twitter.
They don't need twitter to give them access to their servers /if/ they go down the route of processing every packet originating from your PC/phone.
This is obviously not something we're going to see in the near future. For now, as you say, it's much more practical to forge relationships between government and twitter, than it is to monitor all the world's traffic
But in future? Who knows. I'll admit it's unlikely. Or is it? Yes, it is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOsHoqhbUIU&feature=youtu.be&t=136
Who is picking up the bill for this astronomical amount of data?
Sure, it's not content. By the sounds of it it's client, destination and timestamped protocol data rather than actual content but that is still a LOT of data.
It seems like a ridiculous endeavour really. It screams of constant monitoring rather than reactive investigation. I have absolutely no problems with the powers already in place to see ANYTHING on ANYONE that is backed by a warrant or power. As stated, most people of interest will already be using encryption platforms OR will be covered by the powers already in place.
Also, even with a warrant - You cannot see social media message content from a client<>endpoint capture, it's encrypted. The only way that is getting out is if the actual social media platform plays ball and discloses it directly from servers. Facebook wont in most circumstances for example.
Last edited:
As far as I am aware most ISPs tend to record only a small amount of data and retain it for a very small period of time. 12 months retention is huge.
...and?
That's a commenting article on the current issues of encryption and not being able to access encrypted information even with a warrant.
That's STORED (encrypted) information however. An ISP cannot see the content of an encrypted data stream. If it is not stored anywhere, even unencrypted...it's gone.
As a side note, the article is not very specific on what exactly ISPs will store. There is no way they are storing full content, it's not feasible. The article states content of email etc could be seen by a warrant (as it already is now) But that will be a warrant aimed at the actual content storer (Google, Yahoo, Hotmail etc) rather than the ISP. Otherwise Government is expecting the ISP to keep a content archive of every user for 12 months? No chance.
Last edited:
It's an EU directive which appears to have been challenged. The article refers to an actual UK law. So, the question is - Are ISPs complying with a challenged EU directive at present? If they were, why the need for a UK law?
Even so...it's still a huge amount of data to store and manage. As an ISP I would be pretty annoyed at picking up the bill for that
Meh you'd just pass it onto the customers.