‘Snooper’s charter’: four Lords in bid to pass changed version before election

BlackDragon · 23 Jan 2015 at 23:55

I thought I would make this post to increase awareness on this issue.

It has recently appeared in the news that several lords have amended a new counter-terrorism bill to include the 'snooper's charter', and hope to have it passed before the election. You can read more here.

Something with such huge consequences should never be rushed through like this. It needs to go through the process of consultation and debate.

For those who don't know, the Communications Data Bill (AKA 'snooper's charter') was shot down in 2013 thanks to Nick Clegg and was prevented being being re-introduced again in the 2010-2015 parliament. It is a massive violation of privacy, the wrong approach to a problem, and a step on a slippery slope. There are plenty of resources that help explain why this is bad for us, the Open Rights Group is a good starting point (see here).

AGD said:
It sounds silly but sending tweets to lords could actually make quite a different - they probably are not aware of the amendments.

You can do that from here:

https://act.eff.org/action/tell-britain-s-lords-don-t-let-the-snooper-s-charter-sneak-past-you.

SGCWill · 24 Jan 2015 at 00:46

So how do we stop them?

murah · 24 Jan 2015 at 02:48

poo in the house

send them glitter

use a vpn that doesn't log

Nate--IRL-- · 24 Jan 2015 at 03:06

Hang on. this doesn't change anything. GCHQ stores all of this anyway. It is already there for analysis.

Nate

SGCWill · 24 Jan 2015 at 03:31

Nate--IRL-- said:
Hang on. this doesn't change anything. GCHQ stores all of this anyway. It is already there for analysis.

Nate

Yes, if they use a warrant (and the procedures inherent with that) they can do this, but this bill means that the ISPs have to log all of their customers data for the past 6 months with no due cause.

One is targeted and a reasonable capture of data to investigate for a specific reason and this new one is a grab-all with no reasonable cause or suspicion.

It is no different than police going through all of your mail and personal belongings, listening to all your calls and copying them using a private corporation, just in case you might break a law later.

robgmun · 24 Jan 2015 at 10:43

It's this kind of BS that makes me want to look into TOR

But to be frank they look so much into encrypted communications it'll probably be more private to stay unencrypted as they're looking at people that do use TOR, hide in plain sight and all that.

AGD · 24 Jan 2015 at 10:58

SGCWill said:
So how do we stop them?

It sounds silly but sending tweets to lords could actually make quite a different - they probably are not aware of the amendments.

You can do that from here:

https://act.eff.org/action/tell-britain-s-lords-don-t-let-the-snooper-s-charter-sneak-past-you

edit: OP it might be good to put this link in your original post.

FoxEye · 24 Jan 2015 at 11:27

robgmun said:
It's this kind of BS that makes me want to look into TOR

But to be frank they look so much into encrypted communications it'll probably be more private to stay unencrypted as they're looking at people that do use TOR, hide in plain sight and all that.

Nothing to hide
Smoke without fire
Think of the children/terrorists

Anyway, it's pretty safe to assume that everything we send over the internet is compromised/viewable by the authorities already.

TOR has already been proven completely unsafe.

Amp34 · 24 Jan 2015 at 12:47

Has it?

So far we appear to have seen people being caught after malicious software is inserted into compromised sites (and people using unpatched versions of Tor) and the taking down of sites from individual hosts, but very few people actually caught, which could quite easily be related to the police catching someone with poor security and leading them to the host.

Edit: as for the topic, agree totally. Trying to sneak in legislation that is unwanted by the majority and already voted down by parliament is not the way laws should be made.

BlackDragon · 24 Jan 2015 at 14:11

AGD said:
It sounds silly but sending tweets to lords could actually make quite a different - they probably are not aware of the amendments.

You can do that from here:

https://act.eff.org/action/tell-britain-s-lords-don-t-let-the-snooper-s-charter-sneak-past-you

edit: OP it might be good to put this link in your original post.

Thanks, I've added it

SGCWill · 24 Jan 2015 at 22:02

robgmun said:
It's this kind of BS that makes me want to look into TOR

But to be frank they look so much into encrypted communications it'll probably be more private to stay unencrypted as they're looking at people that do use TOR, hide in plain sight and all that.

TOR is not enough. VPN's won't do anything. The information that physically comes through your connection, regardless of purpose, intent or encryption will be recorded.

They'll legislate that encryption should only be used for financial information or commercial interests and if not, they'll hold until quantum computing and then nothing will be enough. We need to plan for the future.

If we lose our rights to 'terrorism', then they have won and all is lost already.

Nate--IRL-- · 24 Jan 2015 at 22:26

SGCWill said:
Yes, if they use a warrant (and the procedures inherent with that) they can do this, but this bill means that the ISPs have to log all of their customers data for the past 6 months with no due cause.

You misunderstand, all data is stored by GCHQ right now. If they see a need to analyse it, they already have it.

Nate

AGD · 24 Jan 2015 at 23:10

Nate--IRL-- said:
You misunderstand, all data is stored by GCHQ right now. If they see a need to analyse it, they already have it.

Nate

Not true. They do not store every website you visit for the period described above (at least this has not been revealed in any leaks so far).

If they are doing it, it would be illegal so we could challenge it in the courts if it ever leaked.

Paradiso · 24 Jan 2015 at 23:29

Isn't GCHQ's Tempora program a catch-all system anyway. Even if they don't already store months of meta data on every UK civilian (Ed Snowden would suggest otherwise) they could, who's to stop them?

SGCWill · 24 Jan 2015 at 23:30

Nate--IRL-- said:
You misunderstand, all data is stored by GCHQ right now. If they see a need to analyse it, they already have it.

Nate

According to: http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2015/january/lords-counter-terrorism-and-security-bill/

You are correct.

It seems that I have completely missed the point. Why are people getting bent out of shape over this new 'amendment'? It's already too late.

That's what you get for ignoring the world, we only have ourselves to blame. I'd say it's time to live in a cave, but that's what allowed this to happen in the first place. I'm quite angry at myself now.

arc@css · 24 Jan 2015 at 23:53

The internet.....the most enslaving tool of control.

murah · 25 Jan 2015 at 00:42

Virtual machine with spoofed mac address, VPN that does not keep logs of any form, and TOR is about as hidden as you can get (IP/traffic wise). Staying off social networking, using secure email etc but it all starts to get a bit OTT

Shouldn't have to do it it's all so wrong

BlackDragon · 25 Jan 2015 at 11:50

SGCWill said:
According to: http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2015/january/lords-counter-terrorism-and-security-bill/

You are correct.

It seems that I have completely missed the point. Why are people getting bent out of shape over this new 'amendment'? It's already too late.

That's what you get for ignoring the world, we only have ourselves to blame. I'd say it's time to live in a cave, but that's what allowed this to happen in the first place. I'm quite angry at myself now.

Any opposition we show towards this is a good thing, no matter how difficult it may seem to make a difference

AGD · 25 Jan 2015 at 13:40

Paradiso said:
Isn't GCHQ's Tempora program a catch-all system anyway. Even if they don't already store months of meta data on every UK civilian (Ed Snowden would suggest otherwise) they could, who's to stop them?

Tempora can only store the data for a few days due to storage requirements.

It is currently facing legal challenges and it looks unlikely that the european courts would allow it.

Obviously it will still be in place for several more years though even if found illegal.

BlackDragon · 2 Feb 2015 at 19:43

Despite being rejected a week ago, the same lords tried to bring it back again this week.

Fortunately it has been withdrawn, see #SnoopersCharter.

Here is a quote from Lord King who tried to bring it back:

I am not a tweeter, but we’ve got Facebook, we’ve got Twitter and somebody tried to explain to me what WhatsApp is, somebody else tried to explain to me Snapchat. My lords, I don’t know about them, but what is absolutely clear is that the terrorists and jihadists do.