UK Govt to make it legal to access internet & phone records

[Jenny A]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28237111

The legislation is primarily aimed at the companies that provide us with telephone and internet connections. It outlines their legal obligation to retain "communications data" on their customers. This metadata includes things like logs of when calls were made, what numbers were dialled, and other information that can be used, the government says, in investigations. It does not include the content of the communications.

Done in the name of security, naturally.

And I, for one, am ashamed by this. Whilst it's currently illegal in most cases for the government to gain access to the content of calls/emails/texts (although this isn't always the case), it's pretty clear that in the coming years this will be made legal through additions to this law.

The fact that this has cross party support sickens me. And the US thought they had it bad! I believe the following is a misquote but regardless, it sums this up nicely:

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Benjamin Franklin

I'd say welcome to the U.S.A. but at least your government is doing it openly instead of waiting for the whistle-blowers to tell you.

[Aractus]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28237111

The legislation is primarily aimed at the companies that provide us with telephone and internet connections. It outlines their legal obligation to retain "communications data" on their customers. This metadata includes things like logs of when calls were made, what numbers were dialled, and other information that can be used, the government says, in investigations. It does not include the content of the communications.

Done in the name of security, naturally.

And I, for one, am ashamed by this. Whilst it's currently illegal in most cases for the government to gain access to the content of calls/emails/texts (although this isn't always the case), it's pretty clear that in the coming years this will be made legal through additions to this law.

The fact that this has cross party support sickens me. And the US thought they had it bad! I believe the following is a misquote but regardless, it sums this up nicely:

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Benjamin Franklin

So that would make UK-based anonymous proxies illegal. That's a dangerous, and irrational path to go down.

[Mudhammam]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28237111


Done in the name of security, naturally.

And I, for one, am ashamed by this. Whilst it's currently illegal in most cases for the government to gain access to the content of calls/emails/texts (although this isn't always the case), it's pretty clear that in the coming years this will be made legal through additions to this law.

The fact that this has cross party support sickens me. And the US thought they had it bad! I believe the following is a misquote but regardless, it sums this up nicely:

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Benjamin Franklin

I have to say I'm not bothered by this: a phone record is a pretty minor detail, unless it is going to break your alibi on a big mob hit or something. EVEN IF they recorded my phone conversations and converted them to text-- if the government wants to hear about my wife's shopping list, or my opinions about the game of soccer-- they can go for it.

Liberty to act and speak is one thing. But should we have liberty to do everything under the cover of darkness and anonymity? Should be be allowed to walk around with ski masks because we don't want to be identified? I don't think so. Sometimes the defence of liberty is really an announcement of an intent to violate (or potentially violate) the social contract. I'm willing to give up some of my privacy if it allows the government a better means to flush out the pedos and the shoe bombers.

Benny, that is disheartening to read you say that if you have nothing to hide, privacy is irrelevant. Would you kindly give us all your passwords? If not, why are you comfortable with letting any government official have unfettered access to your privacy?

Not to mention, this law is not only an atrocious attack on the privacy of citizens in the U.K. but also any journalist or adversary whom the U.K government disproves of and wishes to silence, as they tried to do by storming the Guardian's office and destroying their laptops thinking they could suppress the excellent journalism that resulted from the Snowden leaks or when they detained Glenn Greenwald's partner under a terrorism law (the message is clear--adversarial journalism that strikes at the heart of Leviathan is tantamount to crime, perhaps even sedition or terrorism in the U.K.).

[Fidel_Castronaut]

It's also a dangerous precedent. The uk govt has implemented this in the full knowledge that they will later push through an amendment to make it legal for them to gain access to content of calls/ emails/ texts , and the only ones that will be exempt will be security services.

If that's not Orwellian I don't know what is.

Also bearing in mind that this is exactly what the UK govt tried to do the other year but were stopped by it being rejected by the lib dems.theyve used the whole 'we won't get access to content' to water it down so it would get cross party support.