-Caveat Lector- Wednesday, 17 July, 2002, 09:15 GMT 10:15 UK Switch on for state snooping
Police forces want to plug in to lots of networks >From August net service providers in The UK will be legally obliged to carry out automatic surveillance of their customers' web habits. Controversial laws passed in 2000 oblige large communications companies to install technology that allows one in 10,000 of their customers to be watched. The information gathered about the websites that people visit, who they exchange e-mail with and who they call on the phone will be passed to the police or a government monitoring station. The demands have been criticised by experts who say the law conflicts with basic guarantees of privacy and that the government is not doing enough to help pay for the installation of the surveillance systems. Data hoover The controversial Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act was passed in October 2000 and gave law enforcement agencies sweeping powers to snoop on the electronic lives of citizens. It's the internet equivalent of a telephone tap Roland Perry, Linx The Act demands that organisations it dubs Communication Service Providers (CPS) - broadly anyone that helps people keep in touch via the web, fax machine or phone - install technology that can automatically monitor what many of their customers are doing. It also demands that service providers start monitoring a customer within 24 hours of being told that the police or other investigation agencies want to snoop on them. The information collected must also be passed on electronically to the agency which asked for the snooping to start. A spokeswoman for the Home Office said 1 August was the day on which the new surveillance regime would start, even though the snooping systems are yet to be installed. "It will just mean that police can go to CSPs and say we want information on this person," she said. Data delivery Roland Perry, public policy director for the London Internet Exchange which interconnects the networks of net service companies, said the government was still working out how best to put the surveillance systems in place. "It's a very long-term project," he said. "The whole thing will be done on a one-to-one basis with the individual companies concerned." Agencies have to make a judgement whether it's worth making a request if costs a few hundred pounds to do it Ian Brown, Foundation for Information Policy Research The government is also currently working out what types of information it wants from CSPs and how it will be delivered. "In theory, an interception capability would deliver all the data," said Mr Perry. "It's the internet equivalent of a telephone tap." The government is hoping that its work on automatic surveillance will become a European standard and be widely adopted. Costly communication Service providers have asked for help to buy the equipment needed to set up the permanent interception capability. Up to 1 in 10,000 could be monitored "The Home Office has said it would contribute £20m to this but the net industry has said it will cost a lot more than that," said Ian Brown, director of the Foundation for Information Policy Research. The Internet Service Providers Association has warned about the potentially huge costs of installing surveillance equipment to meet the demands of the RIP Act and the recently passed Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act. A spokesman for the organisation said it was still seeking clarification over the types of data its members were supposed to be catching, how long it had to be stored for and who would pay for the storage. Mr Brown said one of the few safeguards on the snooping system was the fact that the agencies asking for the surveillance to be carried out will be charged to use it. "This means agencies have to make a judgement whether it's worth making a request if costs a few hundred pounds to do it," said Mr Brown. <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
