1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Gov keeping 12 months of Internet history

Discussion in 'Serious' started by Archtronics, 4 Nov 2015.

  1. Archtronics

    Archtronics Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    27 Jun 2006
    Posts:
    2,559
    Likes Received:
    64
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34715872

    Internet surveillance aside. Can anyone else see a technical issue with this 12 months of history for everyone in the UK is going to be a huge amount of data. I can't see that its feasable to keep that much info stored in what must have to be massive server farms.

    We also don't seem to be coping that badly with all these "terroist attacks", Most recently it has been individual attacks which I can't see any amount of surveillance stopping.

    Discuss.
     
  2. yodasarmpit

    yodasarmpit No longer the other Brett.

    Joined:
    27 May 2002
    Posts:
    11,275
    Likes Received:
    174
    And the use of a decent VPN renders the whole thing useless, just another cost to be absorbed somewhere.
     
  3. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    386
    As the bill hasn't been published yet it's a little early to know for sure, but storing the Internet history of everyone in the UK would be a trivial affair, ISPs already record DNS requests so the storage needed for keeping those records for a year would depend on how much extra information the Snoopers Charter Mk II requires them to retain.

    Or for no cost change your DNS servers to ones outside the UK, depends how they go about it.
     
  4. Goatee

    Goatee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    19 Apr 2015
    Posts:
    1,700
    Likes Received:
    627
    The fact it can be so easily be avoided means it completely useless.

    More headline grabbing news bites.
     
  5. Bungletron

    Bungletron Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 May 2010
    Posts:
    1,169
    Likes Received:
    62
    It is just the top level domain visited that is required to be recorded or handed over, not the specific page. I guess a lot of this is already logged. Snowden said the GCHQ Prism program was already indiscriminately logging all of this and more illegally anyway, so it appears that after he blew the whistle rather than bin the project and prosecute your own operatives who must have been given tacit permission to do this the only way to proceed is to make a law to legitimise it. So the government's line is we are going to snoop and if you don't like it then we are going to make it law so you have to like it, its a crock of ****.

    Since the information is the entire set of all internet users and a computer would flag all the blatant idiots automatically, if I was an analyst at GCHQ I would start by getting the system to filter out the comparatively tiny subset of VPN users and single them out for added scrutiny (the FBI busted a top level release boss even though he always used a VPN because of the one day he forgot to!). Otherwise they wouldn't know what you accessed through the VPN since it would be illegal for them to gain access to foreign VPN company servers and steal their info, so because GCHQ has such great respect for the law they will never do that...
     
  6. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    386
    It does seem strange that (afaik) the bill makes no mention of VPN or ToR, isn't any ne'er-do-well just going to use one of those and go under the radar, wouldn't what they propose, like you said, only catch the blatant idiots.

    Aren't the really nasty ones going to go undetected in the crowd of legitimate VPN & ToR users, isn't that going to make their job harder, it seems all this bill is going to do is push the worst of the wrong doers further underground.
     
  7. Anfield

    Anfield Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    6,274
    Likes Received:
    704
    They don't need to do anything about VPNs or Tor (or its various clones), they simply have to get the data before it leaves the pc (or after it reaches it), all they need is to get their spyware on the targets (a.k.a anyone who uses a VPN or Tor) pc.
     
  8. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    386
    Isn't that speaking about the equipment interference section though, apologies for not saying i was referring to the keeping of Internet connection records part, my mistake.

    If the ne'er-do-wells use VPN and/or ToR and loose themselves in the crowd how are the SS going to be able to pick them out from legitimate users as a target for equipment interference, surly not everyone using VPN and/or ToR is going to be targeted for equipment interference?

    In case I'm having brain fade, yes they simply have to get the data before it leaves the pc (or after it reaches it), but how would they know who to target that at if the really serious criminals always used VPN and/or ToR.

    EDIT: This should be funny or interesting, some guy has made an Freedom of Information request for Mrs May's metadata (Who she sent & received emails and Skype calls from, and what websites she visited), if as she claims Internet connection records are like an itemised phone bill and no personal information can be gained from metadata it shouldn't be a problem, right?
     
    Last edited: 7 Nov 2015
  9. Anfield

    Anfield Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    6,274
    Likes Received:
    704
    I'd bet on old fashioned racial profiling, of course they will be more likely to catch the hipster plumber who unclogged the toilet in the mosque in the act of ironically pirating windows 95 rather than the next Bin Laden, but hey, got to start somewhere*

    *at least according to the UK Government.
     
  10. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    386
    UN privacy chief: UK surveillance bill is 'worse than scary'
    http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-11/10/surveillance-investigatory-powers-scary-joseph-cannataci

    Why tech companies are really worried about the snooper's charter
    http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/nov/10/why-tech-companies-worried-snoopers-charter-whatsapp-imessage
    Broadband bills will have to increase to pay for snooper's charter, MPs are warned
    http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/nov/11/broadband-bills-increase-snoopers-charter-investigatory-powers-bill-mps-warned
    The Snooper’s Charter would devastate computer security research in the UK
    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/11/the-snoopers-charter-would-devastate-computer-security-research-in-the-uk/
     
    Last edited: 11 Nov 2015
  11. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    386
    I wouldn't normally bump a thread if i was the last person to comment but i feel a recently held consultation in the House of Commons Science and Technology committee is worthy enough to warrant peoples attention, not only because it discuss the potential impact of the revised snoopers charter but also because the guest speakers (Matthew Hare, CEO Gigaclear, John Shaw, VP Sophos, and James Blessing, Chair Internet Services Providers) discuss what i hope the technological BT community will appreciate.

    The minutes of the meeting have been publish on the Gov web site here, it would be interesting to know what peoples opinion are of the topics that MPs raised and the answers they were given.
     
  12. theshadow2001

    theshadow2001 [DELETE] means [DELETE]

    Joined:
    3 May 2012
    Posts:
    5,196
    Likes Received:
    153
    I just had a quick look at my firefox profile, it was about 180MB which holds all of my history for about 9 or 10 months extrapolating that across 44million british users, I would guess you would be looking at around 8 petabytes or so of raw data.

    Handling that much data is probably somewhat challenging, but far from infeasible, given that it would be spread out across a number of technology providers. But it would certainly bump the price of the internet.
     
  13. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    386
    Paris terror attacks: Calls for snooper's charter to be rushed through to prevent UK atrocities
    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paris-terror-attacks-calls-snoopers-6835963
    Never let an atrocity go to waste a Lord Carlile, if only France had something similar to the snoopers charter...Oh wait they do. :wallbash:
     
  14. Samanthap.

    Samanthap. New Member

    Joined:
    3 Nov 2015
    Posts:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think they surely have VPNs in their mind and would have taken proper steps before making the decisions.
     
  15. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    386
    Despite reassurances from Theresa May that the Investigatory Powers Bil wouldn't be rushed through parliament and that it would receive proper scrutiny she's given the joint committee only 3 weeks to go over the 300 page bill.

    Theresa May accused of rushing surveillance bill through back door
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/26/theresa-may-accused-of-rushing-surveillance-bill-through-back-door
    It also seems the Investigatory Powers Bil is going to do nothing to keep people safe.

    UK ISP boss points out massive technical flaws in Investigatory Powers Bill
    http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2015/11/uk-isp-boss-points-out-massive-technical-flaws-in-investigatory-powers-bill/
     
  16. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,220
    Likes Received:
    1,660
    I hear Zen Internet is good. :)
     
  17. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    386
    Maybe they could use it in their advertising "Zen Internet, Better - for - Terrorists" ;)
     
  18. RedFlames

    RedFlames ...is not a Belgian football team

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    13,249
    Likes Received:
    2,027
  19. thom804

    thom804 Member

    Joined:
    22 Oct 2009
    Posts:
    714
    Likes Received:
    6
    Except, they probably don't.

    It's well documented and evidenced that MP's have no f*cking clue when it comes to technology. They have advisors who are nothing but brown-nosing sycophants, and probably don't even have a CISCO CCNA cert to their name, let alone the ability to know how to monitor a VPN and the traffic that goes through one.

    The government will pass this legislation and then outsource the work to the lowest bidder, who will then take it upon themselves to drag the process out as long as possible and end up costing the taxpayer a lot more than was initially ever proposed.
     
  20. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    386
    Maybe that's the only way we're going to be free from a virtual panopticon, it seems most people couldn't give two hoots about this bill, maybe if costs run into the hundreds of millions and start hitting people in their pockets they'll start to care a little more. :blah:
     

Share This Page