|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Im-a-Ridah |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Im-a-Ridah
World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
   |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
 |
| Lord Percy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Lord Percy
World Chat Champion
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Karma :
|
 Posted: 12:54 - 26 Nov 2016  Post subject: |
 |
|
| ScaredyCat wrote: |
All that is ignoring the fact that this information will be stored by BT or TalkTalk or Virgin Media. Tell me just how secure do you think that information is? What sort of people would like access to it? The newspapers? Blackmailers? The pot is so full of honey you'll be fighting off Pooh Bear. |
But don't ISPs store that info anyway? Hence the odd person being punished for illegal file sharing and the likes?
Anyway I've been partially won over. Ended up talking about it on facebook and my brother made a fair point:
| Quote: | ...whether we like it or not the vast majority of the population have their lives laid out on some sort of digital way. We probably talk to more people on Facebook or other social platforms than we do in real life these days. You can't say "do nothing wrong, have nothing to hide". Imagine a police officer sat recording everything you say whilst you're having a private conversation with a mate. You'd have to constantly make sure you say nothing wrong. Or what if everything you'd ever searched on pornhub was suddenly open for the government to look at, which it will be! Previously companies do not have to disclose their user information, unless it was needed as evidence. But now the government can literally go to say Google and say "give me all the emails that guy has ever sent" and they have to cooperate! No privacy whatsoever. And let's not forget the worst part of this... Anyone in Parliament and all journalists are exempt!! |
So I'm beginning to understand the gravity of it all.
But then, I can't really get over how obvious it is that the internet is a massive public 'web' of information where demanding ultimate privacy is just a bit too naive. Yes it can be enforced by law, but internet usage will never have the same ultimate privacy as a quiet chat with a mate.
Come to think of it, if the internet really does become the ultimate surveillance tool, it might be a good thing because it'll make people start rejecting it as a means of communication. The increasingly hollow world of online socialising will be eradicated and replaced by something like the rebirth of the great british pub, 7 days a week. Imagine that, heh.
Also... is this bit true?
| Quote: | Anyone in Parliament and all journalists are exempt!! |
If so, that's mad and out of general 'equality' principles I oppose the bill for that reason alone. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Jewlio Rides Again LLB |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Jewlio Rides Again LLB
World Chat Champion
Joined: 06 Oct 2015
Karma : 
|
| Posted: 14:49 - 26 Nov 2016 Post subject: |
|
|
| Lord Percy wrote: |
But don't ISPs store that info anyway? Hence the odd person being punished for illegal file sharing and the likes?
Anyway I've been partially won over. Ended up talking about it on facebook and my brother made a fair point:
| Quote: | ...whether we like it or not the vast majority of the population have their lives laid out on some sort of digital way. We probably talk to more people on Facebook or other social platforms than we do in real life these days. You can't say "do nothing wrong, have nothing to hide". Imagine a police officer sat recording everything you say whilst you're having a private conversation with a mate. You'd have to constantly make sure you say nothing wrong. Or what if everything you'd ever searched on pornhub was suddenly open for the government to look at, which it will be! Previously companies do not have to disclose their user information, unless it was needed as evidence. But now the government can literally go to say Google and say "give me all the emails that guy has ever sent" and they have to cooperate! No privacy whatsoever. And let's not forget the worst part of this... Anyone in Parliament and all journalists are exempt!! |
So I'm beginning to understand the gravity of it all.
But then, I can't really get over how obvious it is that the internet is a massive public 'web' of information where demanding ultimate privacy is just a bit too naive. Yes it can be enforced by law, but internet usage will never have the same ultimate privacy as a quiet chat with a mate.
Come to think of it, if the internet really does become the ultimate surveillance tool, it might be a good thing because it'll make people start rejecting it as a means of communication. The increasingly hollow world of online socialising will be eradicated and replaced by something like the rebirth of the great british pub, 7 days a week. Imagine that, heh.
Also... is this bit true?
| Quote: | Anyone in Parliament and all journalists are exempt!! |
If so, that's mad and out of general 'equality' principles I oppose the bill for that reason alone. |
It's not about it being stored as such, it's about the ability for it to be accessed without having a good enough reason to be granted a warrant to do it.
____________________
Mpd72: I can categorically say i’m Brighter than that, no matter how I come across on here.
HAHAHA HAHAHA Blew Chilly MyCrowSystems |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| ScaredyCat |
This post is not being displayed .
|
ScaredyCat
World Chat Champion
Joined: 19 May 2012
Karma : 
|
Posted: 15:08 - 26 Nov 2016  Post subject: |
|
|
| Lord Percy wrote: | But don't ISPs store that info anyway? Hence the odd person being punished for illegal file sharing and the likes? |
Some might have logs that contain where an ip address went to, it's not the same. They're not required to store it or do anything with it. They might even only turn it on for fault finding.
People being punished to file sharing is about threatening them with prosecution if they don't pay up and the person caving because they don't want to go to court, so settling. YOu'll probably find most of those 'prosecuted' are in the USA, not the UK.
| Lord Percy wrote: | So I'm beginning to understand the gravity of it all. |
Good.
| Lord Percy wrote: | But then, I can't really get over how obvious it is that the internet is a massive public 'web' of information where demanding ultimate privacy is just a bit too naive. |
That's because you're not grasping that the internet may have parts that are public, but that doesn't mean that anything on it or that it is used for is public. Sure you can't expect privacy about your latest bong party (is that a thing?) if you post it on Facebook, but if you send an email* to a mate about it, that should still be private.
*I don't mean via gmail or a similar service where you sign up to T&C's that allow them to trawl your email in exchange for a free service.
| Lord Percy wrote: |
Also... is this bit true?
| Quote: | Anyone in Parliament and all journalists are exempt!! |
If so, that's mad and out of general 'equality' principles I oppose the bill for that reason alone. |
Parliament excluded yes, but the government removed any real protection for journalists and by extension their sources.
____________________
Honda CBF125 ➝ NC700X
Honda CBF125 ↳ Speed Triple |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Im-a-Ridah |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Im-a-Ridah
World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Karma :
|
| Posted: 17:58 - 26 Nov 2016 Post subject: |
|
|
| Lord Percy wrote: |
So I'm beginning to understand the gravity of it all.
But then, I can't really get over how obvious it is that the internet is a massive public 'web' of information where demanding ultimate privacy is just a bit too naive. Yes it can be enforced by law, but internet usage will never have the same ultimate privacy as a quiet chat with a mate.
Come to think of it, if the internet really does become the ultimate surveillance tool, it might be a good thing because it'll make people start rejecting it as a means of communication. The increasingly hollow world of online socialising will be eradicated and replaced by something like the rebirth of the great british pub, 7 days a week. Imagine that, heh. |
Privacy is not being demanded for the sake of it. It is fundamental to a free and open society. Government clamp downs on privacy are the core of totalitarianism. Note that this is not party specific, these policies are pushed by the civil servants, not the elected MPs. Here are a few examples of website that you might not want a government or other 3rd party knowing you used:
wikileaks.org
WikiLeaks publishes documents of political or historical importance that are censored or otherwise suppressed. We specialise in strategic global publishing and large ...
liberty-human-rights.org.uk
Liberty campaigns for civil liberties and human rights in the UK. We're entirely independent - so we can truly hold the powerful to account.
grindr.com
Download Grindr, the #1 gay social network app free for iOS and Android. Over 2M+ daily active users in 192 countries. Chat, share photos, and meet up with guys near you.
tht.org.uk
Terrence Higgins Trust is a British charity that campaigns on various issues related to AIDS and HIV.
ukip.org
Official site of UKIP, led by Nigel Farage. Sign up to our mailing list for regular updates from the party.
swp.org.uk
The politics of the ruling class are in deep crisis as disillusionment with the system deepens. Socialist Worker argues that discontent doesn't have to go to the right
britainfirst.org
Britain First is a patriotic political party and street defence organisation. Here you can join forces with patriots like you and make a real difference!
webmd.com/erectile-dysfunction/default.htm
Erectile dysfunction affects an estimated 18 million men in the U.S. alone. Here you'll find impotence information including its causes, impotence drugs, and other
It's not really practical to exclude MPs from the retention for obvious reasons. They could however prevent access of MPs data whilst they are in Parliament. Plenty of loopholes though.
| Lord Percy wrote: | But don't ISPs store that info anyway? Hence the odd person being punished for illegal file sharing and the likes? |
ISPs do not want to store customer data. They would like to store zero. It's a big fat liability, customers hate it and companies generally want to keep customers on side, and storing data is expensive. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg
nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Jewlio Rides Again LLB |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Jewlio Rides Again LLB
World Chat Champion
Joined: 06 Oct 2015
Karma :
|
| Posted: 15:10 - 27 Nov 2016 Post subject: |
|
|
That's just BCF he'll be posting then. 
____________________
Mpd72: I can categorically say i’m Brighter than that, no matter how I come across on here.
HAHAHA HAHAHA Blew Chilly MyCrowSystems |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Im-a-Ridah |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Im-a-Ridah
World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Karma :
|
| Posted: 19:48 - 27 Nov 2016 Post subject: |
|
|
Remember that this comes down to an issue of cost. If you are concerned about your privacy the aim is to make getting your data more expensive than the rest of the public. Longer password = more expensive, exponentially more expensive. For this reason avoid fingerprint scanners if your target threat is cops or intelligence agencies, as anyone arrested for anything gets their fingerprints taken. So the cost there is ~£10 for a kit to copy the fingerprint. Use Tor or a VPN, again exponential cost increase. This really restricts them to either go after on specific individuals or focus on the mass of in the clear traffic.
On equipment interference you can frustrate this immensely. Crypto for computers comes in software form and hardware form. Simple solution is to use both. A 14 character password in your hardware SSD drive, and a 14 character password in Truecrypt/Veracrypt/Bitlocker. Bitlocker is the most convenient. Veracrypt is really quite brutal on your opponent as it has 24 encryption/hash algortithm combinations, and a PIM multiplicative factor on the number of hash iterations. For example, if you use a PIM between 0 and 1000, let say 855, then with 8 x GTX1080 a password like "loDaxaRk" would take ~20,000,000,000,000 years, and even "Ji44Qw" would take 250 years! Clearly this is unaffordable. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Azoth |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Azoth
Brolly Dolly
Joined: 07 Jul 2016
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| The Artist |
This post is not being displayed .
|
The Artist
Super Spammer
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Im-a-Ridah |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Im-a-Ridah
World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Im-a-Ridah |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Im-a-Ridah
World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| ScaredyCat |
This post is not being displayed .
|
ScaredyCat
World Chat Champion
Joined: 19 May 2012
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Jewlio Rides Again LLB |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Jewlio Rides Again LLB
World Chat Champion
Joined: 06 Oct 2015
Karma :
|
| Posted: 15:54 - 04 Dec 2016 Post subject: |
|
|
____________________
Mpd72: I can categorically say i’m Brighter than that, no matter how I come across on here.
HAHAHA HAHAHA Blew Chilly MyCrowSystems |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| ScaredyCat |
This post is not being displayed .
|
ScaredyCat
World Chat Champion
Joined: 19 May 2012
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| CaNsA |
This post is not being displayed .
|
CaNsA
Super Spammer
Joined: 02 Jan 2008
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg
nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
|
| Posted: 08:52 - 06 Dec 2016 Post subject: |
|
|
Facebook, YouTube and Twitter are being strong-armed into suppressing crimethink, including "fake" (i.e. non-approved) news. Privatised Pravda.
Surely it's only a matter of time before BCF is outlawed as samizdat.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Lord Percy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Lord Percy
World Chat Champion
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| - |
This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.
|
-
Super Spammer
Joined: 22 Oct 2013
Karma : 
|
| Posted: 10:43 - 06 Dec 2016 Post subject: |
|
|
Lack of ID cards is cited as one of the main attractions of the UK to illegal immigrants.
Considering how many millions are wandering around the UK off record, working in the black market, it might go some way to control it.
If you want to reduce illegal immigration, the only effective way is to stop the attraction of coming here illegally. Clamp down on being able to live and work undetected and you're at least half way there.
Why so anti? I have to show a photocard driving licence, just to pick up a pre-paid bag of screw from Screwfix. I don't feel offended.
____________________
TZR250 2MA road, TZR250 1KT road, TZR250 2MA race, TDR250, YZF-750R Boost colours.
Jaguar S Type 3.0 V6 Sport R, VW Transporter T5 GP LWB Shuttle 140ps DSG. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg
nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| ScaredyCat |
This post is not being displayed .
|
ScaredyCat
World Chat Champion
Joined: 19 May 2012
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| ScaredyCat |
This post is not being displayed .
|
ScaredyCat
World Chat Champion
Joined: 19 May 2012
Karma :
|
| Posted: 12:47 - 06 Dec 2016 Post subject: |
|
|
IP Bill, Section 56 is 'interesting'. In essence "We can lie, you can't question those lies, you're going down".
| Quote: |
56 Exclusion of matters from legal proceedings etc.
(1)No evidence may be adduced, question asked, assertion or disclosure made or other thing done in, for the purposes of or in connection with any legal proceedings or Inquiries Act proceedings which (in any manner)—
(a)discloses, in circumstances from which its origin in interception-related conduct may be inferred—
(i)any content of an intercepted communication, or
(ii)any secondary data obtained from a communication, or
(b)tends to suggest that any interception-related conduct has or may have occurred or may be going to occur.
This is subject to Schedule 3 (exceptions).
(2)“Interception-related conduct” means—
(a)conduct by a person within subsection (3) that is, or in the absence of any lawful authority would be, an offence under section 3(1) (offence of unlawful interception);
(b)a breach of the prohibition imposed by section 9 (restriction on requesting interception by overseas authorities);
(c)a breach of the prohibition imposed by section 10 (restriction on requesting assistance under mutual assistance agreements etc.);
(d)the making of an application by any person for a warrant, or the issue of a warrant, under Chapter 1 of this Part;
(e)the imposition of any requirement on any person to provide assistance in giving effect to a targeted interception warrant or mutual assistance warrant.
(3)The persons referred to in subsection (2)(a) are—
(a)any person who is an intercepting authority (see section 18);
(b)any person holding office under the Crown;
(c)any person deemed to be the proper officer of Revenue and Customs by virtue of section 8(2) of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979;
(d)any person employed by, or for the purposes of, a police force;
(e)any postal operator or telecommunications operator;
(f)any person employed or engaged for the purposes of the business of a postal operator or telecommunications operator.
(4)Any reference in subsection (1) to interception-related conduct also includes any conduct taking place before the coming into force of this section and consisting of—
(a)conduct by a person within subsection (3) that—
(i)was an offence under section 1(1) or (2) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (“RIPA”), or
(ii)would have been such an offence in the absence of any lawful authority (within the meaning of section 1(5) of RIPA);
(b)conduct by a person within subsection (3) that—
(i)was an offence under section 1 of the Interception of Communications Act 1985, or
(ii)would have been such an offence in the absence of subsections (2) and (3) of that section;
(c)a breach by the Secretary of State of the duty under section 1(4) of RIPA (restriction on requesting assistance under mutual assistance agreements);
(d)the making of an application by any person for a warrant, or the issue of a warrant, under—
(i)Chapter 1 of Part 1 of RIPA, or
(ii)the Interception of Communications Act 1985;
(e)the imposition of any requirement on any person to provide assistance in giving effect to a warrant under Chapter 1 of Part 1 of RIPA.
(5)In this section—
“Inquiries Act proceedings” means proceedings of an inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005;
“intercepted communication” means any communication intercepted in the course of its transmission by means of a postal service or telecommunication system.
|
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/25/section/56/enacted
____________________
Honda CBF125 ➝ NC700X
Honda CBF125 ↳ Speed Triple |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg
nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| ScaredyCat |
This post is not being displayed .
|
ScaredyCat
World Chat Champion
Joined: 19 May 2012
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg
nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
|
| Posted: 13:32 - 06 Dec 2016 Post subject: |
|
|
Nope, I'm at a loss to understand what problem you're identifying.
Right now, today, a forged driving photocard is sufficient to obtain any services. It "grants entitlement where it shouldn't". Any wrong 'un who wants to game the system can get one. That problem already exists.
So, what becomes worse when they have to obtain a forged card with a different logo on it?
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
 |
Old Thread Alert!
The last post was made 7 years, 141 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful? |
 |
|
|
Help & FAQs
Search BCF
Members
Groups
Events Calendar
rating
rating