Garda seek permission 2have browser history

TriciaDelicia

Yes. It's true. The Gardaí are making a formal request to Vodaphone O2 etc. that they hold on to all browser history used by all users in case they need it for future cases against "suspected criminals". They are using the case of murderer Joe O'Reilly as evidence of its use.
Is this a breach of your human rights?
Should these companies be allowed to hold on to this information?
If the Garda say 'such & such' is a SUSPECTED criminal is this enough to breach their rights?

Jay D

maybe it's just to cover areas they already aren't covering.

It is a breach of human rights but the thing about it is, if you are doing nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about. It is putting a stop to filesharing maybe sometime soon.

Stay away from childporn though.

Run_to_da_hills

Zillah

Well that's worrying. No idea what the legal standing is, but I'd have thought they'd need a warrant to get any sort of personal info like that. I presume this is mobile browsing considering you mentioned o2 and Vodaphone? Anyone know how it works with normal home internet?

Jay D wrote: »

It is a breach of human rights but the thing about it is, if you are doing nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about. It is putting a stop to filesharing maybe sometime soon.

I hate this argument, it's used all the time. You have a right to privacy, any attempt to circumvent that should be a very serious matter. The argument "you have nothing to worry about if you haven't done anything wrong" just doesn't cut it. The state should have the bare minimum of power it needs over the citizens that it serves.

TriciaDelicia

Zillah wrote: »

Well that's worrying. No idea what the legal standing is, but I'd have thought they'd need a warrant to get any sort of personal info like that. I presume this is mobile browsing considering you mentioned o2 and Vodaphone? Anyone know how it works with normal home internet.

No I didn't just mean mobile internet its with all the companie that supplies internet access. Vodaphone etc. can be used as 'normal home internet' but yeah all browsing history is included whether mobile or not.

ScumLord

BALLS!!

*deletes message history*

MagicMarker

Does this mean i can't look at kiddie porn anymore?

Sharpshooter

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

But you really wanted to put :mad:.
My post was going to be " Hang on , its not Run_to_da_hills.":eek:

monkeyfudge

But they're only supposed to carry information on you that is used for billing.

Browser history isn't relevant to billing you.

tony1kenobi

Your service provider can already access all that information so what odds does it make if the cops can too? I have nothing to hide. It's why I don't wear clothes at work. I am a lollipop man. Currently seeking work, upon release.

Run_to_da_hills

TriciaDelicia wrote: »

Yes. It's true. The Gardaí are making a formal request to Vodaphone O2 etc. that they hold on to all browser history used by all users in case they need it for future cases against "suspected criminals". They are using the case of murderer Joe O'Reilly as evidence of its use.
Is this a breach of your human rights?
Should these companies be allowed to hold on to this information?
If the Garda say 'such & such' is a SUSPECTED criminal is this enough to breach their rights?

Source?

You should always back up your posts with links.

old boy

if you cant cover your tracks dont go

HalloweenJack

I believe the old "1984 was a warning, not a manual" chestnut needs dusting off.

Dyr

yep, its cos they can't get access to browser histories that the cops havent been able to nail anyone for a gangland hit since veronica guerin :pac:

Sharpshooter

MagicMarker wrote: »

Does this mean i can't look at kiddie porn anymore?

Childish post imo......:pac::p

TriciaDelicia

Sorry I know my source is mediocre it was in the Star the minute I saw it I thought I'm gonna freak them feckrs on boards out tonight. lol

GhostInTheRuins

Source?

Edit: nevermind

Jay D

Zillah wrote: »

Well that's worrying. No idea what the legal standing is, but I'd have thought they'd need a warrant to get any sort of personal info like that. I presume this is mobile browsing considering you mentioned o2 and Vodaphone? Anyone know how it works with normal home internet?



I hate this argument, it's used all the time. You have a right to privacy, any attempt to circumvent that should be a very serious matter. The argument "you have nothing to worry about if you haven't done anything wrong" just doesn't cut it. The state should have the bare minimum of power it needs over the citizens that it serves.

don't even get me started on how bad we are actually 'governed'.

it is bull**** but maybe the very least of the actual level of corruption practiced every single day.

Zillah

Bambi wrote: »

yep, its cos they can't get access to browser histories that the cops havent been able to nail anyone for a gangland hit since veronica guerin :pac:

Haha

HalloweenJack wrote: »

I believe the old "1984 was a warning, not a manual" chestnut needs dusting off.

Explain please. Where should we draw the line?

Run_to_da_hills

The Gardai don't have to go near the ISP's for this information at all, they can go directly to the UK Authorities for this seen as they are both bedfellows on this "war on terror", wooops, NWO. :eek:

http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=574

http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=492

Sharpshooter

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

sharpshooterH wrote: »

But you really wanted to put :mad:.
My post was going to be " Hang on , its not Run_to_da_hills.":eek:

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Source?

You should always back up your posts with links.

:D:D:D

Lillyella

How readily available is your browsing history to your ISP's anyway?

And exactly what have they got access to? Full emails?

Biggins

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Source?

You should always back up your posts with links.

Garda chief asks mobile phone firm to retain web-browsing data


Here is where I read it, don't know where the OP read it.

Friday, November 7, 2008
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/1107/1225925540654.html

DETAILED INFORMATION on the web pages people view will be retained for possible future criminal investigations if telecommunications operators comply with a letter from the Garda Commissioner.
The request for real-time web-browsing information - the content or the web address (URL) of every web page browsed by users of mobile handsets, palmtop devices or 3G modems - goes beyond the European Union's data retention directive, which the Government intends to implement as a statutory instrument.
Such a measure would cover the content of web-based email. "The directive does not pertain to the retention of content, and this would be very concerning," said Deputy Data Protection Commissioner Gary Davis.
Industry sources confirmed last night that Vodafone - the largest mobile service provider in the State - had received a letter from the Garda Commissioner.
The Irish Times understands that the chief executives of O2 and 3 Ireland have not yet received the letters requesting the subscribers' browsing history to be retained, although the Garda Commissioner is believed to want to make retention of internet data a requirement for all mobile broadband providers.
Industry sources indicated that Vodafone has met Garda representatives to discuss the letter. Vodafone executives are believed to have questioned the legal basis under which it could retain this data.
Representatives of Vodafone, O2 and 3 discussed the letter at a meeting with Mr Davis yesterday. The meeting had been called to discuss a separate undisclosed telecoms regulation matter
It is understood the request for the web content is based on an appeal to telecommunications operators to act as "good citizens" and aid criminal investigations if asked to do so.
Ireland's draft statutory instrument, which must bring in the EU directive in full, allows for the retention of traffic information relating to phone and mobile calls - already retained in Ireland under legislation passed in 2006 - and also introduces new requirements for the retention of internet data. However, the content of calls or e-mails, or details on webpages browsed, is excluded from the directive and its disclosure would conflict with existing European data protection legislation.

---

Long story short, if your want to keep your privacy in regards to files locked, data in emails attached as files, use PGP (Pretty Good Privacy), the latest version you can get.
Its the only one they so far can't crack.
They might be able to see what you are seein gon the net but keeping your hard data to yourself is another story.

Info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
http://www.pgpi.org/
http://www.heureka.clara.net/sunrise/pgp.htm
etc...

A word of warning: if you lose your encryption keys, consider your data gone for ever.
Not a good thing to encrypt your entire hard drive!
Its the ultimate tool but you HAVE to know what you are doing.

FruitLover

Lillyella wrote: »

How readily available is your browsing history to your ISP's anyway?

And exactly what have they got access to? Full emails?

Well, seeing as everything you access goes through them, they could potentially see every piece of unencrypted data you send or receive over the internet.

That's why I use Tor for my kiddie porn.






Er... I mean...

the_syco

If you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to worry about.

That is, until one of those f**king pop-ups is from a dodgy site, and then you're f**ked.

To paraphrase it: you've done nothing wrong, until we something that is.

Run_to_da_hills

Forget about any encryption, "what you make they can break" Remember the squiggle guy that had his image decrypted?

Biggins wrote: »

Garda chief asks mobile phone firm to retain web-browsing data


Here is where I read it, don't know where the OP read it.

Friday, November 7, 2008
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/1107/1225925540654.html

You beat me to it :mad:

Sharpshooter

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Forget about any encryption, "what you make they can break" Remember the squiggle guy that had his image decrypted?

You are making me scared now........../ and I've done nothing wrong.:pac:

Biggins

Forget about any encryption, "what you make they can break" Remember the squiggle guy that had his image decrypted?

Thats was a reversal of a picture using a photoshop tool (if we're talking about the same guy).
Any one good with professional graphics app could do it. I could.

PGP is the only one at the moment that encrypts info/data at a higher rate than is possible to uncrypt.
Even a simple password is encrypted so much so that using the entire Langley super computers it would take them something like 10,000 years to descramble the password code alone.

To the best of publicly available information, there is no known method which will allow a person or group to break PGP encryption by cryptographic or computational means. Indeed, in 1996, cryptographer Bruce Schneier characterized an early version as being "the closest you're likely to get to military-grade encryption."[1] Early versions of PGP have been found to have theoretical vulnerabilities and so current versions are recommended. In addition to protecting data in transit over a network, PGP encryption can also be used to protect data in long-term data storage such as disk files.

The cryptographic security of PGP encryption depends on the assumption that the algorithms used are unbreakable by direct cryptanalysis with current equipment and techniques. For instance, in the original version, the RSA algorithm was used to encrypt session keys; RSA's security depends upon the one-way function nature of mathematical integer factoring[2]. Likewise, the secret key algorithm used in PGP version 2 was IDEA, which might, at some future time, be found to have a previously unsuspected cryptanalytic flaw. Specific instances of current PGP, or IDEA, insecurities — if they exist — are not publicly known. As current versions of PGP have added additional encryption algorithms, the degree of their cryptographic vulnerability varies with the algorithm used. In practice, each of the algorithms in current use is not publicly known to have cryptanalytic weaknesses.

Any agency wanting to read PGP messages would probably use easier means than standard cryptanalysis, e.g. rubber-hose cryptanalysis or black-bag cryptanalysis i.e. installing some form of trojan horse or keystroke logging software/hardware on the target computer to capture encrypted keyrings and their passwords. The FBI has already used this attack against PGP in its investigations. However, it is important to note that any such vulnerabilities apply not just to PGP, but to all encryption software.

In 2003, an incident involving seized Psion PDAs belonging to members of the Red Brigade indicated that neither the Italian police nor the FBI were able to decode PGP-encrypted files stored on them.

Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy#Security_quality
(There are other confirming sources too)

I have PGP. A day after I got it, I was questioned (by FBI email) as to why I wanted it. Told them to mind their own business.
The simple answer was ...security! ...Like duh!

It was illegal at one stage to share PGP across American state borders but the Internet killed that idea of stopping it getting out.
The best the authorities (everywhere) can do now is try and keep track of who is using it.

Note: The FBI/CIA etc NEVER admit that they cannot crack it (if the passwords alone are long enough) due to they not wanting folk to know that they fail. Instead, a number of times they admitted that its's "near impossible!" - they still want folk to think that they can actually access data - when they can't!

Randi

So if I use next doors and do something illegal, would it not be them that gets in trouble

Biggins

Randi wrote: »

So if I use next doors and do something illegal, would it not be them that gets in trouble

If you can turn yourself invisible, get in and out of the house without leaving your DNA, not leave footprints, no witnesses etc...

If you can do all that and more, you should be breaking into Fort Knox with those talents! LOL

Randi

Biggins wrote: »

If you can turn yourself invisible, get in and out of the house without leaving your DNA, not leave footprints, no witnesses etc...

If you can do all that and more, you should be breaking into Fort Knox with those talents! LOL

I'll plant somebody else DNA that I dont like, ill copy there finger prints and paste them somewhere. so tempting

Biggins

Randi wrote: »

I'll plant somebody else DNA that I dont like, ill copy there finger prints and paste them somewhere. so tempting

...I'm starting to get worried now!

Do you live beside me? :eek:

Randi

Biggins wrote: »

...I'm starting to get worried now!

Do you live beside me? :eek:

haha if I do we can do it to the other neighbour..............god im sooo bored

Sherifu

They can have my non existant browsing history.

Biggins

Randi wrote: »

haha if I do we can do it to the other neighbour..............god im sooo bored

Well I'm off to me bed now but I'm not going to sleep tight knowing you might be out there trying to break into me and get to my pc! :eek:

I'm turning on the electric fence and letting out the guard dogs just in case your about. :P

Randi

Biggins wrote: »

Well I'm off to me bed now but I'm not going to sleep tight knowing you might be out there trying to break into me and get to my pc! :eek:

I'm turning on the electric fence and letting out the guard dogs just in case your about. :P

Ill dig under the fence and throw the dogs a bone feck its half 2 didnt notice that lol time flies when you bord

Biggins

Randi wrote: »

Ill dig under the fence and throw the dogs a bone

Haha, sorry, you'll hit the land mines!
O' and the dogs are trained only to take food from me.

Randi

Biggins wrote: »

Haha, sorry, you'll hit the land mines!
O' and the dogs are trained only to take food from me.

Ill put on dog repellant or dress in a dog costume, ill fly over the fence you better be worth it im tellin ya

gerky

The retention directive that was brought earlier this year covers this,

Categories of data to be retained
1. Member States shall ensure that the following categories of
data are retained under this Directive:
(a) data necessary to trace and identify the source of a
communication:
(1) concerning fixed network telephony and mobile
telephony:
(i) the calling telephone number;
(ii) the name and address of the subscriber or registered
user;
(2) concerning Internet access, Internet e-mail and Internet
telephony:
(i) the user ID(s) allocated;
(ii) the user ID and telephone number allocated to any
communication entering the public telephone
network;
(iii) the name and address of the subscriber or registered
user to whom an Internet Protocol (IP) address, user
ID or telephone number was allocated at the time of
the communication;
(b) data necessary to identify the destination of a
communication:
(1) concerning fixed network telephony and mobile
telephony:
(i) the number(s) dialled (the telephone number(s)
called), and, in cases involving supplementary services
such as call forwarding or call transfer, the
number or numbers to which the call is routed;
(ii) the name(s) and address(es) of the subscriber(s) or
registered user(s);
13.4.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 105/57
(2) concerning Internet e-mail and Internet telephony:
(i) the user ID or telephone number of the intended
recipient(s) of an Internet telephony call;
(ii) the name(s) and address(es) of the subscriber(s) or
registered user(s) and user ID of the intended recipient
of the communication;
(c) data necessary to identify the date, time and duration of a
communication:
(1) concerning fixed network telephony and mobile telephony,
the date and time of the start and end of the
communication;
(2) concerning Internet access, Internet e-mail and Internet
telephony:
(i) the date and time of the log-in and log-off of the
Internet access service, based on a certain time zone,
together with the IP address, whether dynamic or
static, allocated by the Internet access service provider
to a communication, and the user ID of the
subscriber or registered user;
(ii) the date and time of the log-in and log-off of the
Internet e-mail service or Internet telephony service,
based on a certain time zone;
(d) data necessary to identify the type of communication:
(1) concerning fixed network telephony and mobile telephony:
the telephone service used;
(2) concerning Internet e-mail and Internet telephony: the
Internet service used;
(e) data necessary to identify users’ communication equipment
or what purports to be their equipment:
(1) concerning fixed network telephony, the calling
and called telephone numbers;
(2) concerning mobile telephony:
(i) the calling and called telephone numbers;
(ii) the International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI)
of the calling party;
(iii) the International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI)
of the calling party;
(iv) the IMSI of the called party;
(v) the IMEI of the called party;
(vi) in the case of pre-paid anonymous services, the date
and time of the initial activation of the service and
the location label (Cell ID) from which the service
was activated;
(3) concerning Internet access, Internet e-mail and Internet
telephony:
(i) the calling telephone number for dial-up access;
(ii) the digital subscriber line (DSL) or other end point
of the originator of the communication;
(f) data necessary to identify the location of mobile communication
equipment:
(1) the location label (Cell ID) at the start of the
communication;
(2) data identifying the geographic location of cells by reference
to their location labels (Cell ID) during the period
for which communications data are retained.
2. No data revealing the content of the communication may be
retained pursuant to this Directive.

All of this information that's kept on us can be accessed without a court order, it seems now that they want the ISP's to not only keep track of who we are emailing and stuff like that, they also want them to retain the content of the emails and possibly pm's and texts too.

For all of you that say "well if your not doing anything wrong then you shouldn't be worried" how do you feel knowing that your neighbour/friend/relation that happens to be a guard can fairly easily see everything you do on the net.

You can find out all about a person by their internet use, you can find out their health problems,relationships,what they post where they post it, if they are in to porn, you can tell what floats their boat and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

And for those who post that I'm going over board, there have already been cases of guards snooping for their own uses.

Run_to_da_hills

gerky wrote: »

The retention directive that was brought earlier this year covers this,




All of this information that's kept on us can be accessed without a court order, it seems now that they want the ISP's to not only keep track of who we are emailing and stuff like that, they also want them to retain the content of the emails and possibly pm's and texts too.

For all of you that say "well if your not doing anything wrong then you shouldn't be worried" how do you feel knowing that your neighbour/friend/relation that happens to be a guard can fairly easily see everything you do on the net.

You can find out all about a person by their internet use, you can find out their health problems,relationships,what they post where they post it, if they are in to porn, you can tell what floats their boat and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

And for those who post that I'm going over board, there have already been cases of guards snooping for their own uses.

Hitler and Stalin would have given their right hands to have this wonderful technology to be able to search through and invade the privacy of individuals in this atrocious manner.

During WW2 Nazi intelligence had to get their hands dirty in order to hunt down Jews, gays gypsies and all those that resisted the system.

This will be a peace of pi*s to the authorities of the NWO as they can do all this from the comfort of an office. :eek:

ScumLord

Biggins wrote: »

Well I'm off to me bed now but I'm not going to sleep tight knowing you might be out there trying to break into me and get to my pc! :eek:

I'm turning on the electric fence and letting out the guard dogs just in case your about. :P

I broke my spiny ashtray and I blame you.

The Mighty Ken

What a gross vioation. If people aren't completely outraged they should be. Sure why don't we just let the Gardai stick CCTV's in our home FFS?

SimpleSam06

Bambi wrote: »

yep, its cos they can't get access to browser histories that the cops havent been able to nail anyone for a gangland hit since veronica guerin :pac:

My guess is this is aimed at Eastern European crime syndicates. They are hard enough to track with the language barrier. I'm still opposed to this though.

Doodee

whats to stop them using a netcafe. This is bs, just cause im innocent doesn't mean i shouldn't worry. According to the OH they voted against th this in germany

Gummy Panda

Its not gonna be like Garda John Lynch just rings up the network and gets this info.

Its going to involve alot of red tape. Even now there is lenghty process for getting information from the networks.

I wouldn't worry too much tbh.

Run_to_da_hills

The Mighty Ken wrote: »

What a gross violation. If people aren't completely outraged they should be. Sure why don't we just let the Gardai stick CCTV's in our home FFS?

I am pretty sure there is software already availible that can switch on the webcam in your PC unknowingly. All new generation laptops have built in webcams. This would be very convenient for Big Brother to track you and look at your face when using free wifi on the bus or train. As mentioned in another post they have the technology to turn your 3G mobile phone into a "roving bug" even if its switched off.


There would be a national outcry if we woke up in the morning and found that all our personal letters were opened and sellotaped over with a Garda stamp, "Sorry, we had to open your latters to inspect them for "terrorist and criminal activity" it is all for your benefit and in the interest of national security". Opening and snooping through your personal "electronic letters" is no different as it is just an up to date version of the old snail mail.

I commend Vodafone for bringing this to the light of the Irish Times.

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Its not gonna be like Garda John Lynch just rings up the network and gets this info.

Its going to involve alot of red tape. Even now there is lenghty process for getting information from the networks.

I wouldn't worry too much tbh.

If they follow in the same paranoid footsteps as the UK and US authorities bloody right we should be concerned. It may not be such a threat now but put a beggar on horseback and he’ll ride to hell, God knows what else they will want to know about us.

gerky

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Its not gonna be like Garda John Lynch just rings up the network and gets this info.

Its going to involve alot of red tape. Even now there is lenghty process for getting information from the networks.

I wouldn't worry too much tbh.

Well apparently it is quite easy, a court order isn't needed and the data retention commissioner said earlier this year that their had been 300,000 requests for access to data, something tells me that there isn't exactly that much terrorist/criminal activity going on that needs access to data.

Afaik there were guards reprimanded for looking at their partners phone records.

apathetic84

i think there are valid points supporting both sides of this argument.

i have nothing to hide but i would like my permission asked before my message/browsing histories are accessed.

towel401

just use a satellite phone. the gardee have more trouble getting records from any of those

pgp has probably been cracked. or there is at least a few supercomputers busy with trying to crack it. before a new encryption scheme comes out i'm sure the FBI have a word with the designer before he's allowed to release it if it's too hard to crack they put him on a plane to guantanamo. the only encryption that still works is one-time pads made with a decent hardware random number generator and even those are useless against this sort of thing because they're not looking to scan the contents of the message

shenanigans1982

This is all due to pressure from the American government because somebody mentioned an Obama assassination attempt. I look forward to meeting everybody who posted in that thread during our five minute exercise break in camp Ex-Bray.

fumpidge

towel401 wrote: »

just use a satellite phone. the gardee have more trouble getting records from any of those

Nothing in modern telecommunications is immune from being monitored. the FBI would be grateful to assist the Irish Authorities in any surveylance equipment required for such.