UK spy agency GCHQ records EVERY INTERNET USER'S browsing history.

hatrickpatrick

Glenn Greenwald and his colleagues at The Intercept, the organisation which is home to the entire cache of mass surveillance documents Edward Snowden leaked from the NSA and its international partners, have discovered documents which now prove conclusively that GCHQ's Tempora program (revealed earlier to involve hacking into and tapping the international undersea cables which hold the internet together) was not, as was claimed at the time, targeted specifically at suspected terrorists.

What most of us probably guessed at the time, that GCHQ was using their program to indiscriminately record the internet usage of every single internet user, is in fact the case.

https://theintercept.com/2015/09/25/gchq-radio-porn-spies-track-web-users-online-identities/

I have quoted some of the article below, the article itself and the embedded links to the raw classified documents obtained from the Snowden archive go into far more detail.

This is quite clearly one of the most egregious abuses of power among Western governments in the 21st century. It runs absolutely roughshod over every concept of decency, civil freedom, privacy, and the social contract between governments and those they are supposed to be serving.

The possibilities are endless and truly bone chilling. A political dissident who the government views as a threat, publicly discredited after someone leaks that they visit BDSM websites. A corporate whistleblower, silenced after a phone call threatens to reveal details of their affair. An investigative journalist, bullied into abandoning a story they were working on after being told that their visits to websites for depression or anxiety self-help would be publicised. A budding politician, discredited after GCHQ pulls some data which shows that they were making racist jokes with their friends on Facebook when they were teenagers.

This story is a truly terrifying escalation in the ongoing unfolding surveillance scandal, and given that it comes at a time when the UK government is behaving increasingly dictatorially towards the internet (the WHOLE internet, not just UK internet users) and vying for even greater legal authorities to spy on ordinary people "for the greater good", I only hope these revelations can kick-start a public backlash which finally puts individual privacy to the forefront of the political agenda.

THERE WAS A SIMPLE AIM at the heart of the top-secret program: Record the website browsing habits of “every visible user on the Internet.”

Before long, billions of digital records about ordinary people’s online activities were being stored every day. Among them were details cataloging visits to porn, social media and news websites, search engines, chat forums, and blogs.

The mass surveillance operation — code-named KARMA POLICE — was launched by British spies about seven years ago without any public debate or scrutiny. It was just one part of a giant global Internet spying apparatus built by the United Kingdom’s electronic eavesdropping agency, Government Communications Headquarters, or GCHQ.

The revelations about the scope of the British agency’s surveillance are contained in documents obtained by The Intercept from National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden. Previous reports based on the leaked files have exposed how GCHQ taps into Internet cables to monitor communications on a vast scale, but many details about what happens to the data after it has been vacuumed up have remained unclear.

Amid a renewed push from the U.K. government for more surveillance powers, more than two dozen documents being disclosed today by The Intercept reveal for the first time several major strands of GCHQ’s existing electronic eavesdropping capabilities.

One system builds profiles showing people’s web browsing histories. Another analyzes instant messenger communications, emails, Skype calls, text messages, cell phone locations, and social media interactions. Separate programs were built to keep tabs on “suspicious” Google searches and usage of Google Maps.

The surveillance is underpinned by an opaque legal regime that has authorized GCHQ to sift through huge archives of metadata about the private phone calls, emails and Internet browsing logs of Brits, Americans, and any other citizens — all without a court order or judicial warrant.

Metadata reveals information about a communication — such as the sender and recipient of an email, or the phone numbers someone called and at what time — but not the written content of the message or the audio of the call.

As of 2012, GCHQ was storing about 50 billion metadata records about online communications and Web browsing activity every day, with plans in place to boost capacity to 100 billion daily by the end of that year. The agency, under cover of secrecy, was working to create what it said would soon be the biggest government surveillance system anywhere in the world.

Radio radicalization

The power of KARMA POLICE was illustrated in 2009, when GCHQ launched a top-secret operation to collect intelligence about people using the Internet to listen to radio shows.

The agency used a sample of nearly 7 million metadata records, gathered over a period of three months, to observe the listening habits of more than 200,000 people across 185 countries, including the U.S., the U.K., Ireland, Canada, Mexico, Spain, the Netherlands, France, and Germany.

A GCHQ graphic illustrating how KARMA POLICE works
A summary report detailing the operation shows that one aim of the project was to research “potential misuse” of Internet radio stations to spread radical Islamic ideas.

GCHQ spies from a unit known as the Network Analysis Center compiled a list of the most popular stations that they had identified, most of which had no association with Islam, like France-based Hotmix Radio, which plays pop, rock, funk and hip-hop music.

They zeroed in on any stations found broadcasting recitations from the Quran, such as a popular Iraqi radio station and a station playing sermons from a prominent Egyptian imam named Sheikh Muhammad Jebril. They then used KARMA POLICE to find out more about these stations’ listeners, identifying them as users on Skype, Yahoo, and Facebook.

The summary report says the spies selected one Egypt-based listener for “profiling” and investigated which other websites he had been visiting. Surveillance records revealed the listener had viewed the porn site Redtube, as well as Facebook, Yahoo, YouTube, Google’s blogging platform Blogspot, the photo-sharing site Flickr, a website about Islam, and an Arab advertising site.

GCHQ’s documents indicate that the plans for KARMA POLICE were drawn up between 2007 and 2008. The system was designed to provide the agency with “either (a) a web browsing profile for every visible user on the Internet, or (b) a user profile for every visible website on the Internet.”

The origin of the surveillance system’s name is not discussed in the documents. But KARMA POLICE is also the name of a popular song released in 1997 by the Grammy Award-winning British band Radiohead, suggesting the spies may have been fans.

A verse repeated throughout the hit song includes the lyric, “This is what you’ll get, when you mess with us.”

strelok

hopefully they can use it to catch some of the dastardly men and women who disagree with feminists on the internet

KERSPLAT!

My browsing history probably consists of boards, BBC football, Netflix and porn for the most part, they can do what they want with that information!

Buona Fortuna

Ellie2008

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

My browsing history probably consists of boards, BBC football, Netflix and porn for the most part, they can do what they want with that information!

Would you not mind if your boss knew you wanted porn?

Buona Fortuna

Ellie2008 wrote: »

Would you not mind if your boss knew you wanted porn?

He doesn't want it, he just arrives at the page by accident

Streetwalker

Sinister stuff alright.

KERSPLAT!

Ellie2008 wrote: »

Would you not mind if your boss knew you wanted porn?

Not in the slightest. Sure why would he care, I don't watch it in work!

The_Valeyard

Who watches the watchers

kneemos

Ellie2008 wrote: »

Would you not mind if your boss knew you wanted porn?

Cameron stuck his micky in a pig and smoked dope,nobody gives a shoite.
Unless your local presidential candidate it in cahoots with ISIS I doubt anyone will really care much what they do on the internet.
Plus knowledge of affairs or ill health have always been badly kept secrets.

The Backwards Man

If I gave a fcuk I'd stay off the internet.

hatrickpatrick

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Not in the slightest. Sure why would he care, I don't watch it in work!

You're running for election on an anti-establishment platform, and somebody leaks the fact that you watch hardcore bondage porn, which is still taboo. Or that you're visiting a counsellor for mental health issues. Or that you once cheated on your girlfriend. Or that you look up websites which show you how to make bongs.

There are plenty of things which most people perfectly legitimately wouldn't want the entire world to know about, particularly people who are in public life or trying to enter a career in public life.

Matt_Trakker

The Backwards Man wrote: »

If I gave a fcuk I'd stay off the internet.

Yea, I'm the same.

But if you do want to do some searching without being monitored, then have a look here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Tor_hidden_services

JustTheOne

I blame Denis o brien.

kneemos

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

You're running for election on an anti-establishment platform, and somebody leaks the fact that you watch hardcore bondage porn, which is still taboo. Or that you're visiting a counsellor for mental health issues. Or that you once cheated on your girlfriend. Or that you look up websites which show you how to make bongs.

There are plenty of things which most people perfectly legitimately wouldn't want the entire world to know about, particularly people who are in public life or trying to enter a career in public life.

This stuff has always been discoverable.

osarusan

HEY GCHQ, ARE YOU READING THIS?



SCREW YOU

hatrickpatrick

kneemos wrote: »

This stuff has always been discoverable.

Sure it has, but the idea that the government is literally warehousing every single thing every one of us does every day online is to me a massive abuse of power. Unless I'm suspected of a crime, they shouldn't have the right to collect anything I haven't chosen to give them.

Pink Lemons

God help the man who stumbles across my porn history.

Mother Brain

Just another signpost on the path to totalitarianism we are sleepwalking into.

It never fails to amaze me that people can be so blasé about this stuff. The whole "well i don't get up to any mischief so I don't really mind" attitude boggles my mind. The principle alone is enough to make me angry. Sure, I don't get up to any shennanigans either but it still feels like a violation.

Funny now that I think about it, many other threads have asked about how appropriate it is for someone in a relationship to dig through their partners phone and are met with howling rage about the invasion of privacy, but if multiple faceless government organisations do it it's like "meh".

asherbassad

kneemos wrote: »

This stuff has always been discoverable.

Yes, but only with a search warrant. If you are so comfortable with your mail being read then give me all your email/twitter/fb/etc. passwords. I just want to have a look. No harm no foul, right?

One eyed Jack

The leader is good, the leader is great...


Seriously, all of us will be dead before anyone gives a sh1te about any of this stuff. Look at how much we know about our ancestors already through recorded history?

Anyone think James Joyce gives a sh1t about people knowing how he obsessed about Nora's farts?




Dirty fcuker :pac:

KomradeBishop

Jesus...fúcking hell, that's about the worst possible outcome of this spying program - using it literally in the most undemocratic, damaging way possible.

It is also highly likely that this goes on in Ireland as well - where we can't even trust our own ISP's, not to openly fúck over their customers right on this very forum, in view of everyone - what's to stop them collaborating with any kind of intelligence agency they want (or at least our own undocumented intelligence agency), so long as the state would be willing to turn a blind eye?

This country has a history of such spying after all, with previous incidences of phone tapping.

The_Valeyard

Time to vpn and proxy up!

Son Of A Vidic

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

My browsing history probably consists of boards, BBC football, Netflix and porn for the most part, they can do what they want with that information!

They'll probably just use it for fapping.

People have been willingly compromising their privacy for years. Most or many have publicly announced details of their whereabouts and activities, their acquaintances and their habits and predilections, their relationships and affiliations and their attitudes to their work. Facebook and similar sites were at the vanguard of the erosion of personal privacy, and many of the people shocked at a government agency collecting information via the internet have been willingly feeding that information into it for years.

Which isn't to excuse state spying, but just to point out that privacy isn't just being stolen but also surrendered.

strelok

Candie wrote: »

People have been willingly compromising their privacy for years. Most or many have publicly announced details of their whereabouts and activities, their acquaintances and their habits and predilections, their relationships and affiliations and their attitudes to their work. Facebook and similar sites were at the vanguard of the erosion of personal privacy, and many of the people shocked at a government agency collecting information via the internet have been willingly feeding that information into it for years.

Which isn't to excuse state spying, but just to point out that privacy isn't just being stolen but also surrendered.

there is quite the difference between voluntary and involuntary

i might choose to allow someone to penetrate me after I've had a few pints, doesn't mean any guard or civil servant can just saunter inside me if the mood strikes.

KomradeBishop

Candie wrote: »

People have been willingly compromising their privacy for years. Most or many have publicly announced details of their whereabouts and activities, their acquaintances and their habits and predilections, their relationships and affiliations and their attitudes to their work. Facebook and similar sites were at the vanguard of the erosion of personal privacy, and many of the people shocked at a government agency collecting information via the internet have been willingly feeding that information into it for years.

Which isn't to excuse state spying, but just to point out that privacy isn't just being stolen but also surrendered.

In this case, it's a situation of privacy being impossible - not even your supposedly 'private' communications (Skype/IM/email conversations) are private.

Barely anything is adequately encrypted either - if you want to stick to only secure/encrypted use of the Internet, you make something in the range of ~90% of stuff you might want to do on the Internet, totally impractical.

Just a simple basic example: Good luck sending any more emails, if you have an 'encrypted communication only' rule - you might as well just stop sending emails altogether. Pretty much nobody uses PGP or anything for email. Exclude this, and it means that you can't register for practically any kind of website, as none of them use encrypted email for registration.


Even if you want to and make an effort to maintain your privacy, it's not actually possible at all anymore - this is more dangerous than anyone realizes at the moment, as right now things are pretty peaceful politically in this part of the world - but if there's every any amount of political violence in the future, and you end up holding the 'wrong' political views, there will be a decades-long permanent record of you, allowing easy identification and targeting of you, at any time in the future (and governments worldwide, trade this kind of information with each other).

You can control the politics of entire countries, with this kind of leverage on people - so it's a huge threat to democracy.

ejabrod

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Who watches the watchers

the watchers ?

strelok

strelok wrote: »

there is quite the difference between voluntary and involuntary.

KomradeBishop wrote: »

In this case, it's a situation of privacy being impossible - not even your supposedly 'private' communications (Skype/IM/email conversations) are private.

Yes, obviously I know there is a difference, as I alluded to.

My point is that concepts of privacy and relative privacy have been eroded for years, both voluntarily and involuntarily. It's a climate that's developed where the perception of privacy isn't as absolute as it was, and should still be.

kneemos

Candie wrote: »

Yes, obviously I know there is a difference, as I alluded to.

My point is that concepts of privacy and relative privacy have been eroded for years, both voluntarily and involuntarily. It's a climate that's developed where the perception of privacy isn't as absolute as it was, and should still be.

Time we had a national ID card.

chillin117

I'm Outraged. Joe shall hear of this tomorrow.

kneemos

kneemos wrote: »

Time we had a national ID card.

”Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.”

Ben Franklin

darkpagandeath

So they Have access to the information Isp's are obliged to keep...

Mother Brain

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The leader is good, the leader is great...


Seriously, all of us will be dead before anyone gives a sh1te about any of this stuff. Look at how much we know about our ancestors already through recorded history?

Anyone think James Joyce gives a sh1t about people knowing how he obsessed about Nora's farts?




Dirty fcuker :pac:

We know stuff now about Joyce after his death, where it would be impossible to say, charge him with indecent conduct and lock him up for it as may have been the case with the victorian sensibilities of the government at the time.

Candie wrote: »

People have been willingly compromising their privacy for years. Most or many have publicly announced details of their whereabouts and activities, their acquaintances and their habits and predilections, their relationships and affiliations and their attitudes to their work. Facebook and similar sites were at the vanguard of the erosion of personal privacy, and many of the people shocked at a government agency collecting information via the internet have been willingly feeding that information into it for years.

Which isn't to excuse state spying, but just to point out that privacy isn't just being stolen but also surrendered.

I totally agree, however I would maintain the difference being that facebook isn't able to lock you up for the content of your "private" data. Sure, they sell it to advertisers, and perhaps could be forced to comply with a surrender order to a government agency if compelled to do so. But in and of themselves, facebook doesn't have the power to look through all of your data and then charge you with a crime and potentially lock you up for it. Only governments have that power, and they're the ones with the ability to scan not only your facebook data, but your emails, skype calls, im's, search terms etc. Facebook can't read your data outside of facebook. The governments can and do and they have no right to. It's against their own laws for a start.

Why should anyone comply with the governments law when the government don't abide by it themselves?

One eyed Jack

Mother Brain wrote: »

Why should anyone comply with the governments law when the government don't abide by it themselves?

Well, because as you point out yourself, the State has the power to lock people up for criminal behaviour, as it should be. If someone isn't engaged in criminal behaviour, then these sorts of intelligence operations wouldn't have any impact on their lives.

I'm not sure new laws can be applied retrospectively. However if someone engages or is engaged in behaviour that's already criminal, they are aware of the consequences and are totally responsible for their own actions.

Being fellated by a dead pig is humiliating if it becomes public knowledge, but it isn't a criminal offence AFAIK?

Shep_Dog

Mother Brain wrote: »

But in and of themselves, facebook doesn't have the power to look through all of your data and then charge you with a crime and potentially lock you up for it.

The can and they do. If FB or Google etc find anything illegal in your posts or photos they can report you to relevant authorities. For example: http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/5/5970141/how-google-scans-your-gmail-for-child-porn

Mother Brain wrote: »

Why should anyone comply with the governments law when the government don't abide by it themselves?

Because the accused's lawyers will want money up front, and a lot of it.

Shep_Dog

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Being fellated by a dead pig is humiliating if it becomes public knowledge, but it isn't a criminal offence AFAIK?

Pictures of such an act would be illegal in the UK.

If the pig was cooked later there could be breach of Food Safety laws....

Mother Brain

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well, because as you point out yourself, the State has the power to lock people up for criminal behaviour, as it should be. If someone isn't engaged in criminal behaviour, then these sorts of intelligence operations wouldn't have any impact on their lives.

So basically the argument is, the government can do what it wants because it has the power to oppress you.

That's the beginnings of totalitarianism in action.

Also, I reject the "if you have nothing to hide" argument. It's like arguing that freedom of speech doesn't matter because you've got nothing to say.

The bottom line is it's illegal. I'm not aware of any argument that can be made against compliance with the law if and when you feel like it.

Mother Brain

Shep_Dog wrote: »

The can and they do. If FB or Google etc find anything illegal in your posts or photos they can report you to relevant authorities. For example: http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/5/5970141/how-google-scans-your-gmail-for-child-porn

Yeah they informed the authorities. Who do have the power to do something about it.

Facebook can't despatch the facebook police to come to your house and lock you up in facebook prison.

darkpagandeath

Shep_Dog wrote: »

Pictures of such an act would be illegal in the UK.

If the pig was cooked later there could be breach of Food Safety laws....

You cannot commit a crime on a dead animals body for one.

Got a link to the food safety law ?

Into The Blue

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Unless I'm suspected of a crime, they shouldn't have the right to collect anything I haven't chosen to give them.

Why not? If they waited on folk to give them permission to look through stuff they'd be fücked! I really think our right to privacy laws needs a looking at.. The scum hiding behind it are laughing at us.

Playboy

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well, because as you point out yourself, the State has the power to lock people up for criminal behaviour, as it should be. If someone isn't engaged in criminal behaviour, then these sorts of intelligence operations wouldn't have any impact on their lives.

I'm not sure new laws can be applied retrospectively. However if someone engages or is engaged in behaviour that's already criminal, they are aware of the consequences and are totally responsible for their own actions.

Being fellated by a dead pig is humiliating if it becomes public knowledge, but it isn't a criminal offence AFAIK?

Kind of a contradictory statement? Last time I checked getting fellated by a dead pig can have an impact on your life especially if you are in public office.

Shep_Dog

darkpagandeath wrote: »

You cannot commit a crime on a dead animals body for one.

The actual act with a dead animal could be illegal in some countries. I did see a reference to this being illegal in Winsconsin.

A photograph of such an act, or even a cartoon, would be illegal under the UKs https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_Justice_and_Immigration_Act_2008"] extreme porn laws.

Got a link to the food safety law ?

That would be a 'backup' charge to be cooked up in case the primary charge failed.

kowloon

Candie wrote: »

Facebook and similar sites were at the vanguard of the erosion of personal privacy, and many of the people shocked at a government agency collecting information via the internet have been willingly feeding that information into it for years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juQcZO_WnsI

kowloon

darkpagandeath wrote: »

You cannot commit a crime on a dead animals body for one.

Got a link to the food safety law ?

Cameron insists on all pork being cooked until his juices run clear.

Capt'n Midnight

Just a reminder that most "Irish" internet providers are foreign owned and use foreign equipment and that most links coming into this country terminate in a ECHELON country. Those countries have also banned Huawei and ZTE as has India in case it phones home. We of course have installed a lot of it recently.

CISCO gear has publicly acknowledged backdoors for law enforcement use. And the security ain't great so third parties could and probably use them. Israeli kit and software almost certain phones home too.

BTW: this is the tower that intercepted Irish - UK calls back in the day.
http://www.lamont.me.uk/capenhurst/original.html even back then voice recognition and word recognition software could capture interesting calls.

Capt'n Midnight

Matt_Trakker wrote: »

Yea, I'm the same.

But if you do want to do some searching without being monitored, then have a look here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Tor_hidden_services

Tor alone is not enough. Don't forget that the NSA / GCHQ / others / criminals are probably operating a sizeable number of exit nodes and so have direct access to the traffic and can see anything that's not encrypted.

The NSA have a watch list. Using certain words in emails or being curious about things like Tor may be enough to get you added to the list. No one would suggest that other countries would be different.

Tor can help hide where you browse from your ISP though as could any VPN.

ClovenHoof

Mother Brain wrote: »

Just another signpost on the path to totalitarianism we are sleepwalking into.

It never fails to amaze me that people can be so blasé about this stuff. The whole "well i don't get up to any mischief so I don't really mind" attitude boggles my mind. The principle alone is enough to make me angry. Sure, I don't get up to any shennanigans either but it still feels like a violation.

Funny now that I think about it, many other threads have asked about how appropriate it is for someone in a relationship to dig through their partners phone and are met with howling rage about the invasion of privacy, but if multiple faceless government organisations do it it's like "meh".

This is boards. Most of the mother****ers on her are Irish government civil servants. They exist for no other purpose than to defend government policy and belittle citizens concerns of the growing totalitarianism of our so called democratic governments.

Them Partnership pay days and 'Entitlements' buy perfect toadies.

entropi

I wonder if they pick up on the word "Orwellian" in their list of key words, since it seems the beginnings of it exist now.

The_Valeyard

ejabrod wrote: »

the watchers ?

ST: TNG S03 E04

custard gannet

I am shocked and appalled at this revelation of something that has been common knowledge for the last, at a minimum, 16 years.