EU legislation will allow authorities search your PC remotly without a warrent.

Run_to_da_hills · 05-01-2009 2:25pm #1

Police and state intelligence agencies from several countries may soon be working together to secretly hack into private citizens' personal computers without their knowledge and without a warrant.

According to a London Times report, the police hacking process, called "remote searching," enables law enforcement to gather information from e-mails, instant messages and Web browsers, even while hundreds of miles away.

A new edict by the European Union's council of ministers in Brussels has paved the way for international law enforcement agencies to begin remote searching and sharing the information with each other.

According to the Times, the United Kingdom's Home Office, the nation's lead government department for immigration, drugs and counter-terrorism enforcement, has already quietly adopted a plan that would enable French, German and other European Union police forces to request remote searching be done on UK citizens' computers.

This is as intrusive as someone busting down your hall door and coming into your home.

This just gives us siome insight to the type of envasive totalitarian control we can expect from the EU and all this is before the European Constitution gets ratified.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5439604.ece

Galvasean · 05-01-2009 2:27pm

Oh no

Quazzie · 05-01-2009 2:27pm

Snyper is NOT gonna like this!!!

AnonoBoy · 05-01-2009 2:34pm

I've missed you Run_to_da_Hills.

It's great to be back at work again!

Sarky · 05-01-2009 2:36pm

Damn fatcats, stealing our megahurtz and our... Well, stealing our megahurtz.

chin_grin · 05-01-2009 2:39pm

Quick guys. EVERYONE. Turn your PC's off.

shenanigans1982 · 05-01-2009 2:41pm

Lets all look up porn so when they search through our PC's they will think all we do is look at porn.

dr.bollocko · 05-01-2009 2:42pm

chin_grin wrote: »

Quick guys. EVERYONE. Turn your PC's off.

Done!
fnaw fnaw fnaw.

Danbo! · 05-01-2009 2:44pm

What about this part?

A remote search can be granted if a senior officer says he “believes” that it is “proportionate” and necessary to prevent or detect serious crime — defined as any offence attracting a jail sentence of more than three years

followed by

Police say that such methods are necessary to investigate suspects who use cyberspace to carry out crimes. These include paedophiles, internet fraudsters, identity thieves and terrorists.

Im not a paedophile, an internet fraudster, an identity thief or a terrorist. So unless you are, who cares?

AnonoBoy · 05-01-2009 2:47pm

....and this is why I use a Mac.

*self-satisfied smug grin*

Nodin · 05-01-2009 2:47pm

shenanigans1982 wrote: »

Lets all look up porn so when they search through our PC's they will think all we do is look at porn.

And if everyone looks at porn, that'll create the perfect cover for looking at porn.

Mind you, I've already wrapped my PC in tinfoil, put a false beard on it and called it "Gerry". It'll tell them nothin...

Donald-Duck · 05-01-2009 2:49pm

noblestee wrote: »

What about this part?

followed by

Im not a paedophile, an internet fraudster, an identity thief or a terrorist. So unless you are, who cares?

BECAUSE THE EU ARE TRYING TO CONTROL OUR LIVES. It's an RTDH thread, he strives for the attention by selectivly cutting and pasting into his OP.

ScumLord · 05-01-2009 2:49pm

They've just ruined spy movies for our grandchildren.

Earthhorse · 05-01-2009 2:50pm

chin_grin wrote: »

Quick guys. EVERYONE. Turn your PC's off.

Is he gone yet?

LEIN · 05-01-2009 2:51pm

noblestee wrote: »

Im not a paedophile, an internet fraudster, an identity thief or a terrorist. So unless you are, who cares?

Fair point but my business is mine. I have noting to hide but id rather Keep my personal information personal.

Run_to_da_hills · 05-01-2009 2:51pm

noblestee wrote: »

What about this part?

followed by

Im not a paedophile, an internet fraudster, an identity thief or a terrorist. So unless you are, who cares?

Would you let the authorities into your house and rummage through your filing cabinet and personal belongings including letters etc without a warrent?

shenanigans1982 · 05-01-2009 2:52pm

noblestee wrote: »

Im not a paedophile, an internet fraudster, an identity thief or a terrorist. So unless you are, who cares?

Neither was Jean Charles De Mendez....be careful or British police will shoot you from inside your monitor.

Donald-Duck · 05-01-2009 2:52pm

Damo9090 wrote: »

Fair point but my business is mine. I have noting to hide but id rather Keep my personal information personal.

Well what business do you do that would lead them to suspect you enough to search your pc?

Donald-Duck · 05-01-2009 2:52pm

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Would you let the authorities into your house and rummage through your filing cabinet and personal belongings without a warrent?

If they had reasonable belief I wouldn't care less.

Guy:Incognito · 05-01-2009 2:54pm

Damo9090 wrote: »

Fair point but my business is mine. I have noting to hide but id rather Keep my personal information personal.

You should really get off tinternet so. If goverments can decide to do it, there are a lot more clever people about that could decide to have a snoop if they choose.

I'm looking at you gay animal porn right now as it happens.

Donald-Duck wrote: »

If they had reasonable belief I wouldn't care less.

They can look anywhere except my thong drawer.

LEIN · 05-01-2009 2:54pm

Donald-Duck wrote: »

Well what business do you do that would lead them to suspect you enough to search your pc?

Sh1t there on to me! Time to burn my hard drive!

chin_grin · 05-01-2009 2:55pm

Aw shucks. My fantasy of frollicking freely on AH has been ruined again. I'll get you next time gadget. <meow>

BaconZombie · 05-01-2009 2:55pm

If that did why not just get a search warrant in the first place?

Donald-Duck wrote: »

If they had reasonable belief I wouldn't care less.

MackDeToaster · 05-01-2009 2:56pm

noblestee wrote: »

Im not a paedophile, an internet fraudster, an identity thief or a terrorist. So unless you are, who cares?

Civil liberties ? Innocent unless proven guilty ? It's all mission creep and you can be sure this is only more of the same.

i don't wear a tinfoil hat but you only have to look at the UK and witness Gordon Brown shutting down Icelandic banks using anti-terrorist legislation of all things, or anti-terrorist legislation being used by county councils to see who's trying to get their kids into schools in different boroughs and the like to see how these powers are abused and used far beyond their supposed original remit.

banshee_bones · 05-01-2009 2:57pm

Damo9090 wrote: »

Fair point but my business is mine. I have noting to hide but id rather Keep my personal information personal.

Exactly. It is still an invasion of privacy

LEIN · 05-01-2009 2:57pm

Stekelly wrote: »

You should really get off tinternet so. If goverments can decide to do it, there are a lot more clever people about that could decide to have a snoop if they choose.

I'm looking at your gay animal porn right now as it happens.

Its for a project i am doing up. I swear.:D

I really do put too much trust in my anti-virus!

Guy:Incognito · 05-01-2009 2:58pm

BOFH_139 wrote: »

If that did why not just get a search warrant in the first place?

Whats the difference? All this is doing is cutting out the going to a judge or whoever and getting a warrant bit.

Mountain range out of a molehill tbh.

Damo9090 wrote: »

Its for a project i am doing up. I swear.:D

pffffft "research for a book" ftw.:)

Personnally I'm creating an annual of all the filthiest muck on the internet.:D

Danbo! · 05-01-2009 2:59pm

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Would you let the authorities into your house and rummage through your filing cabinet and personal belongings including letters etc without a warrent?

If they had a good reason to then yes, just to disprove them.

Cow Moolester · 05-01-2009 3:00pm

shenanigans1982 wrote: »

Lets all look up porn so when they search through our PC's they will think all we do is look at porn.

Pshh...like I need to be told to do that:rolleyes:

Guy:Incognito · 05-01-2009 3:00pm

noblestee wrote: »

If they had a good reason to then yes, just to disprove them.

If anything they'd probably just find some stuff for you that you thought you'd lost.

Guy:Incognito · 05-01-2009 3:02pm

shenanigans1982 wrote: »

Lets all look up porn so when they search through our PC's they will think all we do is look at porn.

I've known this was coming for years and have already put in the leg work.

Terry · 05-01-2009 3:08pm

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Would you let the authorities into your house and rummage through your filing cabinet and personal belongings including letters etc without a warrent?

Yes.
I've nothing to hide.
Do you?

lisbon_lions · 05-01-2009 3:16pm

Im glad some people have no issue with this, thats great.

What if you have a 14 yo daughter - you are quite happy for some middle aged men to trace through her emails and check her browsing history then so?
Well good for you, thats great.

Danbo! · 05-01-2009 3:17pm

Stekelly wrote: »

If anything they'd probably just find some stuff for you that you thought you'd lost.

Actually I did mislay my plans to overthrow the government, and my documents with solid proof of the existence of the NWO.

Danbo! · 05-01-2009 3:18pm

lisbon_lions wrote: »

What if you have a 14 yo daughter - you are quite happy for some middle aged men to trace through her emails and check her browsing history then so?
Well good for you, thats great.

:rolleyes: I would assume, if I had a 14 yo daughter, that she would be looking at bebo or chatting on MSN, wheres the problem?

Ciaran500 · 05-01-2009 3:19pm

<3BeingIN6th wrote: »

Yes.
I've nothing to hide.
Do you?

I'm starting to think he does. I remember one of his threads was complaing that they were putting a limit on moving large amounts of undeclared money across borders.

LEIN · 05-01-2009 3:20pm

lisbon_lions wrote: »

What if you have a 14 yo daughter - you are quite happy for some middle aged men to trace through her emails and check her browsing history then so?

I think that is the reason that its been set up. To protect the children.

dade · 05-01-2009 3:22pm

MackDeToaster wrote: »

witness Gordon Brown shutting down Icelandic banks using anti-terrorist legislation of all things, or anti-terrorist legislation being used by county councils to see who's trying to get their kids into schools in different boroughs .

got any links to these incidents

CreepingDeath · 05-01-2009 3:28pm

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

According to a London Times report, the police hacking process, called "remote searching," enables law enforcement to gather information from e-mails, instant messages and Web browsers, even while hundreds of miles away.

UK "security services" have been allowed to intercept e-mail since 2000. Linky

Sure weren't they scanning all phones, faxes and e-mails on Ireland for years during the troubles ? Can't find the link, but fairly sure it was well documented.

MackDeToaster · 05-01-2009 3:31pm

<3BeingIN6th wrote: »

Yes.
I've nothing to hide.
Do you?

I am honestly at a loss to understand this

All I can think of is that you have full faith that the state is 100% benevolent and that it will remain forever so?

I have nothing to hide either, but I need just look at repressive states around the world and even experiences in Donegal to see that this is wishful thinking and as far as I'm concerned this would be a step too far.

I also think that it's completely and utterly futile as any serious criminals will of course be well aware of it and simply go offline, use encryption, vpn, etc etc. Which begs the question, what ultimately is the point ?

thelordofcheese · 05-01-2009 3:35pm

lisbon_lions wrote: »

What if you have a 14 yo daughter - you are quite happy for some middle aged men to trace through her emails and check her browsing history then so?

I know you're trying to phrase this in a super sinister way; young girl, middle aged man, THE INTERNET, but really what exactly would you see as the problem here?

Terry · 05-01-2009 3:36pm

CreepingDeath wrote: »

UK "security services" have been allowed to intercept e-mail since 2000. Linky

Sure weren't they scanning all phones, faxes and e-mails on Ireland for years during the troubles ? Can't find the link, but fairly sure it was well documented.

Now that you mention it, I do remember a few instances where they were monitoring IRA mobile phone calls. Wouold have been in the 088 days. Not GSM, the previous one.

They also monitored British roayls and leaked information about prince Charles wanting to be a tampon. That may have been the press though. My memory is hazy.

At the end of the day, if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about.

Abusing bittorrent? Me? Let them come and get me.
I'll go back to blank tapes if needs be.

Ckal · 05-01-2009 3:36pm

<3BeingIN6th wrote: »

Yes.
I've nothing to hide.
Do you?

Every person in the world has a right to privacy. Whether they are hiding something or not, this right is being denied.

Terry · 05-01-2009 3:38pm

MackDeToaster wrote: »

I am honestly at a loss to understand this All I can think of is that you have full faith that the state is 100% benevolent and that it will remain forever so?

I have nothing to hide either, but I need just look at repressive states around the world and even experiences in Donegal to see that this is wishful thinking and as far as I'm concerned this would be a step too far.

I also think that it's completely and utterly futile as any serious criminals will of course be well aware of it and simply go offline, use encryption, vpn, etc etc. Which begs the question, what ultimately is the point ?

The point?
The creation of more IT jobs of course.

ejmaztec · 05-01-2009 3:40pm

CreepingDeath wrote: »

UK "security services" have been allowed to intercept e-mail since 2000. Linky

Sure weren't they scanning all phones, faxes and e-mails on Ireland for years during the troubles ? Can't find the link, but fairly sure it was well documented.

Yep, GCHQ in Cheltenham had access to all ROI phones - and still do, I believe.

CreepingDeath · 05-01-2009 3:42pm

MackDeToaster wrote: »

I also think that it's completely and utterly futile as any serious criminals will of course be well aware of it and simply go offline, use encryption, vpn, etc etc. Which begs the question, what ultimately is the point ?

To make it more difficult for terrorists and criminals to communicate.
If someone uses strong encryption, then they might get special attention.

Your right though, serious criminals probably already use advanced encryption. Assuming the security services don't have some secret quantum computer to break all existing encryption methods already.
Which wouldn't exactly surprise me.... look at Colusus in World War II, it broke the German enigma codes and was probably 20-30 years ahead of its time.

Sure people think todays encyption is safe.... it's only safe today because current computers would take hundreds of years to crack the codes by brute force.
In 10 years time they will easily be broken.
So, if the security services were patient, they could store all encrypted messages they intercept until such time as they could break them.

You'll have to wait until NTL roll out a quantum encryption network for home users for decent privacy !

faceman · 05-01-2009 3:43pm

Wow, id love some high flying security or secret service agent to have a cool file on me with a big TOP SECRET spread across the top of it in red ink. That would be cool.

although id imagine my file will probably look something more like this:

Subject: IRL-4,564,123
Result: Spends far to much time on boards.ie
Threat level: Swears alot

CreepingDeath · 05-01-2009 3:45pm

faceman wrote: »

Wow, id love some high flying security or secret service agent to have a cool file on me with a big TOP SECRET spread across the top of it in red ink.

There's an idea... make a few red coloured TOP SECRET folders and leave them on the trains and buses for people to find

Wreck · 05-01-2009 3:49pm

I kinda agree with RTDH on this one (there's a first) - this kind of action should definetely require a warrant, the procedure should be exactly the same as getting a warant to search a house etc.

How are they going to do this though? Do the police in the UK have some kind of super secret hacker training college? Cause as far as I am aware, it's actually pretty dificult to do something like this.

parsi · 05-01-2009 3:55pm

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

A new edict by the European Union's council of ministers in Brussels has paved the way for international law enforcement agencies to begin remote searching and sharing the information with each other.

Any chance of a link to the "edict" ?

Donald-Duck · 05-01-2009 4:00pm

MackDeToaster wrote: »

I am honestly at a loss to understand this All I can think of is that you have full faith that the state is 100% benevolent and that it will remain forever so?

I have nothing to hide either, but I need just look at repressive states around the world and even experiences in Donegal to see that this is wishful thinking and as far as I'm concerned this would be a step too far.

I also think that it's completely and utterly futile as any serious criminals will of course be well aware of it and simply go offline, use encryption, vpn, etc etc. Which begs the question, what ultimately is the point ?

Actually, you'd be suprised at how many people were caught by using their mobile friend to call another person to plan such and such a thing

EU legislation will allow authorities search your PC remotly without a warrent.

Comments