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

27-09-2015 06:31PM

kneemos wrote: »

Time we had a national ID card.

”Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.”

Ben Franklin

darkpagandeath · 27-09-2015 06:39PM

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

Mother Brain · 27-09-2015 06:41PM

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 · 27-09-2015 06:59PM

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 · 27-09-2015 07:11PM

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 · 27-09-2015 07:15PM

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 · 27-09-2015 07:32PM

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 · 27-09-2015 07:35PM

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 · 27-09-2015 07:36PM

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 · 27-09-2015 07:42PM

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 · 27-09-2015 07:46PM

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 · 27-09-2015 07:56PM

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 · 27-09-2015 07:58PM

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 · 27-09-2015 08:09PM

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 · 27-09-2015 08:10PM

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 · 27-09-2015 08:18PM

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 · 27-09-2015 08:22PM

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 · 27-09-2015 08:23PM

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 · 27-09-2015 08:34PM

ejabrod wrote: »

the watchers ?

ST: TNG S03 E04

custard gannet · 27-09-2015 08:43PM

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

kippy · 27-09-2015 08:50PM

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".

There is a big difference between digging through/analysing and just recording.
At this point in time anyone who thinks their internet and telephony traffic is completely private need to cop on a bit. All of this traffic has always been recorded by someone if only for a billing purpose.

Dohnjoe · 27-09-2015 08:50PM

In other shocking news my local supermarket has been videoing me for the last 10 years

They are violating my privacy man

Ulysses Gaze · 27-09-2015 09:06PM

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".

I'd agree with you on this.

Maybe the people who are so blasé about this stuff should hand over the keys of their gaff to the Guards or Security Services because "well i don't get up to any mischief so I don't really mind"....

KingBrian2 · 27-09-2015 09:12PM

The information obtained no doubt for security reasons could be used as blackmail against sitting politicians and diplomats then again you have to trust the people handling the information are not going to abuse their powers.

Valetta · 27-09-2015 09:43PM

ClovenHoof wrote: »

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.

What's an "Irish government civil servant", as distinct from an ordinary civil servant?

Methinks paranoia has set in.

Mother Brain · 27-09-2015 10:13PM

y wrote: »

There is a big difference between digging through/analysing and just recording.
At this point in time anyone who thinks their internet and telephony traffic is completely private need to cop on a bit. All of this traffic has always been recorded by someone if only for a billing purpose.

Perhaps so, but it's a qualitative difference between how this data has historically been recorded and how it is now.

Previously, maybe the phone company had a record of your phone conversations meta data. It's innocuous enough in and of itself and was previously only available to law enforcement under court order / warrant.

Now, the data is taken at source and collated alongside a vast cache of other data from every single source there is of any similar data in order to be able to get a complete picture of your online activities. It's not the same thing.

I mean these documents show that engineers working on mobile phone sim cards (and the encryption they use) were targeted via tracing their IP address and then cross referencing that with a ton of other data in order to uniquely identify those engineers that were of interest to them. Once they were known, they used the information to hack into their work computers and extract back door keys into the entire global sim card technology stack. These weren't criminals or terrorists. They were lawfully employed engineers doing their jobs.

It's not even just about privacy anymore or criminality. It's about the government abusing it's power to do whatever the hell they like.

What if it was discovered by their employer that that enginee's computer had been responsible for a global hack? Do you think his employers would be happy? Would they be in their eights to fire him even though he did nothing wrong?

kippy · 27-09-2015 10:27PM

Mother Brain wrote: »

Perhaps so, but it's a qualitative difference between how this data has historically been recorded and how it is now.

Previously, maybe the phone company had a record of your phone conversations meta data. It's innocuous enough in and of itself and was previously only available to law enforcement under court order / warrant.

Now, the data is taken at source and collated alongside a vast cache of other data from every single source there is of any similar data in order to be able to get a complete picture of your online activities. It's not the same thing.

I mean these documents show that engineers working on mobile phone sim cards (and the encryption they use) were targeted via tracing their IP address and then cross referencing that with a ton of other data in order to uniquely identify those engineers that were of interest to them. Once they were known, they used the information to hack into their work computers and extract back door keys into the entire global sim card technology stack. These weren't criminals or terrorists. They were lawfully employed engineers doing their jobs.

It's not even just about privacy anymore or criminality. It's about the government abusing it's power to do whatever the hell they like.

What if it was discovered by their employer that that enginee's computer had been responsible for a global hack? Do you think his employers would be happy? Would they be in their eights to fire him even though he did nothing wrong?

Just because data is being recorded does not mean it is being analysed/dug through etc etc.
I am not sure why people link the two........

And again, I'd state categorically that any data over mobile/landline/data networks has always been "recorded" to a point - although back then it was generally private companies that had access to this information for billing/security purposes or otherwise.
Indeed companies like google/facebook have far better online profiles on us in comparison to what the state surveillance bodies might have on your average joe soap.

If state bodies believe that recording this data is for the greater good, then so be it.

Hey, if a story about the current british PM and a pig cannot bring him down, I dont think the majority of us have much to fear.

kippy · 27-09-2015 10:32PM

Valetta wrote: »

What's an "Irish government civil servant", as distinct from an ordinary civil servant?

Methinks paranoia has set in.

I wouldn't mind but it's the British government that are involved here. Not sure what that has to do with Irish civil servants.

kippy · 27-09-2015 10:34PM

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

I'd agree with you on this.

Maybe the people who are so blasé about this stuff should hand over the keys of their gaff to the Guards or Security Services because "well i don't get up to any mischief so I don't really mind"....

At some point you have to trust people.....
The guards and/or security services don't need the keys to go into your home.

genericguy · 27-09-2015 10:35PM

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Who watches the watchers

Mrs watchwoman

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

Comments