Is The UK Really Looking To Spy On All Browsing Habits, Emails And Phone Calls?
from the seems-a-bit-extreme dept
There's not much in the way of detail, and our UK readers have pointed out in the past that The Times Online is hardly the most reputable of newspapers in the UK, but it's reporting that the UK government is considering spending £12 billion on a system to spy on the internet browsing histories, emails and phone calls of everyone in the UK. That seems almost too ridiculous to be true, so consider us to be skeptical that this is actually what's happening -- but we'll mention it here with the link back to the source to see if some of our readers can fill us in on the details (or lack of details, as the case may be).
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: eavesdropping, spying, tapping, uk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
patriot act
I'm kidding! Only for the terrorists!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The surveillance marketplace
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm kidding! Only for the terrorists!
Google something call 'Main Core'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm so desensitized...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm so desensitized...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I'm so desensitized...
V for Vendetta has to do with government control via bioweapons. There are much better movies you can cite like, oh, I dunno, 1984 which the author of the graphic novel drew inspiration from.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So you are calling out The Times for not being "reputable"?
One can assuredly have issues with its editorial decisions (and since this is a British paper those decisions openly extend into reportage ) but I cannot imagine that anyone would call The Times a "disreputable" paper.
(as one _might_ in discussion of the Sun, Mirror, or Daily Mail)
I would guess then that only the Guardian, the Independent or the BBC hold standards high enough for Techdirt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No, I am not. I have merely pointed out that when we used them as a source in the past, UK readers claimed it was not reputable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes!
The basis of the story is certainly correct. If you want more details and links to other publications that might meet with more approval from the Techdirt readers, you can look at the Intercept Modernisation page on The Open Rights Group’s wiki.
The Times’ article is new in giving a much higher total financial cost and the names of two network providers. The figure of £12 billion may not be correct and is an order of magnitude higher than previous figures I’ve seen. However, given the spiralling costs of the National ID Card and Database, it may not be as far out as it currently appears. Also, it’s not clear how many years of costs this represents.
If you were to just guess at one fixed-line and one network provider, you’d go with BT and Vodafone. It would be logical to start with the largest providers that are not owned by foreign companies.
Picking up on Mike Allen’s comment about email signatures, it should be remembered that it’s not the content that is to be stored. It will be one complete, centralised database of web hosts accessed, who has emailed whom, who has telephoned whom, over the past two years. So, slightly different to the TOM-Skype database. That also records content, but doesn’t include every communication.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Somewhat strange and backward
My guess : they are preparing for a change in US legislation, which might hurt current international agreements between Agencies.
My 2c.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
£12b - like, half the defence budget!
According to FAS, the GCHQ annual budget is estimated to be about £400m.
And GCHQ is looking for £12b? From where? Are they gonna sell the Queen to raise the money?
And as for what GCHQ might do with that info - they've already proven incapable of actioning live intercepts from known terrorists who were in the act of placing the car bomb that killed so many people in Omagh (look up BBC for GCHQ & Omagh).
Funny? I nearly cried.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mmm
Of course you could visit some strange websites or send fake emails or mess up the system or put a signature on all your Emails derogatory to the control freak of Downing street just for starters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
England; land of bad ideas
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What a joke
[ link to this | view in chronology ]