UK Home Secretary Says Don't Worry About Collection Of Metadata; FOIA Request Made For Her Metadata
from the well,-this-should-be-interesting dept
With the release of the new UK Snooper's Charter, UK Home Secretary Theresa May tried to justify the collection of phone and internet records as nothing more than being like an "itemised phone bill" and therefore nothing to worry about. Keith Vaz replied that there is plenty to be concerned about when the government can look at such records:I know you said the information is equivalent to an itemised bill but there's a lot of information in an itemised bill.But, in response to Vaz, May apparently insisted that there was nothing at all in her records that anyone might find surprising -- leading some to question whether this was May agreeing to release her phone and internet records. Apparently Chris Gilmour decided to find out for sure, and has filed a Freedom of Information request in the UK for a bunch of May's records (found via Ryan Gallagher).
If I were to look at your itemised telephone bill and you were to look at mine we might be surprised at who we were telephoning.
Dear Home Office,Should be interesting to see the responses to that request, huh?
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 I hereby request the following information from and regarding the Rt Hon Theresa May MP (Con), Secretary of State for the Home Department (the "Home Secretary"):
1) The date, time, and recipient of every email sent by the Home Secretary during October 2015.
2) The date, time, and sender of every email received by the Home Secretary during October 2015.
3) The date, time, and recipient of every internet telephony call (e.g. "Skype" call) made by the Home Secretary during October 2015.
4) The date, time, and sender of every internet telephony call (e.g. "Skype" call) received by the Home Secretary during October 2015.
5) The date, time, and domain address of every website visited by the Home Secretary during October 2015.
Yours faithfully,
Chris Gilmour
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: chris gilmour, internet records, metadata, phone records, surveillance, theresa may, uk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Obviously
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So...
Or does the UK no longer have any POTS?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So...
That's where the brilliance of this request lies: specifically requesting the metadata that the MP considers unimportant.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"It's just metadata."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
i'm sure she will consider october to be the first installment of an ongoing campaign to assuage our concerns, since, you know, there's no problem doing that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
If you make your opinion known is some other way then you are a disruptive malcontent and/or criminal.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: "It's just metadata."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
On the one hand they can spin some story about not releasing it because security... but then they have to admit it is useful information.
On the other hand they could release it... and have people construct a very useful timeline revealing all sorts of things using only 'meta-data'.
It is nice to see a politician backed into a corner where there is no good answer that doesn't destroy their own arguments.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MetaData
A technique developed during WW2 by Bletchley Park for analysing communications to determine a great deal of information (about your enemy), without even knowing what the messages were.
I may be old fashioned and behind the times, but this MetaData sounds exactly like that, only 70 years later.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MetaData
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not a chance
At most they'll comb through the requesting records, removing anything that would provide real data before releasing the butchered records, but more likely they'll give some pathetic excuse as to why they simply cannot comply with the request.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: "It's just metadata."
turns out one smart kgb type had a list of criteria he had garnered over the years that when winnowed through gave them about a 99.99% chance of 'guessing' (it wasn't guessing) who was/wasn't a cia stooge in state dept clothing...
a LOT of it was such stupid, elementary stuff, you REALLY do wonder about the 'intelligence' of so-called intelligence agencies...
for example, they were too fucking cheap to mix it up when a new spook was introduced into the embassy fold, so they were put up in the SAME FUCKING HOUSE the previous spook was given... same with their local cars, etc...
herp derp
there were other clues, as far as real state dept types would have on their record they went to a certain school for state dept 'stuff', while the spooks skipped class...
when they put all these together, they had a near fool-proof method of spotting the spooks, DUE TO OUR OWN laziness and stupidity...
no wiretaps, no backdoors, no blackbag jobs, no social engineering (although i'm sure they do all those too), just plain open records and holmesian ratiocination...
AS IF anyone with two INDEPENDENT eyes can't tell all this spookery has NOTHING to do with the russkies or red chinee, and EVERYTHING about keeping the rabble in line in der faderland...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Not a chance
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Not a chance
"You mean ten pounds more than I have at the moment? That's easy enough to fix, I'll just borrow some money from someone."
"Oh no no no, I mean exactly what I said, the cost will be ten pounds more than you have at the time of the transactions. It will always be ten pounds more than you have, no matter how large or small that number is."
"... in other words, it will always cost more than I have, making the request impossible to pay for, and the information always out of reach."
"It does rather seem that way doesn't it? Now then, if that was all, I will bid you goodbye."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: "It's just metadata."
http://www.salon.com/2015/09/26/how_to_explain_the_kgbs_amazing_success_identifying_cia_agent s_in_the_field/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: So...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Collecting What?
This in itself is somewhat worrying.
Living in the UK, I already know that my ISP cannot collect metadata from me because of my habitual use of a VPN service and TOR. Hell, I'm one of the good guys, don't they realise that the bad guys are going to hide themselves even more?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Collecting What?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Governments representing governments.....what happened to governments representing people
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]