Investigatory Powers Act (UK)

[FatBastard]

When this get put into play properly every agency and their dog can take a gander at your browsing habits without a warrant (and therefor without probable cause):

• Metropolitan police force
• City of London police force
• Police forces maintained under section 2 of the Police Act 1996
• Police Service of Scotland
• Police Service of Northern Ireland
• British Transport Police
• Ministry of Defence Police
• Royal Navy Police
• Royal Military Police
• Royal Air Force Police
• Security Service
• Secret Intelligence Service
• GCHQ
• Ministry of Defence
• Department of Health
• Home Office
• Ministry of Justice
• National Crime Agency
• HM Revenue & Customs
• Department for Transport
• Department for Work and Pensions
• NHS trusts and foundation trusts in England that provide ambulance services
• Common Services Agency for the Scottish Health Service
• Competition and Markets Authority
• Criminal Cases Review Commission
• Department for Communities in Northern Ireland
• Department for the Economy in Northern Ireland
• Department of Justice in Northern Ireland
• Financial Conduct Authority
• Fire and rescue authorities under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004
• Food Standards Agency
• Food Standards Scotland
• Gambling Commission
• Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority
• Health and Safety Executive
• Independent Police Complaints Commissioner
• Information Commissioner
• NHS Business Services Authority
• Northern Ireland Ambulance Service Health and Social Care Trust
• Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service Board
• Northern Ireland Health and Social Care Regional Business Services Organisation
• Office of Communications
• Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland
• Police Investigations and Review Commissioner
• Scottish Ambulance Service Board
• Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission
• Serious Fraud Office
• Welsh Ambulance Services National Health Service Trust

Not to say that some of those agencies haven't broke TLS encryption anyway, but for a little peace of mind consider at MINIMUM installing this browser extension to force HTTPS connections to supporting websites https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere%20

However, I prefer to use a VPN. proXPN get's my vote since they had a cracking lifetime deal a few years ago, but any that are not based in the UK should be a good bet. Again, some of the agencies listed above can no doubt get around that if they are determined to see what you're doing, but it would at least thwart some of the lower level snoops.

Remember the laws in NI around paying for sex. Now the PSNI do not need a warrant to keep an eye on you if they intercept your traffic to an escort related website, and you ISP has to keep 2 years worth of your browsing history by law.

IMO the around £50 a year it costs for a reputable VPN provider is well worth it to fly under the radar.

[philipkntz]

They are just legalising what they have been doing for several years now.
All internet traffic is routinely scanned for certain words or phrases or contact with certain persons or organisations. Some of this is for our protection, but much of it is for the protection of those in authority. At present, they can only use this info as leads, and then have to gather evidence but in future they will be able to use this info in court.
The frightening thing is what could be done with an increase in resources of manpower and computing capacity.

[MidlifeCrisis]

They are just legalising what they have been doing for several years now.

I think it is more than that. The two main things that are new are that ISP's have to keep and provide tracking information without court order, and the data will be made easily searchable by lots of organisations.

You are right that intelligence organisations have had this capability. Now it will be very easy for ordinary police to do so - for example, they can request names and addresses of anyone accessing EI. Anyone who has not taken precautions to be anonymous is taking a bit more risk now.

[ladiesman217]

I think it is more than that. The two main things that are new are that ISP's have to keep and provide tracking information without court order, and the data will be made easily searchable by lots of organisations.

You are right that intelligence organisations have had this capability. Now it will be very easy for ordinary police to do so - for example, they can request names and addresses of anyone accessing EI. Anyone who has not taken precautions to be anonymous is taking a bit more risk now.

But it's not a crime to visit the site is it? I remember the TORL crowd were trying to get that through down here as part of their crusade but wasn't that thrown aside? Is it like that up North now?

[MidlifeCrisis]

But it's not a crime to visit the site is it? I remember the TORL crowd were trying to get that through down here as part of their crusade but wasn't that thrown aside? Is it like that up North now?

No, it isn't, but I can think of a lot of possible disadvantages of being in such a database. Simple precautions mean you don't have to lose sleep over it (like using a VPN or a separate phone with no link to you).

[The Libertarian]

But it's not a crime to visit the site is it? I remember the TORL crowd were trying to get that through down here as part of their crusade but wasn't that thrown aside? Is it like that up North now?

One particular prominent TORLER Group proposed that anybody downloading an escort related site, such as this one (which BTW is not pornographic), should be treated legally the same as a Paedo downloading images of children being abused and raped!
Also that innocent downloader could be a punter, curious teenager or a sex worker looking for safe sex advice or dangerous punter warnings!
The TORLER group proposing it likes to project oitself as the saviour of sex workers!
Even more worryingly, The JOC committee on sex work accepted this and put it forward as one of its psychotic recommendations!
It isn't in the new proposed law because it was probably originally proposed as some leeway to be traded off and somebody in The Department may have pointed out that it was extremely seriously insane and would make us even more of a complete international laughing stock!

[FatBastard]

No, it isn't, but I can think of a lot of possible disadvantages of being in such a database. Simple precautions mean you don't have to lose sleep over it (like using a VPN or a separate phone with no link to you).

This. If you're nabbed red handed walking out of an apartment complex and you have a throwaway dumbphone with only the number of the lady you visited on it, you would have a good case for it being your first time and you bottled out, nothing happened, whatever. But, if some peeler with a stick up their arse then pulled your internet history and see's that you visit EI (or other such sites) multiple times per day for the last 2 years it would be enough to convince a jury that you knew fine well what you were at.

Remember so much of the law is not black and white and is based on opinion, it's all about convincing a judge and jury that based on evidence available would a 'reasonable person' believe you broke the law. 2 years worth of internet history could be enough to sway that opinion.

Can they see you looked or can they see you logged in, no harm looking.

As far as I can decipher, they can see what websites you visit, but not what you do there (especially since this is an "https" site once you log in so nobody can see what you're doing expect for you and EI). But like I said above, if you have to convince a jury that you did nothing wrong, having the info from your ISP saying you searched for escort related websites, and visited escort websites lots of times regularly, it won't look good. Whereas if they brought forward evidence that they have no history because you use a VPN, that's easier to explain because there are many, many legitimate reasons why a private person would use a VPN.

Pretty much all VPNs will also work on Android/iOS so there's no excuse for not protecting your privacy, regardless of what you're doing and especially if you use a lot of public/free wifi because you don't know who is controlling that network and what they're doing with your internet traffic. Using a VPN will keep you private from them.

[FatBastard]

Also I should add, look at the list of agencies that have info to that data. Eddie Snowden and others that went public talk about how part of the boys club is saving and sharing nudes when they come across them, and other juicy personal info. With all those agencies having warrantless access to that information you really have to trust that ALL the employees at ALL of them are above board and are on top of their own security to prevent leaks.

I have seen how government employees (that deal with sensitive information) handle information security, and it's bad. The number of post it notes with passwords written down stuck to screens is soul destroying to see.

[SteveB]

European Court of Justice has given it a swift kick up the arse.
“Landmark EU ruling: Legality of UK's Investigatory Powers Act challenged”

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/21/eu_judgment/

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-private-lives

[FatBastard]

European Court of Justice has given it a swift kick up the arse.
“Landmark EU ruling: Legality of UK's Investigatory Powers Act challenged”

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/21/eu_judgment/

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-private-lives

Should brexit not happen they'll want an act like that across the EU, and EU directives get passed so much easier than local laws since we have so little say in it and they're rarely given any attention by the news