Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 302 posts

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#131

Post by petercooper »

DonaldFisk wrote: post #99
pjc50 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are also staggeringly ineffective and can't seem to decide what they stand for. Miliband was OK despite the "controls on immigration" equivocation, but since then the party has turned into a circular firing squad. Going back into history, I'm fairly sure we saw attempts at invasive surveillance under Blair's Labour; Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, and the failed ID cards scheme. It's not even clear wheth…

That's because Blair's Labour Party was as right wing and authoritarian as the Tories they replaced. Both Corbyn's supporters and opponents know well what they stand for. The problem is it isn't the same things. The only people who have any moral right to oppose Brexit are the Scottish nationalists and the Northern Irish republicans. England and Wales voted to leave.

That's because Blair's Labour Party was as right wing [..] as the Tories they replaced.

That's revisionist, and demonstrably false. The Blair government brought in gay adoption, a minimum wage, the Freedom of Information Act, the Human Rights Act, civil partnerships, banned fox hunting with dogs, increased NHS investment by >25% in real terms, achieved the lowest unemployment in 50 years, slashed child poverty, and more. Minimum wage alone was considered a bold left wing move at the time. Blair made modern Tories softer, if anything.

It's sad that the Iraq debacle caused people to write off what was the most progressive and beneficial government this country had seen in decades - I can't see how anyone could equate it to the governments of Major or Thatcher.

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#132

Post by bahjoite »

erjjones wrote: post #105

The first thing that comes to mind here is that data is only good if it is quality data... dirty data isn't good or reliable. Coming up with a way to dirty the data from our IPs (i.e. a program that randomly hits domains via multiple browsers that everyone just runs as a background service)

I think this too and am considering running a web crawler full time.

If enough people were willing to do this we could create a massive distributed index to rival google's.

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#133

Post by rwmj »

DonaldFisk wrote: post #90
s_kilk wrote: post #12

> Despite the uproar, the government's opposition failed to scrutinize any significant amendments and abstained from the final vote. Killock said recently that the opposition Labour party spent its time "simply failing to hold the government to account". What the hell is the point of the Labour party these days? They are absolutely not an effective opposition. Worthless bastards, one and all.

What is Jeremy Corbyn supposed to do? He was elected twice by the overwhelming majority of party members on a socialist platform, but the majority of his MPs aren't socialist and support a "Blairite" (neoliberal) agenda. Since his election, those MPs have tried to force him to resign, staging various incidents (an MP calling Ken Livingstone a Nazi apologist for pointing out the existence of the Haavara Agreement, a h…

The trouble with this is that Corbyn has done nothing whatsoever to oppose the Snooper's Charter or Brexit or the Psychoactive Substances Act or the (now delayed) attempt to neuter the House Of Lords (in fact I suspect he fully supports all of those).

What could he do? Step aside.

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#135

Post by btym »

simopaa wrote: post #122
pjc50 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite a lot of them would be in favour of it as a means of "fighting terrorism". It's not so much what is reported as how it's spun. The really big thing is the "internet connection record": every TCP connection you make is supposed to be logged by the ISP: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachm... (just look at that list of justifications. Of course! It's about catching paedos! The all purpose…

This sounds like a potential (new?) attack type though. Just have software that pings certain illegal websites and bam - the target is now a paedo or whatever the attacker wishes.

Come visit my website! Make sure you have JavaScript enabled, friend! :o)

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#136

Post by bahjoite »

hundchenkatze wrote: post #92
anondon wrote: post #63

What is the easiest way to explain to the average citizen that the "Nothing to hide, nothing to fear" argument is not a good reason to let the Government keep tabs on your online activities? Most people don't give any thought to online privacy that it truly scares me.

I like to use the fact that nothing to hide and privacy are different. You don't hide the fact that you use the bathroom, but you still go to a dedicated private room and close the door.

And the only time you might decide to hide the fact is when faced with the knowledge that someone may come, at any time, and force the door open.

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#137

Post by jwtadvice »

dx034 wrote: post #113

As a UK resident: I know that I can only avoid logging traffic by using a vpn. But the domain logging part bothers me the most. Does anyone here know how they will do it? Could I just use another dns server? Or will they intercept http header? If I'm not mistaken, they could still extract the domain names from https traffic but no exact history? Anyway, a reason more to use https everywhere, reduces sharply what they…

VPN has been thoroughly defeated. China, UK and US state law enforcement monitor VPN use. (Snowden documents, for example, revealed that VPN traffic can be readily decrypted.)

ISPs and police will use every mechanism including DNS, HTTP, IP addresses, CRL behavior, ad tracking markers embedded in pages and more to determine your browsing behavior and history.

The best way to defend yourself against this is to lie down and comply.

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#138

Post by bbcbasic »

chillingeffect wrote: post #85
datamoshr wrote: post #44

As a UK resident, this irks me beyond belief. It's a sickening invasion of human rights[1]. To echo u/rubberstamps sentiments, it's such that there's been little to no coverage of this in the media. But it's the same everywhere, introduce an encroaching bill, have uproar from those with the heads screwed on (the minority). Let it grow a little stale in the publics eye and keep reintroducing with slight alterations it…

Interestingly, privacy matters less to "wage-slaves" than to entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs value their reputations more, having to gain approval from strangers more often. Meeting with a customer/VC/bank/mayor/state committee/supplier for the first time? good chance they'll google you. In a typical corporate desk job, they do some basic checking (arrest record) at hire, then leave you alone. I'm sorry this doesn't hel…

Offtopic but why not call entrepreneurs "revenue slaves" or "investor slaves" if we are going to be fair.

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#139

Post by ablation »

jwtadvice wrote: post #130
ablation wrote: post #120

As other people have said, there are a few steps you can take to protect yourself in the near to medium term future: 1) Use Signal 2) Use Tor 3) Use a VPN 4) Reduce your digital footprint - especially if you use social media What was once paranoid fantasy now just seems like prudence. What a time to be alive, eh?

1) Signal does not and can not protect information about who you are in contact with, when you contact or are contacted by them, and how long your conversation is. 2) Tor has been both infiltrated organizationally, academically broken, and is occupied by police on most of its exit nodes. This without the operational burden it puts on users. Tor is 'just okay' at protecting users, and should never be used alone. 3) Us…

Good points, and an interesting addition too.

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#140

Post by bahjoite »

jwtadvice wrote: post #130
ablation wrote: post #120

As other people have said, there are a few steps you can take to protect yourself in the near to medium term future: 1) Use Signal 2) Use Tor 3) Use a VPN 4) Reduce your digital footprint - especially if you use social media What was once paranoid fantasy now just seems like prudence. What a time to be alive, eh?

1) Signal does not and can not protect information about who you are in contact with, when you contact or are contacted by them, and how long your conversation is. 2) Tor has been both infiltrated organizationally, academically broken, and is occupied by police on most of its exit nodes. This without the operational burden it puts on users. Tor is 'just okay' at protecting users, and should never be used alone. 3) Us…

5) is probably the most depressing thing I've read for some time. We should all make the effort to do exactly the opposite.
Post reply on HN