Member Offer
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

UK E-Mail Law

Discussion in 'Chill Out Forum:' started by Greg, Jan 9, 2009.

  1. Greg

    Greg Active Member

    BBC NEWS | UK | UK e-mail law 'attack on rights'

    Has anyone heard about this story?
    What are your thoughts?
     
  2. blueocto

    blueocto Senior Member

    Waste of time and tax payers money in my opinion - anyone can register a free email address, its not like the government is really going to be able to use them for anything.
     
  3. Greg

    Greg Active Member

    Apparently it's to track who is e-mailing who, rather than the actual content of the e-mails, but I completely agree blueocto, I can't see how that expenditure can be warranted, surely the money would be better spent in other techniques for tracking crime/terrorism online? I'm sure they must have more advanced techniques? The other thing I heard was that small ISP companies wouldn't need to keep these records? Surely that just blows the whole idea out of the water as a security answer?!
     
  4. tbwcf

    tbwcf Active Member

    (i think) they would intend to track where your emailing from using your ip so even if it was a free account in a made up name they would know and email was sent from your home, though a server in canada, to your mate in Wales.

    I think it's an invasion of privacy and not on, unfortunately this is England and no one does anything about it we just piss and moan, if it was France the lorry drivers could blockade the cyber cafes or something!

    Also on the report they mentioned this is already common practice with text messages and phone calls.
     
  5. Jazajay

    Jazajay Active Member

    My personal opinion is if you are not doing anything wrong, and there are checks and balances in place, then what's the issue?

    But TBH I reckon, sorry programmers mind coming in, that they would search each email for designated terms, log the IP address of the sent email, then check with the ISP when suspicious emails are being detected, where it originated from.

    Automated and very little expense or time needed TBH.

    Keep them for a year, so if new keywords are added to the search field, old emails can be searched for the new terms thus backtracking any terrorististic, emails.

    If they want to read my emails then fair enough, lets hope the reader isn't shocked, otherwise they may learn something new. :lol:

    But the reason why terrorists are hitting places like India more is because of the fact that our security services actually rock, not many people know that the UK security forces stopped 65 terrorist actions in 07, 2 got through, sorry but anyway you look at it, that's god odds.

    1 attempt was to poison a city's water supply possible killing thousands, and make thousands more sick, our guys and gals rock and for good reasons, so if it keeps me safe bring it on, but as long as it is not abused, like the last email fiasco, where everyone from a bloody conciliar could read your emails to check what you are doing at work to when you put your rubbish out, and that was last year in the UK. So.........sorry but it's actually nothing new, well for the rest of Europe maybe but in the UK it's been going on for years.

    I have a mate who is a teacher, but he use to work for the gov 3 years ago, and he was already checking emails of certain people then without them knowing, and that was not for terrorist reasons!!!!!!
     
  6. mrleesimpson

    mrleesimpson Guest

    You're joking though right? Thats what people are saying about ID Cards and DNA Records.

    The problem is if the last 12-18 months has taught us anything its that the UK goverment can't be trusted to look after sensitive (and very very sensitive) data and that their track record on handling the terroist situations is a little bit suspect at the best of times (Charles de Menezes anyone?).

    This (and ID Cards) is the goverments smoke and mirrors approach to putting the readers of the Daily Mails mind at rest, when in fact they're avoiding doing any real work to prevent the problem.

    Imagine if they turned around and said "We're going to check all mail that is in the UK potal service to see who is sending what to who and why". That would get people second thinking the idea wouldn't?!
     
  7. Jazajay

    Jazajay Active Member

    TBH if it was electronically done, I wouldn't have an issue with it, I know you have a difference of opinion when it comes to civil liberties and I do respect that, I honestly do that's the benefit of living in a free country, but if you get killed because of a terrorist attack that could have been stop via more intensive checking then well what's the point.

    MPO, and this may rattle a few cages here TBH, is that DNA should be taken at birth, as long as it is not used in cloning, or coarse.

    Heres another fact, my other half did sociality and criminology at uni, only 1 in 10 rapist are ever cought and it is the most easiest crime to commit and get away with, now if everyone's DNA was on record then rapist's could be cought a lot earlier and, thousands of men and women wouldn't have thier lives ruined because of it.

    The same case could be made to help catch other sex offenders including child sex offenders, or any case where DNA was left, serial killer for example before he kills more people.

    Then you have DNA screening that could prevent/slow down diseases, especially in the future, with earlier intervention, again improving thousands of people lives as people wouldn't go around for years not knowing they where at risk, when earlier medication could improve, and in some cases dramatically pre-long their lives, to me it is only logical I seriously cant see the whole don't do it side.

    I would rather be informed that I had/ had a high risk of Parkinsons or MS then go in for yearly tests just for it, second the symptoms show straight in with the medication, and my life is dramatically improved and I live longer.

    I will admit ID cards suck TBH, driving license does the same IMO, but scanning emails for security reasons is a lot more pro-active then giving out cards, that can be abused, IMO.

    Awaiting the hate posts for taking babies DNA, lol, :lol:

    Jaz
     
  8. Greg

    Greg Active Member

    I can see your point Jaz, but at the same time by making changes to the way we live our lives we are giving into terrorism, I appreciate that a lot of work goes on that we don't know about with regards to intelligence operations, but I think given the Governments track record with sensitive data as Lee said, it's pretty obvious why people wouldn't want that kind of data being tracked. Also given the rise in identity theft surely this is just creating more routes for ID theft to occur, and more loopholes the tax payer then has to pay to fix/cover.

    Wirth regards to DNA at birth, that sounds excessive! What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Whilst I can appreciate your points regarding crimes, perhaps if the police were given more time to investigate crimes and be on the street as such the crimes wouldn't occur so often and the culprits would be caught. Less paperwork more police work AKA bobby on the beat!

    Just my thoughts, an interesting subject though!
    Greg
     
  9. Jazajay

    Jazajay Active Member

    No I do agree with everything you said, the data was not actually lost by the government every time though, they where lost on 2 of the major occasions by a private security contractor. But I will concede that the government will/and should take the blame TBH.

    But the emails is slightly different IMO, from what I understand it is the ISP's that will keep it, so...... it is not actually that big of an issue really because you are not opening up the same security threats, the information is not being moved to an external contractor, it's just being stored at the source.

    But by not making changes we are in fact giving in to more attempts getting through, which leads to more deaths, now the problem is getting the balance right, to me Personally the balance should be one sided in the area of security, I of coarse respect other peoples views it should be the other way.

    But I personally don't want to be blown up/or worrying about being, because some people don't like their emails being checked for keywords, as that is the only logical way of doing it, millions of emails get sent daily, so there is no way each one could be read, and at the speed of the computer program doing it, would be quicker and more effective.

    What's gets me, is gmail, hotmail any good email provider already do this, looking for spam, however in Googles case they also give you ads dedicated to the email down the right hand side.

    So here's my question whats the differance from google doing it to give you ads and thus make money, and the security severices doing it to catch terrorists?
     
  10. mrleesimpson

    mrleesimpson Guest

    I trust Google to look after my information I don't trust the goverment.

    I haven't got a problem with Goverment (I'm not about to start an uprising) but I have got a problem with this Goverment. If I thought they could be trusted to do the right thing and use the information they collect in the right way (i.e. successfully catch rapists, stop terrorisim, prevent/slow down diseases, prevent crime) then I'd say go for it.

    But I don't think they can. I don't think the current goverment (that includes the other main parties) have a clue on how to use, let alone secure the data.

    Like I said in the last post its easy to say these things. Labour saying "letting us spy on emails will stop terrorisim" is the same as the BNP saying "Getting illegal immigrants out of the country, will stop terrorisim" they tell people what they want to here to get/stay in power.
     
  11. Jazajay

    Jazajay Active Member

    Yeah I agree, but as you say/suggest 2 of those cases, would of happened under any government.

    I suppose that is 1 way of looking at it, and common sense to me anyway would tell me the difference between those 2 examples you gave.

    Again IMO it's down to balance, yes they have to say something, because people expect them to, if they don't they get criticised for being slow to respond, then other things they do, this being 1 of them is the pro-active side of it, they actual stuff that IMO will make a differance in the long run.

    But you may think I'm a tad mad for trusting my information in the government, however, and no offense is ment by this, I think you are a tad mad, by trusting the same information to a corporation, who have proved time and time again to the SEO company that you as a webmaster should do what they say not what they do, and also to a company that is just trying to make money from you, via scaning your private information from your emails, with out telling you, sorry it's in the TOC which many people don't read.

    I will say it is slightly different as I don't reckon they log it, but it is still the same thing IMO.
     

Share This Page