Investigatory Powers Bill (Snooper's Charter) Passed by UK Government

[CGurrell]

In what is one of the biggest U-Turns by a party in recent history, the UK government has passed the investigatory powers bill, which will now head to the House of Lords for approval, thanks to the Labour Party deciding not to abstain from voting on it, and voting for it instead. The Controversial bill forces ISP's to store 12-months worth of every customers Internet History, which can be searched by Police without the need of a Warrant, and without the knowledge of the person in question. The Bill is so controversial, that the UK newspaper, The Independent, has actually suggested the use of anonymous web browser Tor to its readers (see here).

 

On Tuesday night, 444 MPs voted in favour of the third reading of the Investigatory Powers Bill. The SNP, Liberal Democrats, and the Green Party opposed the proposed law representing just 69 votes. The bill will now proceed to the House of Lords. This marks the first occasion that a majority of Labour MPs have voted for the bill to be passed, thanks to Andy Burnham and his proposed amendments to the Bill (mentioned here). These proposals were designed to reduce the power that the bill has, and the affect these proposals have had is the desired one, with encryption of devices and connections no longer considered illegal thanks to the Bill. In a revised edition, encryption backdoors were suggested, however these have also been abolished in the passed Bill. All is not well, however, as the crux of the issues with the bill circled around the ability for Police and Government to get information (sometimes personal) about anybody via ISPs.

 

Update: As explained by KitGuru, none of the amendments proposed prior to the vote concerning the Bill were passed, though the Bill has been changed since it's last reading. These amendments included "calls to better define its wording and to require reasonable suspicion before spying on someone".

 

It is important to note that the House of Lords has blocked the passing of this Bill before, and can do so again if they wish. This would require a decent overhaul of the Bill before being passed to the Lords again. It is important to note that the House of Lords can only delay a bill for so long: "Other public bills cannot be delayed by the House of Lords for more than two parliamentary sessions, or one calendar year. These provisions, however, only apply to public bills that originate in the House of Commons, and cannot have the effect of extending a parliamentary term beyond five years. A further restriction is a constitutional convention known as the Salisbury Convention, which means that the House of Lords does not oppose legislation promised in the Government's election manifesto." (from Wikipedia - not exactly reliable normally but normally good for stuff like this)

 

One last thing to note - Not only does The Investigatory Powers bill not deem the use of VPNs, Tor, or other means of hiding internet history illegal, it doesn't even mention VPNs or Tor, and only mentions the word "Encryption" 3 times. I do wonder how a government can pass a bill relating to spying and collecting information, specifically internet history, without considering VPNs or browsers like Tor. It makes me wonder how many "Experts" they actually consulted before drafting this Bill.

 

Source: ArsTechnica  http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2016/06/labour-backs-principle-of-investigatory-powers-bill/

 

The Bill in full: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5buBct5cGDZNnRMVXFIVkI3eTA/view (Yes it's a Google Drive link, and no it's not mine)

[M4st4M1nd]

Not happy about this at all. These are very scary times we live in.

[samcool55]

They probably contacted no experts at all, look at the EU, they just passed net neutrality laws but they have no clue what they exactly mean.

For that there is a european instance that will look at the rules and will explain what every law means so we know what they actually mean.

 

So yea probably none because even the EU can't do it properly without external help that in the end can say almost whatever they want O_o

[LukeTim]

I'll be setting up my own private VPN in another country, then, I guess.

(the fact that I can do so hugely undermines this bill and the fact that it was never even mentioned is concerning. Who are these people who are so ignorant as to not even consider this and yet still be arrogant enough to try and legislate?)

They possibly didn't have any security experts because every security expert would tell them it's a bad idea.

[LukeTim]

When ISPs start storing internet history though...

Imagine the cyberattacks... cybercriminals are going to hit them with everything.

[suicidalfranco]

rapist, rapist everywhere. Also child molesters, terrorists and pig head f##kers.

[M4st4M1nd]

35 minutes ago, suicidalfranco said:

rapist, rapist everywhere. Also child molesters, terrorists and pig head f##kers.

Lmao we don't even need to monitor internet usage to see that either. I wonder what Camoron's search history is like? Pig pr0n 

[suicidalfranco]

12 minutes ago, M4st4M1nd said:

Lmao we don't even need to monitor internet usage to see that either. I wonder what Camoron's search history is like? Pig pr0n 

doesn't have a search history, he has his own vids 

[CommandMan7]

"These proposals were designed to reduce the power that the bill has, and the affect these proposals have had is the desired one, with encryption of devices and connections no longer considered illegal thanks to the Bill. In a revised edition, encryption backdoors were suggested, however these have also been abolished in the passed Bill."

 

So as I understand it, the current bill that's been passed just legalizes what all governments have been doing since the beginning of the internet. The important thing here is that encryption is still legal. 

 

Honestly, a bill similar to this in the US would be a very good compromise between the government and the people, since it protects encryption while not really changing anything that the government does already. 

 

This bill may stink, but it's nowhere near the complete disaster that it could have been.

[Misanthrope]

What the fuck? I guess everyone was too focused on Brexit to notice. 

[CGurrell]

1 hour ago, CommandMan7 said:

"These proposals were designed to reduce the power that the bill has, and the affect these proposals have had is the desired one, with encryption of devices and connections no longer considered illegal thanks to the Bill. In a revised edition, encryption backdoors were suggested, however these have also been abolished in the passed Bill."

 

So as I understand it, the current bill that's been passed just legalizes what all governments have been doing since the beginning of the internet. The important thing here is that encryption is still legal. 

 

Honestly, a bill similar to this in the US would be a very good compromise between the government and the people, since it protects encryption while not really changing anything that the government does already. 

 

This bill may stink, but it's nowhere near the complete disaster that it could have been.

The problem I have is the fact that no warrant is needed to check somebody's internet history, and as far as I can tell, there's no communication to the accused required, heck they may not even know they've done anything wrong or that they're being investigated at all. I know it could've been a heck of a lot worse, but this still doesn't sit right with me.

[M4st4M1nd]

33 minutes ago, CGurrell said:

The problem I have is the fact that no warrant is needed to check somebody's internet history, and as far as I can tell, there's no communication to the accused required, heck they may not even know they've done anything wrong or that they're being investigated at all. I know it could've been a heck of a lot worse, but this still doesn't sit right with me.

Yep not only that but ISP's now have to keep logs of all internet history of all users for 12 months. That's insane! I can see internet bills going up if this becomes the law.

[Belgarathian]

I would be buying a VPN service subscription and using a modem with built-in VPN capabilities right about now... 

[CGurrell]

6 hours ago, Belgarathian said:

I would be buying a VPN service subscription and using a modem with built-in VPN capabilities right about now... 

Slight problem with that idea. A lot of ISPs in the UK force you to use their modem/router. I called sky once to ask if I could use my own and was told by contact would be terminated if I did, and me forced to pay it off, because it's in their Ts and Cs or something. The only thing you can really do is run their device as a modem and connect your own router 

[Thony]

21 hours ago, LukeTim said:

When ISPs start storing internet history though...

Imagine the cyberattacks... cybercriminals are going to hit them with everything.

I'd love for some group to delete their records every now and then

[Bouzoo]

22 hours ago, samcool55 said:

they just passed net neutrality laws but they have no clue what they exactly mean.

Everyone here likes to call them anti net neutrality laws. I hope those same people in EC will be throttled to hell and back. 

[Oshino Shinobu]

18 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

What the fuck? I guess everyone was too focused on Brexit to notice. 

Maybe you've just discovered why Cameron took the EU Referendum to public vote. 

 

He's been pushing for this sort of legislation for quite a while. My inner conspiracy theorist has been awakened. 

[CGurrell]

7 minutes ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

Maybe you've just discovered why Cameron took the EU Referendum to public vote. 

 

He's been pushing for this sort of legislation for quite a while. My inner conspiracy theorist has been awakened. 

Genuinely wouldn't surprise me with Cameron and his cabinet of Theresa "I'm not paranoid" May, Jeremy C**t and George "I only like you're rich or from where i w" Osbourne. 

[Me1z]

This is absolutely terrifying, how the hell does something like this even happen? What level of idiocy is required for people to vote away their own right to privacy? I'm used to hearing about European countries passing facepalm-worthy 'tech bills', but this is the first time that the actions of another country has actually instilled me with fear. This shouldn't be possible, and the idea of a world where anyone finds this is acceptable scares the shit out of me.

[CGurrell]

1 minute ago, Me1z said:

This is absolutely terrifying, how the hell does something like this even happen? What level of idiocy is required for people to vote away their own right to privacy? I'm used to hearing about European countries passing facepalm-worthy 'tech bills', but this is the first time that the actions of another country has actually instilled me with fear. This shouldn't be possible, and the idea of a world where anyone finds this is acceptable scares the shit out of me.

The people didn't vote for this. The politicians people voted for, voted for this.

[RuffRuffmcgruff]

1 hour ago, CGurrell said:

The people didn't vote for this. The politicians people voted for, voted for this.

Truth brother, but watch nothing happen at all. There won't be any riots in the streets because we're so fucking complacent with our fucking corrie and Geordie fucking shore. Fuck sake

[Citadelen]

This Bill would probably have been passed even without Labour's support, I'm happy that they amended it.

Though that's not to say the Lords can't pick it apart even more, especially since Labour is the leading party there. If it's outright rejected, like the proposed Tax Credits cuts suggested last year, then you can be sure the government will launch a full attack on the Lords, which was once dominated by the Conservatives.