PDA

View Full Version : EU Data Retention Directive passes



BoyOfDestiny
December 16th, 2005, 01:54 AM
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051215-5780.html

This EU gives me a feeling of déjà vu...

floppy
December 16th, 2005, 02:06 AM
Time to buy storage device and media stocks.

And move to the third world, too.

WildTangent
December 16th, 2005, 02:10 AM
Ya, sounds a lot like the Patriot Act to me. *shakes head* What a paranoid world we live in.

-Wild

Kvark
December 16th, 2005, 02:12 AM
It certainly doesn't feel funny that every single phone call I make, every single email I send or recieve and every single website I visit will be logged. The worst part is that it's not just going to be archived and put away, the info will be looked at too. The TV news showed a pattern finding program that can dig through all that info and find dangerous or otherwise interesting persons based on for example patterns in their phone calls as an example of how useful it is.

Think I'm gonna move somewhere outside of EU if and when I can afford it, until then it might help to use encryption whenever possible.

poptones
December 16th, 2005, 02:18 AM
Ummmm... encryption doesn't mean much when you're not using proxies - and if you DO use proxies, well, they can call that "suspicious" too and use it as an excuse to impound your stuff.

Is there a law where you live protecting you from being forced to incriminate yourself? Without that all the encryption in the world won't protect you - if you're a suspect and you refuse to give up your passwords they'll just throw you in jail for that.

BoyOfDestiny
December 16th, 2005, 02:21 AM
Ummmm... encryption doesn't mean much when you're not using proxies - and if you DO use proxies, well, they can call that "suspicious" too and use it as an excuse to impound your stuff.

Is there a law where you live protecting you from being forced to inciminate yourself? Without that all the encryption in the world won't protect you - if you're a suspect and you refuse to give up your passwords they'll just throw you in jail for that.

Yup. How about steganography? :)

BWF89
December 16th, 2005, 02:24 AM
They should sell tshirts with the slogan "George Orwell was right".

ow50
December 16th, 2005, 09:53 AM
Damn, I hate these "terrorist laws". And who's this going to stop. Terrorists will use VoIP, some prepaid, anonymous cell phone deals and whatever else there is that's not tracked. But I bet this law will come in very handy to entertainment industry when looking for copyright infringers.

The weird part about this is that all that data is to be held by private companies. Internet and phone companies will have to manage information that should be secret and for government use only.

And what do you think, will companies use all the information they have to further their business? Here in Finland a while ago a company called Sonera used telephone records (who called who and when) a least on a couple occasions, most notably when trying to track down if someone from their staff was leaking information to the press. This same company is my current ISP.

By the basic structure of capitalism, companies do not care about ethics, always not even about law. It's all about profits. We're trusting way too much information to parties who are bound to misuse it.

23meg
December 16th, 2005, 10:02 AM
The EU needs an Internet 3 now.

Lovechild
December 16th, 2005, 10:04 AM
The word retarded comes to mind... then again that happens quite often when it comes to the EU.

jeremy
December 16th, 2005, 10:08 AM
They should sell tshirts with the slogan "George Orwell was right".
WE should give them away free!

teaker1s
December 16th, 2005, 10:30 AM
I'd be a prime suspect then!!! I research things that governments dont want you to know-like the nuclear accident that never got cleaned up and the strange illness protestors suffered because of radioactive heavy metal dust

http://www.monbiot.com/archives/1997/01/01/secret-dumping/

jeremy
December 16th, 2005, 01:06 PM
Beam me up Scotty!

prizrak
December 16th, 2005, 01:50 PM
They are just legalizing what has been done for years anyway. Echelon anyone?

ubuntu_demon
December 16th, 2005, 02:50 PM
They are just legalizing what has been done for years anyway. Echelon anyone?
This is new for Europe.

I'm really angry about this! (I read a week ago that they would probably would vote this way)

I hope tor/privoxy gets faster so I will be able to use that in firefox (currently it's too slow).

Kimm
December 16th, 2005, 03:52 PM
Personaly I dont mind, as long as its just a computer that goes through my data and not a person, and, as long as the computer just looks for things that might mean that I am doing something illegal.

Knomefan
December 16th, 2005, 04:02 PM
Personaly I dont mind, as long as its just a computer that goes through my data and not a person

Huh? The computer goes through your data because a person wouldn't be able to coupe with all the data. However, it does so in order to generate data that can be used by humans.



, and, as long as the computer just looks for things that might mean that I am doing something illegal.
Might? Isn't that a big vaque? Isn't this exactly the problem?


What is upsetting me the most, apart from the actual law or course, is that this is a total non-issue in the mainstream media. This is a sweeping change in how Europe works and is trampling on the rights of European citizens to an extend that is nearly unprecetented in Europe in the last 50 years and yet there is no outcry, there isn't even something one could call a public debate. Nothing.

Kimm
December 16th, 2005, 04:22 PM
Huh? The computer goes through your data because a person wouldn't be able to coupe with all the data. However, it does so in order to generate data that can be used by humans.


only if the data in some way implies that I am or might be doing something illegal.
A computer isnt smart, its just a machine, it'll never be amused or whatever no mather what it reads, it just processes some data and if it contains certain patterns it reports it to human officials. Nothing like "I realy love you my dear, I want to be with you for the rest of my life" Will ever pass by them, the computer will just ignore it and move on.

its not like humans will read everything.



Might? Isn't that a big vaque? Isn't this exactly the problem?


vague? cant say it is. As I said, unless the data shows some significans the computer will ignore it, dont you think a phone call with someone saying something like *whispering* "Yeah, your right, you get the eh... candycanes and we'll meet outside the bank at five past ten", is something we should ignore?

Realy! I mean, what is there to worry about? As long as you dont spend all your time ordering drugs by telephone or planing terrorist attacks over IRC you dont have to care. What does it mather that some computer somewhere far far away happens to, in a split secund, pass by your e-mail to a friend saying you liked the golfclubs he gave you for chistmas.

Knomefan
December 16th, 2005, 04:32 PM
Realy! I mean, what is there to worry about? As long as you dont spend all your time ordering drugs by telephone or planing terrorist attacks over IRC you dont have to care. What does it mather that some computer somewhere far far away happens to, in a split secund, pass by your e-mail to a friend saying you liked the golfclubs he gave you for chistmas.
Sorry, but that's simply naive.
Who is to say what exactly is suspicious? Especially when it comes to something like terrorism? You are making the mistake that you equate illegal with suspicious.

And apart from that, believe it or not, but people have a right for privacy and this right is getting eroded. What about people who are in contact with someone who is suspicious? What about their data? What if those people engage in things that are perfectly legal, but that they don't want anybody to know about? What about people who spend hours looking at porn on the net? Is this legal? Of course. Do all people agree with others knowing? Probably not. What about people that like to hang around politicly suspicious websites?

And finally, why should it be anybodies bussiness if I have done nothing wrong and haven't even done anything suspicious who I called on my mobile and when I called this person and where I was during this call?

Kimm
December 16th, 2005, 05:10 PM
And apart from that, believe it or not, but people have a right for privacy and this right is getting eroded.


Lets put it this way then. Lets imagine you own a store. Your buisness is going great and you have some quite valuable things for sale, people know this ofcourse. One day some punks walk into your store, beat you down and steal everything of value, you are left completely broke. BUT, thanks to your new security system you got all their faces on film, before the day ends the police have captured them and you are right back on your feet.

I can almost promise you that everytime you walk into a store you are being watched by atleast three cameras, if you want to complain about something invading on your privacy, this is it, 'cos these cameras are acctually watched by humans! but then again... what does it mather? Should you care if some guard watches you while you pick out a new pair of jeans? it not like he watches when you try them on. Now your asking... but what if I'm in some kind of adult store then? well whoever owns the store is probably looking at you, but you dont tell him/her to stop looking 'cos this person is invading on your privacy do you? Its the same thing, you dont care if some strange perverted adult store owner looks at you while you shop, but you go nuts about a camera?



What about people who are in contact with someone who is suspicious? What about their data?


What about it... the computer will just pass over that like with everything else. If the time comes when they want to see if you know anything, they just ask you, just like they do with everyone else.



What about people who spend hours looking at porn on the net? Is this legal? Of course. Do all people agree with others knowing? Probably not.


Sure its legal. And is it suspitious? no! so why should the computer care?
But even if someone would look at what you happen to be looking at, I can promise you that they would not take the time to look up who you are as long as you dont happen to take a liking to kiddie porn (not saying you do), I know for a fact that, for example, it is illegal to track IP addresses in sweden besides for a temporary allowance if this person is found to be heavily pirating. So, you would need a permit, wouldnt you?



What about people that like to hang around politicly suspicious websites?


If they happen to frequently visit some sites with contents like "this weeks KKK meating will be held at bla bla bla's national part, bring your own cross", then thats something someone should be chcking out, dont you think?



And finally, why should it be anybodies bussiness if I have done nothing wrong and haven't even done anything suspicious who I called on my mobile and when I called this person and where I was during this call?


All of a sudden you call a computer "someone"? Its not like theres a team of people sitting in a room constantly watching a screen with something like...

Name: Jonathan Happypants
Age: 34
Address: Milkyway 4B
Country: Switzerland
Cellphone: Sony Ericsson t560
Girlfriend: Lucy Lane
Operative System: Ubuntu Linux

Hobbies: fishing, programming, football and driving

Click here to listen to all phonecalls made by Jonathan

Knomefan
December 16th, 2005, 05:57 PM
Lets put it this way then. Lets imagine you own a store.
And let's imagine not drawing false anologies. Calling my mum is something entirely different from entering a jewlery store.



What about it... the computer will just pass over that like with everything else.

It will? How can you be so sure?



Sure its legal. And is it suspitious? no! so why should the computer care?

Again, it's amazing that you know so well what the computer (that is the humans that use the computer) will be interested in.
Oh, and what about connecting my previous point and this one?



But even if someone would look at what you happen to be looking at, I can promise you that they would not take the time to look up who you are as long as you dont happen to take a liking to kiddie porn (not saying you do)

You can promise me? Now I feel safe. ;-D



, I know for a fact that, for example, it is illegal to track IP addresses in sweden besides for a temporary allowance if this person is found to be heavily pirating. So, you would need a permit, wouldnt you?
Yes, you'd need a judge to allow it.



If they happen to frequently visit some sites with contents like "this weeks KKK meating will be held at bla bla bla's national part, bring your own cross", then thats something someone should be chcking out, dont you think?
Probably. But how about getting an order to do so and then collect the data, not the other way around?



All of a sudden you call a computer "someone"? Its not like theres a team of people sitting in a room constantly watching a screen with something like...

No, not the computer but the people using a tool, in this instance a computer, are someone.

macgyver2
December 16th, 2005, 06:03 PM
I hope tor/privoxy gets faster so I will be able to use that in firefox (currently it's too slow).
I'm doing my part! Maybe after this vote a lot more in the EU will sign onto tor. They just need to be educated about it.

ow50
December 16th, 2005, 06:05 PM
As I said, unless the data shows some significans the computer will ignore it
[...]
A computer isnt smart, its just a machine, it'll never be amused or whatever no mather what it reads, it just processes some data and if it contains certain patterns it reports it to human officials.
[...]
What about it... the computer will just pass over that
[...]
why should the computer care?
[...]
All of a sudden you call a computer "someone"? Its not like theres a team of people sitting in a room constantly watching a screen with something like...

Weird faith you have in a computer that is operated by humans in a manner that you don't know and cannot know. Having the data on a computer is not a blessing, it's a curse. The data is easy to maintain and search. It gives the authorities and phone companies too powerful tools that can too easily be misused.

We are not worried that some dude watching a computer screen might be amused. Remember that the content of any communications is not stored, just info like who, when and where. We're worried about being thrown in jail for visiting political web sites that disagree with the government or web sites that deliver news that is not government approved propaganda. We're worried about not getting a job with some company because that company's contact at our ISP tells them we ordered some herbal seeds from Holland in 1999 or that we actively participated in discussion at a socialist web forum in 2000.

Even if we would trust our current goverment, we're worried that five years from now a more oppressive goverment will be in charge and they will have way too much information based on which to select people to be sent to the prison camps. As for trusting ISPs and phone companies, I don't see how we could ever do that.

Kimm
December 16th, 2005, 06:21 PM
Again, it's amazing that you know so well what the computer (that is the humans that use the computer) will be interested in.
Oh, and what about connecting my previous point and this one?


If there would be acctual people sitting by these computer going though it all, you got me, I give up. But now... that just aint the way its gona be is it? That would be completely useless, you said yourself that people just cant cope with all that info at once. These computers will most probably be stored in some huge cooled server room, wouldnt suprise me if they wount even have screens. The only people comming in there would be the ocational technichian when something goes wrong. Then the occational suspitious pattern would be sent to some human sitting in a cubicle.



And let's imagine not drawing false anologies. Calling my mum is something entirely different from entering a jewlery store.


False analogies? they are very much true, those cameras invade your personal life, just as much, if not more then a computer in a far away country will ever do.



We're worried about not getting a job with some company because that company's contact at my ISP tells them we ordered some herbal seeds from Holland in 1999 or that we actively participated in discussion at a socialist web forum in 2000


That is something that your emplyer will not know about you. Surely you must understand that this info isnt something just anyone can have a look at? It might be possible that if you where convicted for using drugs a phonecall to the Government would allow them to know this.



Even if we would trust our current goverment, we're worried that five years from now a more oppressive goverment will be in charge and they will have way too much information based on which to select people to be sent to the prison camps. As for trusting ISPs and phone companies, I don't see how we could ever do that.


Thats possible, and If that happend I would be truly sorry. But I'm not talking about what might happen, I'm talking about how things are Today.

asimon
December 16th, 2005, 09:57 PM
Actually I am very concened about this development. Every year we get more and more monitored and fewer and fewer rights. And this happens not only in USA or Europe, no, it's a world wide devlopment. Anyone read 1984? Somehow I fear that this is the long-term direction our world's moving.
Oh, and what really enrages me is the dishonest talk with which they justify every one of those little steps (that is if they can't do it sectretly).

bytter
December 17th, 2005, 12:09 AM
On other news, Weird Al Yankovic and "Internet Sandman":

http://www.lyricsondemand.com/w/weirdalyankoviclyrics/internetsandmanenternapsterlyrics.html

GazaM
December 17th, 2005, 12:58 AM
I'm pretty much at a loss for words right now. This is an absolute joke, the world today is an absolute mess run by a bunch of <have-a-guess>! The EU is an absolute joke. I just hope this will be gotten rid of in due time, I don't think 90% of the tech world will like this at all. It is the same with the other EU directive about software patents (If I remember correctly), when the average population (the majority of technology users) are surfing the web and suddenly are shown a warning about the directive before entering, they are made aware of the issue. We need to make serious noise about this, get heard. Simply complaining on a linux distro forum will only go so far, aka not far at all.

Now if only I knew how to get it done...

BoyOfDestiny
December 17th, 2005, 02:15 AM
I'm pretty much at a loss for words right now. This is an absolute joke, the world today is an absolute mess run by a bunch of <have-a-guess>! The EU is an absolute joke. I just hope this will be gotten rid of in due time, I don't think 90% of the tech world will like this at all. It is the same with the other EU directive about software patents (If I remember correctly), when the average population (the majority of technology users) are surfing the web and suddenly are shown a warning about the directive before entering, they are made aware of the issue. We need to make serious noise about this, get heard. Simply complaining on a linux distro forum will only go so far, aka not far at all.

Now if only I knew how to get it done...

Indeed. however, that why I mentioned this here. We all have our reasons for using Ubuntu (and other linux distros too). For me it was idealogical, and frankily I like the Ubuntu way of doing things too. The point is I think some people here would be more receptive to information like this. Some people just don't care, it's all fine and dandy if lost in a sea of information.

When things like the Sony DRM show up... It shows that either sinister methods are being used, or errors are being made.

Methods like this http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051210/ZNYT01/512100416/1001/BUSINESS (tracking people by the cell phones) are also disturbing.

If you want a more valid store analogy. The store owner would be the one under surveillance. Who you call, your entire inventory, how much you sell, how much you buy (and where from), who you sell it to, personal calls, times you enter and leave the store, your home address, etc etc.

The room for abuse is tremendous. If it sounds crazy, just look at history or some other nations right now... I guess my point is, "who watches the watchmen".

To answer your question specifically, how about we form Ubuntu Island ;)

timeoff
December 17th, 2005, 02:15 AM
The most depressing thing about this legislation is that it has been more or less ignored by the mainstream media here in the UK. In the UK the fetish for arguing over the UK's rather trivial EU rebate and the EU budget is of more media interest than legislation that extends the scope of the surveillance society.

However, for an interesting view on the liklihood of the legislation being translated into effective action take a look at:

http://www.newswireless.net/index.cfm/article/2548

I suspect that what we are actually seeing is yet another example of politicians (the UK government in particular) desperate to be seen to "do something". In this case "do something about terrorism". Whether or not what they propose is useful, practical, or effective is the least of their worries - being able to claim that they have passed some more legislation is seen as a good thing of itself. The value to the UK government in pushing for this legislation at the EU level is that they can now turn round and say there is no choice in the UK - legislation will have to be passed locally to meet EU requirements.

If you are in the UK, and are interested in trying to preserve or extend traditional civil liberties in the digital world you might like to take a look at

http://www.openrightsgroup.org/

You will find plenty more areas where proposals for disproportionate corporate/state oversight of the individual are surreptitiously being slipped into law.

T