 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Stumbled across this little gem earlier.
Adrian Kennard, head of ISP Andrews & Arnold, has taken the Investigatory Powers Bill (Snooper's Charter) to bits. The article I found discussing it is on [url= http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2015/11/uk-isp-boss-points-out-massive-technical-flaws-in-investigatory-powers-bill/ ]Ars[/url], however the full report is [url= http://www.me.uk/IPBill-evidence1.pdf ]here[/url] (.pdf file) and I'd urge everyone to read it. It's eye-opening and not very long.
I'm sure I read some of that elsewhere, may have been on boingboing or Flipboard, the bit about DNS Logs being useless was very interesting.
Saved it into iBooks for later perusal. Thanks for the link.
cheers
Thanks cougar Interesting read.
Very interesting to hear on this from the perspective of an ISP.
It's clear the major ISP's want to keep the issuing of retention orders under wraps because spying on your customers is not a good look.
I habitually use VPN on my mobile devices to avoid issues on public WAP's; this makes data retention by the ISP useless - though there is some evidence that the NSA has compromised the encryption used in VPN's under some specific circumstances.
The whole data retention piece does seem rather pointless if only because it is so easy to circumvent; The real item of concern is the 'bulk equipment interference', I really do think that hacking someone should be controlled by a judge.
Cunning and incompetence are often difficult to tell apart.
One of the interesting bits for me was the assertion that the bill is only going to be forced upon the bigger ISPs. So all the murderers and terrorists can circumvent the government's flawless monitoring plan in its entirety by the highly complicated and technical approach of using a local independent service provider.
They just need to use Tor....
Whole thing is easily circumventable by anyone with all of 5 mins training.
They just need to use Tor....
How many Tor exit nodes are already owned by the government...
https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2015/06/25/can-you-trust-tors-exit-nodes/
So, if only large ISP's are required to retain the metadata and the expense (I have seen some very big estimates for the amount of data to be stored) is not fully (or at all) covered by the government that would skew the market in favour of the small ISP.
Given the performance hit when using ToR, I would have thought a VPN was a better solution for 'private' browsing. Both have risks associated though.
and the expense... is not fully (or at all) covered by the government
It's supposed to be wholly funded by the government. But ISPs are commercial enterprises; shouldn't they be turning a healthy profit from providing these services, if the same services aren't required from their competitors?
Interesting article - thank for the link - the PDF in particular...
No surprises there. The least surprising thing of all is the idea that those behind the bill haven't got a clue about how the internet works.
those behind the bill haven't got a clue about how the internet works
If you think that GCHQ and CESG don't know how the internet works then you're probably wrong. However having skimmed through the [url= https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/473770/Draft_Investigatory_Powers_Bill.pdf ]draft bill[/url] it seems to me that there's some discrepancy between what the blurb at the front says about the retention of "internet connection records" and what the draft bill actually says. I leave it to the conspiracy theorists to suggest why this might be.
@Rio It may be that GCHQ & CESG don't like the way the Internet currently works and want to change it unilaterally. That may make things interesting. The urge to control the largely uncontrollable is like a sickness with some people.