DEADLINE FRIDAY: Responding to draft CoP RIP Pt.I Ch.II (was RE: ZDNet UK 26/10/2001: "Home Office admits data retention plans")

[Caspar Bowden]

> Roland Perry
...
> CSPs keep all existing logs for 12 months.
> Disclosures are accepted for "National Security" up to 12 months
>                           for "Serious Crime" for 6 months
>                           for the rest, 3 months.

There is no statutory basis for introducing such distinctions in a CoP -
primary legislation should be amended. As we've observed, CoPs from the
Home Office are no more than turgid regurgitations of the wording the
Acts themselves.

What is needed is an intermediate instrument, between a S.22 Notice and
a executive warrant, preferably authorized by a judge (the Surveillance
Commissioners could be enlisted at a pinch), which would be required for
bulk access to traffic data (whether on an individual for an extended
period, or on a group). The purposes should be clearly stated (and IMHO
limited to *serious* crime etc.), and the criteria for long-term
retention in the authorities' own databases should be addressed. At the
moment this a duty of the Inspectorate of Constabulary, and so far as I
am aware they have written nothing publicly on this subject, so the
current rule of thumb that anything goes up to three years is the de
facto position.

> > all the time blithely saying DP
> >principles should be adhered to.
>=20
> Let's not conflate DPA-for-CSPs (almost obsolete standards of=20
> disclosure) with DPA-for-LEAs=20

Er...I didn't ?
--
Caspar =
Bowden=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=
=A0=A0=A0 www.fipr.org
Director, Foundation for Information Policy Research
Tel: +44(0)20 7354 2333=20