"Warrants authorising phone taps treble"

[Peter Fairbrother]

Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> In article <B720899F87133940965DFA172C81CC4F010D6387@FDCEM007>, Watkin 
> Simon <Simon.Watkin@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk> writes
>>> Is there anywhere where us plebs may get a copy of this
>>> report?
>>
>> http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/hc0708/hc02/0252/0252.pdf
>>
>> The Interception of Communications Commissioner, Sir Paul Kennedy, 
>> appeared
>> on Radio 5Live's Midday News this afternoon to correct the misleading
>> reporting of what his annual report actually says.
> 
> Could you please suggest to him that, in the future, the numbers in his 
> report distinguish subscriber detail checks (i.e. reverse directory 
> enquiries or equivalent) from call record checks (much more intrusive).

Yes!

Also including such things as tracing people through the movement of 
their cellphones, etc. in the more intrusive category.

I don't mind (much) that the Cops can do real-er RDQ's than the rest of 
us can, but I would like it to be known how much they do other traffic 
analysis stuff.

Because any of it (even the real-er RDQ's) is intrusive, and I'd like it 
to be publicly known _exactly_ how intrusive the Cops are.

If we allow the Cops to do this stuff, at least we should know how 
extensively they do it. After all, this is meant to be a free society, 
where the Cops are our servants, not our masters.



-- Peter Fairbrother