Data Retention Regulations in the Lords

[David Hansen]

On 26 Mar 2009 at 18:07, Richard Clayton wrote:

> the Earl of Northesk
> mentioned "layers 2 to 7 of the OSI seven-layer model" (which must be a
> first for either chamber!)

Before it was partly "modernised" by Mr Liar and his cronies there was 
usually someone there who knew rather a lot about any particular 
subject and who would be listened to (unlike a nearby place where 
someone who "knows too much" is liable to be shouted down by the 
tribalists). The "modernisation" could have improved on this, but I 
have yet to see evidence that it has done as much as could and should 
have been done.

> to which she got the answer from the minister (Lord West of Spithead)
> 
>    "spam is not retained. ISPs already deal with spam and are able to
>    tell the difference between that and other data"
> 
> which is extremely pragmatic... but not what the Directive or the
> Regulations actually say!

I think that simple sailor [1] Mr West overestimates the accuracy of 
spam detection software. Organisations are careful to say that they 
only attempt to identify possible spam. They then either put it in a 
separate folder or deliver it with a header to say that it is possibly 
spam.

If the possible spam is put in a folder on a server and someone 
accesses their on-line e-mail via https then any government spying 
software is going to have to be looking at the mail system at a deep 
level to see what happens to mail in the potential span folder.

If potential spam is tagged and then delivered then, if Mr West's 
assertion is correct, not spying on these e-mails will provide an 
excellent form of communication for the four horsemen to use.

What this makes clear is that the Home Office are lying again, though 
that is hardly a surprise as I would fall of my chair if they ever told 
the truth. These measures are designed to allow the police to improve 
their database of people who don't agree with the government and 
undertake political activity to change what the government does [2]. 
The fine upstanding citizens who went to the climate camp, armed only 
with peer reviewed science, are the sort of people put on this 
database. People who blow things and people up are a useful excuse for 
the Home Office, but are not the target.



[1] a term he uses to describe himself.

[2] I'm one of the "guilty" people.




-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents 
me   
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54