https - hopefully not too stupid a question
zenadsl6186 at zen.co.uk
Mon Jun 18 22:23:24 BST 2012
Roland Perry wrote:
> In article <4FDF3F79.1000306 at zen.co.uk>, Peter Fairbrother
> <zenadsl6186 at zen.co.uk> writes
>> 1(4) of the draft Act, which says "Nothing in this Part authorises any
>> conduct consisting in the interception of communications .." only
>> covers part 1 - and not part 2, where all the filtering stuff is.
> A very similar provision is in 9(5)(a) - in Pt2.
Yes - but I think that, like the provision in part 1, it may actually
turn out to be essentially meaningless.
The part 1 proviso is as close to being semantically meaningless as I
can determine - there is perhaps a small gap, in that comms data
consists of traffic, use and subscriber data rather than just traffic
data, and only looking for traffic data is excluded from being
interception - but I cannot think of any situation offhand where that
would make any difference.
just avoiding the chore of analysing the draft, should get back to that,
-- Peter Fairbrother
More information about the ukcrypto