8
ISSUES: Privacy
Chapter 1: What is privacy?
police and intelligence services. They
will be stored by Internet providers
– think TalkTalk, Virgin or BT – for at
least a year and will include metadata,
such as when you visited a website, at
what time and from what computer.
In short, ICRs will list all your Internet
activity. Every website you visit
and smartphone app you access.
According to Big Brother Watch, the
collection of this content “can reveal
more about us than we realise”.
It said: “They can reveal our health
and finances, our sexuality, race,
religion, age, location, family, friends
and work connections. They can
also reveal our internal thoughts,
anxieties and desires, information we
won’t even share with the people we
trust the most.”
Hacking powers
Agencies like GCHQ and MI6 will be
given legal authority to hack into
targeted computer systems as part
of investigations. Called “equipment
interference” in the Investigatory
Powers Bill, it warrants both physical
hacking (downloading data from
a device in procession) and covert
interference
(extracting
data
remotely).
“At the lower end of the scale, an
equipment
interference
agency
may covertly download data from a
subject’s mobile device when it is left
unattended, or an agency may use
someone’s login credentials to gain
access to data held on a computer,”
states the Code of Practice. “More
complex equipment interference
operations may involve exploiting
existing vulnerabilities in software
in order to gain control of devices
or networks to remotely extract
material or monitor the user of the
device.”
“We question whether hacking
can ever be a legitimate form of
state surveillance,” said Privacy
International.
“The
logging
of
keystrokes, tracking of locations,
covert photography and video
recording of the user and those
around them enables intelligence
agencies and the police to conduct
real-time surveillance.”
Bulk personal datasets
Bulk personal datasets (BPD), often
overlooked, include banking data,
travel information, passport scans,
medical documentation and hospital
records “about a wide range of
individuals, the majority of whom are
not of direct intelligence interest.” In
many cases, they are “too large to be
manually processed”.
Conservative
MP
David
Davis
previously
told
the
UK
joint
committee: “This is very intrusive
information for a state to hold. We
are pretty sure they have all the
communications data, they have
got flight data, they have almost
certainly got financial data, and they
may well have Automatic Number
Plate Recognition data.”
MI5 argues that BPDs – stored in
searchable databases – are used to
“understand a subject of interest’s
behaviour and connections, and to
quickly exclude the innocent”. Critics
point out that for this approach to
work, everything has to be collected
on a massive scale, leading to very
real privacy concerns.
Oversight
The Government maintains that
Parliament will have greater oversight
than ever before – however, to be
fair, the bar was fairly low to begin
with. In March this year, Theresa
May claimed the Bill had been
changed to strengthen the powers
of an oversight commissioner and
to introduce enhanced safeguards
around interception warrants.
“The commissioner will have a clear
mandate to inform Parliament and
the public about the need for, and
use of, investigatory powers. The
commissioner will report publicly
and make recommendations on the
findings that emerge in the course of
his or her work,” the UK Government
has said. Additionally, the updated
system boasts a so-called “double-
lock” on warrant authorisation,
alongside the need for the prime
minister to be consulted before the
interception of particularly sensitive
communications.
In August, a 200-page report was
released by David Anderson QC,
the
UK’s
former
Independent
Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation,
which effectively green-lit the bulk
surveillance proposals. He concluded
there was “no viable alternative” to
the current spying regime.
With current surveillance legislation –
the Data Retention and Investigatory
Powers Act 2014 – set to expire on 31
December this year, the Investigatory
Powers Bill is now expected to gain
Royal Assent and be signed into law
well in advance of that date.
What does the future hold?
“The passing of the IP Bill will have
an impact that goes beyond the UK’s
shores,” said Jim Killock, executive
director of the Open Rights Group.
“It is likely that other countries,
including authoritarian regimes with
poor human rights records, will use
this law to justify their own intrusive
surveillance powers.
“While parliamentarians have failed
to limit these powers, the courts may
succeed,” he continued. “A ruling by
the Court of Justice of the European
Union, expected next year, may mean
that parts of the Bill are shown to be
unlawful and need to be amended.”
Meanwhile, Paul Bernal, a leading
privacy and human rights expert,
told IBTimes UK the introduction of
the surveillance law could be “easily
misused” by future governments and
unexpected political change.
“The rapidity of recent political
change, from Brexit to the election
of Trump, should alert us to the
danger,” he said. “These powers are
actually better suited for monitoring
and controlling political dissent than
catching criminals and terrorists −
they’re ideal for an authoritarian
clampdown should a government
wish to do that. A future government
might well.”
23 November 2016
Ö
Ö
The
above
information
is
reprinted with kind permission
from the
International Business
Times
. Please visit
co.uk for further information.
© International Business Times 2017
