TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- More scary police state type legislation
More scary police state type legislation
Government Introduces Bill To Require Surveillance Capabilities, Mandated Subscriber Disclosure
Thursday June 18, 2009
As expected, the Government has taken another shot at lawful access legislation today, introducing a legislative package called the Investigative Powers for the 21st Century (IP21C) Act that would require mandated surveillance capabilities at Canadian ISPs, force ISPs to disclose subscriber information such as name and address, and grant the police broad new powers to obtain transmission data and force ISPs to preserve data. Although I can only go on government releases (here, here), the approach appears to be very similar to the Liberal lawful access bill of 2005 that died on the order paper (my comments on that bill here). It is pretty much exactly what law enforcement has been demanding and privacy groups have been fearing. It represents a reneging of a commitment from the previous Public Safety Minister on court oversight and will embed broad new surveillance capabilities in the Canadian Internet.
The lawful access proposal is generally divided among two sets of issues - ISP requirements and new police powers.
1. ISP requirements
There are two key components here. First, ISPs will be required to install surveillance capabilities in their networks. This feels a bit like a surveillance stimulus package, with ISPs making big new investments and the government cost-sharing by compensating for changes to existing networks. The bill again exempts smaller ISPs for three years from these requirements. While that is understandable from a cost perspective, it undermines the claims that this is an effective solution to online crime since it will result in Canadians at big ISPs facing surveillance while would-be criminals seek out smaller ISPs without surveillance capabilities.
Second, the bill requires all ISPs to surrender customer name, address, IP address, and email address information upon request without court oversight. In taking this approach, Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan has reneged on the promise of his predecessor and cabinet colleague Stockwell Day, who pledged not to introduce mandated subscriber data disclosure without court oversight.
2. New Police Powers
There are several new police powers that come with the lawful access approach. First, police will be able to obtain transmission data about Internet-based messaging. The government says this does not cover the content of a private communication, but it will cover information about what a person is doing online (what sites they visit, who they communicate with, etc.). This will be subject to a judicial order that will allow for obtaining real time data (a warrant) or historical data (a production order).
Second, police can obtain a preservation order that would require ISPs to preserve (ie. not delete) data related to a particular subscriber or even a specific communication. Third, there is an expansion of the police power to obtain a tracking warrant, by allowing police to "remotely activate existing tracking devices that are found in certain types of technologies such as cell phones." Fourth, the law expands the computer virus provision in the Criminal Code and opens the door to greater international cooperation of cybercrime enforcement.
As for what is not in the lawful access package, there is nothing on data retention, a controversial issue in Europe. It is also not clear what reporting requirements the Government envisions to ensure that there is transparency in the process.
I'll have more to say in the days ahead, but it should be stated that everyone wants to ensure that police have the ability to deal with serious crime. Lawful access has been on the public agenda for years, with law enforcement has demanded new powers but not providing compelling evidence that the current system has created serious barriers to their investigations. For example, last year CIRA caved to law enforcement pressure for a backdoor to WHOIS domain name registrant information. More than a year later, law enforcement has never once used this backdoor. Given the potential for misuse (Greece, U.S. telcos), the onus should be on law enforcement to demonstrate how the current system has harmed investigations and then we should work on ensuring that there is always - including for customer name and address information - appropriate court oversight.
Source:
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4069/125/
Conservative bills would force ISPs to widen police access
Justice Minister, Public Safety Minister introduce two bills that would give law enforcement much greater access to Internet communications, personal details of subscribers
Ottawa � The Canadian Press, Thursday, Jun. 18, 2009 02:26PM EDT
The Conservative government wants to give police greater powers to eavesdrop on Canadians in cyberspace.
Justice Minister Rob Nicholson and Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan introduced two bills Thursday that would give law enforcement much greater access to Internet communications and the personal details of subscribers.
The proposed legislation would: � enable police to access information on an Internet subscriber, such as name, street address and email address, without having to get a search warrant.
* force Internet service providers to freeze data on their hard drives to prevent subscribers under investigation from deleting potentially important evidence.
* require Telecom companies to invest in technology that allows for the interception of Internet communications.
* allow police to remotely activate tracking devices already embedded in cellphones and certain cars, to help with investigations.
* allow police to obtain data about where Internet communications are coming from and going to.
* make it a crime to arrange with a second person over the Internet the sexual exploitation of a child.
Nicholson, flanked at a news conference by police officers, said the changes were necessary to keep up with the changing times.
�Twenty-first century technology calls for 21st century tools for police to effectively investigate crime,� he said.
Van Loan added: �The legislation contains important tools to allow our law enforcement community and our intelligence officials to combat crime and terrorism in the face of rapidly evolving communications technologies.�
Privacy and civil liberties advocates have raised alarms over the changes, particularly the measure to remove the obligation of police to obtain a warrant before getting personal information about a Canadian Internet user.
Some Internet service providers willingly gave over such information to police in the past, but others insisted on warrants first, which raised the ire of law enforcement officials.
The new regime would allow a select number of law enforcement officials to see the data, and would conduct regular audits on how the information is being viewed and accessed.
wow...........
such bullshit, unbelievable
disturbing... ceiling cat will now wear a badge and audit in my computer
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Abercrombie disturbing... ceiling cat will now wear a badge and audit in my computer |
Official release:
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-eng.d...ndex&nid=460089
sounds ok, but soooo many loop holes.
so there is a big brother after all...
I hope this doesn't affect me, getting free stuff online lolz... JUST KIDDING ^^
Its like a never ending barrage...
saw this on the news last night and figured Jay would be all over it...
I guess he's on another trip???
Right on...
Liberals Take A Stand For Net Neutrality
Friday June 19, 2009
Yesterday's Question Period featured an unexpected and welcome surprise - the federal Liberal Party has expressed its support for net neutrality. Industry critic Marc Garneau rose on the floor of the House of Commons and asked):
( video version here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u__FtuNwGiI )
Mr. Speaker, in a free and open democracy in the 21st century, in an innovative and progressive knowledge economy, no tool is more paramount than the Internet. The Internet is the backbone of today's flow of free ideas and sharing. My party, the Liberal Party, supports the principle of net neutrality and an open and competitive Internet environment. Do the Conservatives support the principle of net neutrality?
Minister Clement responded by pointing to his digital economy strategy conference next week, but did not take a position on the issue. Sources say that the official Liberal position is that:
"Internet traffic management should not be permitted for anti-competitive behaviour, nor should it target specific websites, users or legitimate business applications. The Liberal Party will also continue to ensure internet management does not infringe on Canadians privacy rights."
This marks a critically important development for net neutrality in Canada just weeks before the CRTC hearings on network management. With two major parties - Liberals and NDP - now standing squarely in favour of protecting an open Internet, pressure is likely to build on the Conservatives to take a position, particularly given the growing emphasis on developing a national digital strategy for Canada.
The official Liberal press release on the issue is here:
http://www.liberal.ca/en/newsroom/m...-net-neutrality
Go Liberals!
can someone coles notes this?
I'm STILL fuckin' hung over...
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Owen M can someone coles notes this? I'm STILL fuckin' hung over... |
lol...I wasn't near a computer. had a pretty fun night though....didn't drink a lot. Just mixed the wrong drinks
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Owen M can someone coles notes this? I'm STILL fuckin' hung over... |
| quote: |
Police: Hello, Mr. Akermanis Me: What do you want? Police: We see you've been looking at a lot of Brazilian Donkey Porn lately. Me: Really? Police: Yes - You're under arrest. |
Good editorial on this issue:
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Techno...2732/story.html
THE OTTAWA CITIZENJUNE 23, 2009 7:52 AM
Balancing security and privacy is one of the trickiest challenges in public policy. Unfortunately, the federal government has come up short in its proposed legislation allowing agents of the state to monitor the Internet use of ordinary Canadians.
The legislation would force Internet service providers (ISPs) to permit law enforcement agencies to tap into their systems to obtain information and conversations from users. Police say they need this power because the Internet is crawling with terrorists, mobsters and sexual predators.
The police are right that the Internet is a playground and networking tool for all sorts of bad people. It's also true that you can walk into any crowded place -- a shopping mall, say, or a music concert -- and assume that among the throngs of people are some with nefarious intent. But the police don't randomly search everyone's pockets.
People use the Internet to make credit card purchases, to look up and share medical information, to exchange personal photographs and letters. These are, needless to say, highly personal activities. It's hard to understand why, in a relatively safe and stable country like Canada, the state needs the right to arbitrarily look over everyone's shoulder.
The proposed legislation would allow police to track Internet activity without a warrant, but getting a warrant is not so onerous a task. Canadian judges are not known to obstruct police investigations. As the University of Ottawa law professor Michael Geist has noted, there are plenty of recent cases in which the current system was perfectly adequate in the sense of giving police enough access to electronic investigative tools to bring charges.
Now, even if police were to be freed from the burden of obtaining warrants, most investigations would continue to be above board. That's because Canadian police officers, we like to believe, are honest and decent people. But it's also true that the more power police have, the more opportunity they have to abuse it.
Here in Ottawa, incidents of police misconduct are not as rare as they should be. Officers have been accused of misusing their own internal computer systems and carrying out unauthorized background or licence plate checks. If police are suddenly given the power to randomly troll through peoples' e-mail traffic and Internet history, the potential for abuse is high indeed.
The Internet has become an enormous instrument of commerce, political activism, journalism and social interaction. Do we really want, or need, the eyes of the state watching and recording and monitoring, in the absence of any cause to do so? The warrant system exists to ensure that when the state does intrude in our private space, be it physical or electronic, it has a legitimate reason to do so. If those who support the new legislation believe that police investigations involving the Internet are routinely derailed by the the unreasonable rejections of a warrant, then they should say so. So far they haven't.
Interestingly, as Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan is promoting this expansion of state power at the expense of personal privacy, his caucus colleague Pierre Poilievre is expressing concern about Google cars driving around city streets and taking pictures. The Google cars are a small infringement compared to what the police would be able to do under the proposed legislation.
The Harper Conservatives, supposedly the party of small government, are sending out mixed messages.
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.