Secret Irish Data Repository Uncovered 258
topgold writes "During an initial public meeting yesterday, the Irish Justice Ministry revealed that for nearly a year, the Irish government has mandated all telecommunications operators store traffic information from every landline, fax and mobile phone call for at least three years. Irish Times journalist Karlin Lillington offers insights regarding this secret data retention regime in several national newspaper columns. A considerable citizen reaction is at the boiling point, stoked by a civil liberties discussion board and the rejuvenation of the Electronic Freedom Ireland citizen group. By law, the Irish government can deep-six any Cabinet discussions related to the 'deliberative process' and since this decision to retain phone records happened at Cabinet level, it could have remained hidden for more than five years."
What were the techies doing? (Score:3, Interesting)
probably madly swapping tapes (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder just what that means... "traffic information." Surely time, date, duration, initiating and receiving parties. I can't see them having too much beyond that... It should be a logistical impossibility to have any information about the content of all those messages... way too much data to sift through and catalog.
Interesting that this was reportedly done by fiat.
Re:What were the techies doing? (Score:2, Insightful)
Hell during the crusades it was fashionable for people to walk around with blood past the elbows.
They were just making the world a better place!
Re:What were the techies doing? (Score:2, Offtopic)
The crusades were a war; valor in war was widely respected by those taking place in the war, be it Europeans trying to carve out kingdoms in the holy land or Native North Americans feuding amongst their own tribes.
They were just making the world a better place!
Odd that you pick the Crusades as an example of "a bad war," when they were started because of pilgrims being killed in the Holy Land--and the miliary strucutre was only there because Muslims tried to conquer Europe first.
You're suprised? (Score:1)
this stuff has been going on for years.. the only 'shock' here is that they actually admitted it. stupid idiots.
Re:Not ISPs, telcos (Score:5, Informative)
Irish telcos, thats my old domain. What they are probably talking about is Call Detail Records from telephone switching equipment, SS7 data from SPs and STPs, lookups of SCP features, billing and customer data. The total amount of data is not that large, a few hundred megabytes per day for all landlines in a small market like Ireland. Mobile system switches can generate much more data, such as cell site handoffs, signal strength, power cycle events and SMS content. GSM/GPRS/UMTS data could total 4-6 Gbytes/day in a market with 2 million handsets.
CDR data was normally kept for a legal minimum of 90 days past each billing cycle, to allow for customer service to deal with complaints. Any disputed data would be copied out of the dataset and kept with the customer record in case the problem took a long time to resolve.
Typically, hard disk based CDR and customer records were kept for nine months before being moved to the recovery pool, and the disk/tape space would be recovered within a year. Billing and customer records are kept permanently, or at least ten years until they are unreadable by modern equipment (9 track, Wang magneto-microfiche, and other horrors)
Immediately after the Omagh bombing, a copy of the complete datasets of all systems in the Republic and NI going back at least 10 months was made and turned over to the police and intelligence services. Combing through that data, the investigators were able to track the exact trips made by the usual suspects in the weeks before the bombing, the exact routes they took, and calls made from vehicle to vehicle in the convoy carrying the bomb south to Omagh. The BBC aired a report on all this about two years ago, much to the chagrin of the powers that be.
This does not seem to concern ISPs, at least for the moment. The meeting seems to have been about who pays for longer data retention, and who pays for investigator access to the data. With a dozen requests per week to a telco for detailed records relating to various cases, it could take several experienced and expensive engineers most of their time. The Irish telcos, as well as ones in the U.S., have been trying to make Law Enforcement Access into a revenue centre. If a detective wants the complete calling history of a certain GSM phone, that could be a billable item. If a prosecutor wants additional data for a conviction, they'll have to dig into their budget and pay the telco for the data. The government wants to compel the telcos to provide this service in return for tax incentives, regulatory breaks, and some other backroom deals.
the AC
Re:Not ISPs, telcos (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Not ISPs, telcos (Score:2)
Ah. It involved terrorists. I guess that means our civil liberties are irrelevant then.
I remember when it used to be "communists".
Umm it said phone companies, not ISP (Score:3, Interesting)
Still a hell of a lot of data.. and yes suprising it didnt leak...
Ooh (Score:2, Insightful)
Still, this kind of thing is probably going on in loads of countries, it just happens that they found this one out.
Re:Ooh (Score:5, Insightful)
It's being going for 2 years in the UK !
And no it's not Northern Ireland but what difference does it make ? Do you think terrorist organisations colude via the internet or phone ?
Don't think so, down the local apache-land bar for that...
Re:Ooh (Score:2, Insightful)
Oooooh! (Score:1, Funny)
Signals in Australia (Score:3, Informative)
deep six (Score:3, Informative)
Yesterday the government proposed to be allowed increase this time to 15 years, given this on the same day we find out the've been snooping us is very disturbing
Re:deep six (Score:5, Insightful)
"The explanation given for deep sixing cabinit records for five years is that many of them relate to the peace process.
"Yesterday the government proposed to be allowed increase this time to 15 years, given this on the same day we find out the've been snooping us is very disturbing"
Up to now, cabinet records have remained confidential for thirty years. However, under the 1997 Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, individuals are now entitled to seek discovery of records relating to cabinet decisions that are over 5 years old. As the act only came into operation 5 years ago, cabinet records from that time are only now coming under the provisions of the act. As far as I'm aware pre-1997 cabinet records cannot be subject to FOI requests.
So the "deep sixing" of cabinet records for five years is not a new measure brought in to protect sensitive documents relating to the peace process, rather it represents a considerable liberalising of the old system. This is why the government is proposing rolling back on these provisions: they're only now being faced with the practical implications. Whereas previously cabinet members could rely on their deliberations being kept secret until after they retired, now they are faced with the prospect of controversial documents being released while they're still very much in power.
I don't think the peace process is a factor at all: these sort of documents could probably be kept secret under the heading of 'national security' or some such thing.
Re:deep six (Score:2)
So now you know why Bertie and his pals want to scrap the FOI act. So far, it's been used to dig up a lot of dirt on the cabinet & FF in particular. Unfortunately, it's also used by relatives of people who were incarcerated by the state in religious-run orphanages to obtain information on their families. Not any longer if the government gets their way .... :-(
Every line? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Every line? (Score:1)
Re:Every line? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Every line? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Every line? (Score:3, Insightful)
By "traffic information", I believe they mean data such as who you called/emailed/etc and when, rather than what you actually talked about.
Re:Every line? (Score:2)
It would be very interesting to know if they are actually tracking who e-mails who and personally I doubt it! Why? Well I know of at least one small hosting company here in Ireland who do not keep (beyond standard log files they don't touch let alone preserve) these sorts of records for themselves let alone anyone else, and certainly have received no requests not to use encrypted channels for email communications, or not to offer webmail or ..... If an Irish person is using webmail, then some carnivore type system would be required to snoop the communications and parse the requests to give them a record of who emailed who! If the webmail is under ssl then they are stuffed n'est pas? All they could really track is that you are using a https server!
Re:Every line? (Score:3, Insightful)
SMTP offers no real protection against traffic analysis. Even if you encrypt every email you send, the headers are still sent as plaintext, so you can still monitor who emails who. Even if you use webmail over SSL, the emails still come in through SMTP.
Yes, you can set up your SMTP server to allow access over TLS, however since virtually no ISPs support this, unless the sending party sets up their own SMTP server as well, everything will still be unencrypted. Even if you set up your own servers, connections between the two servers can be tracked.
Re:Every line? (Score:2)
Re:Every line? (Score:2)
Don't be fooled (Score:2)
Erm (Score:2)
Re:Erm (Score:2)
Where else was I meant to discuss that?
Re:Every line? (Score:1, Offtopic)
No mention of network traffic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No mention of network traffic (Score:5, Interesting)
If *access* to the gathered information is regulated properly, I don't see a problem.
The Data Protection Commissioner [dataprivacy.ie] has outlined some of the problems [dataprivacy.ie] that exist with such a data retention scheme, even if access is "properly regulated".
Of course, one thing that no-one has mentioned yet is that if privacy is outlawed, then only outlaws will have privacy. I have a mobile phone - now that I know that all calls I make on that phone will be recorded and potentially used by law enforcement, I feel like going across the street to a public phone and making all my calls from there. I don't have anything to hide from the law, but if I happen to get caught up in some difficulties with the law, I don't particularly want the law to have unhindered access to all the details of what I use my phone for, as I use my phone for some very very personal things indeed. And that is the huge problem with this system - it is extremely easy for outlaws to defeat it - all that they have to do is to go "across the street" to a public payphone.
Re:No mention of network traffic (Score:2)
If they're trying to track you down urgently, they'll check your mobile records. They'll check who you've called, who've they've called.. If you have a few regulars that you call (or call you), they'll start watching their accounts for calls.
You make a call on a nearby payphone - the number is recorded and flagged. Whoops, they got you. They now know where you are, even if you were smart enough to ditch the mobile phone you were carrying so that they couldn't track you that way.
Hell, lets go a step further.. you then jump into a car and drive away. Nearby CCTV catches you and they find your number plate. Ken's new security ( sorry - congestion ) cameras pick you up a few days later and flag your record up on a computer.
Alright, it's a bit extreme, but it's possible. I'm sure they wouldn't go to those lengths if say, you'd stolen a car, but if you were a suspect in a recent bombing I wouldn't be too surprised for them to go to these lengths to track and find you.
It's not quite as easy as you make it sound.
Re:No mention of network traffic (Score:5, Insightful)
But I don't care if `losing a freedom` means someone keeps a note of who I phoned 7 months ago?
Even if who you phoned 7 months ago was a mistress that you had a one week affair with? Or a business off whom you bought viagra but which has since diversified into cocaine and other illegal narcotics?
Do you keep 7 months of receipts? 7 months of bills? Because if law enforcement can use 7 months worth of your communications patterns in court against you, you would better have at least 7 months worth of documentation with which to defend yourself.
Re:No mention of network traffic (Score:2)
Or even worse(and sadly, more accurately?), What if you dialed the wrong number and got someone who is a terrorist? The logs dont show that you dialed the wrong number, They just show you're associated with terrorism.
Re:No mention of network traffic (Score:2)
Technically, in the USA, I think that you're supposed to keep those records for five (e.g., The Man can legally subpoena up to five years worth of financial records, and you're supposed to have 'em). So find a shoebox someplace and toss those old bank statements in there. It's really not too big a deal.
Re:No mention of network traffic (Score:2)
Come on, even hard drives are still warrantied for one year. That means you gotta keep your receipt if you're gonna prove it died within warranty.
I keep all receipts and bills for three years at the very least. First, in case something does come up, like the IRS declining deductions they accepted in the past years- those deductions are worth more than than keeping a couple boxes of old bills. Second, warranties, especially the extended warranties which businesses conveniently forget I have until I show them the receipt. Third, insurance purposes, in case of theft or fire. Lastly, when I sell something off, it's good to have the receipt so I can figure out how much it's worth (for taxes if applicable).
And yeah, to prove that no, I did not call that person, that call does not appear on my bill.
Re:No mention of network traffic (Score:2)
See you later, Bill. I hope the next guy in office is decent, peaceful and knows how to run an ecconomy.
This info is not to track crime for 99% of the people being tracked. Criminals know this and use alternatives. Terrorists are well ahead of the game and aren't affected either. So, what's the point of it? I've got nothing to hide, so stop spying on me!!
Sure, but why be so secretive about it? (Score:2)
it tends to indicate even they know they are doing
something wrong.
Creeping fascism (Score:3, Insightful)
Notice how fast things began to slip right here in the United States after power was concentrated through the rash of recent laws. One day you look up and wonder, "Who are these people running my country?"
Re:Creeping fascism (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Creeping fascism (Score:2)
ALL people want power to some extent. It's part of evolution. There is a natural and inevitable dominance hierarchy that cannot be erased by utopian idealism. There is ALWAYS a person in any group who takes a leading role, regardless of the purpose of the group. There are always those who will chaffe against this to some extent, seeking themselves to be that person or obtain a favorable position in the overall hierarchy.
It is all part of acquiring mates and resources. EVERYTHING ultimately stems from these most basic drives. Power is not automatically "corrupt". It just is. What one does with power is what is corrupt or not. It is a value judgement you place on it, not something intrinsic to itself.
Re:Creeping fascism (Score:2)
You're half right.
Yes, they want security, loosely defined as control over their own lives.
No, they do not believe that security is obtained by "having enough power to fend off influences that might take that control away from them."
Instead, they believe that security is obtained by GIVING OTHERS THE POWER to fend off said nasty things FOR THEM. And no, this isn't a liberal-versus-conservative thing.
Liberals: "Only the police and the military should have guns". That is, you don't have a right to kick bad-guy-ass. Bad-guy-ass-kicking is the privilege of your betters, who graciously provide your security.
Coservatives: "We must eliminate privacy to eliminate terrorism." You don't have a right to privacy. Privacy is the privilege of your betters, who graciously provide your security.
Stop thinking of yourself as a human being with rights. Start thinking of yourself as a sheep, who exists only to be sheared.
The healthy sheep are permitted to graze on whatever grass they can find, because they produce plenty of wool while alive (sheared at 50% income taxes), and meat when slaughetered (inheritance taxes).
The scrawny sheep are given better pastures (welfare and social benefits) in which to graze, because they greatly outnumber the healthy sheep, and produce the will of the herd (the 50% of the population that pays 5% of the taxes - elects the politicians that collect the other 95%).
Lest you (or the shepherds!) think I'm trying to diss the shepherding system, I'm not. I'm a sheep. I'm proud of it.
Freedom is overrated. As a sheep, I may be no more free today than I was 5000 years ago, but my standard of living has greatly improved. The alternative is to go back to the days when there were no shepherds. Scrabbling around mountaintops for 30 years trying not to be eaten by wolves sucked. Under the sheperds, I get antibiotics and can live to 60 or 70, eat better grass, fresher water, and there's a Bovendo Game-Cube in my pen. It's a fair cop.
Re:Creeping fascism (Score:2)
You are missing the point. You cannot avoid power struggles nor someone gaining power - it comes AUTOMATICALLY when groups of people get together to do anything at all. Even if a group is unstructured by design, it is inevitable that to accomplish goal A, someone WILL come out of the dominance hierarchy on top and the others will follow. It is just the way it is.
A country/society isn't just a gathering of people, it is an active group that absolutely requires a chain of command so that people know what to do and when to do it so that there is no nonsense working at cross purposes (and contrary purposes can be squelched...SOMEONE or SOME means/end HAS to come out on top or you get nothing at all but spun wheels and more conflict).
Social groups have leaders. If they aren't put there from the start, they will be put there as a matter of course and as a result of inevitable power plays/dominance hierarchy dynamics.
except for those... (Score:2)
People like that, who are successful, are few and far between. The others are a dime a dozen... sadly.
We need to elect a president like that. Unfortuneately, there's no one that has a chance any time soon.
Re:Creeping fascism (Score:2)
Some people can only influence others' behavior through force,or the threat of force. Other people can influence others' behavior without threat of force. Who is more powerful?
wrong (Score:2)
Re:wrong (Score:2)
Re:Creeping fascism (Score:3, Interesting)
US Double Standard (Score:2, Insightful)
it would contain... (Score:5, Funny)
50% about sex
30% spam (or telemarketing)
29% adolescent mush
1% calls to a data recovery shrink
hmm... may be not that accurate... anybody care to modify? (ooh, I'm beginning to see several "in soviet russia posts)
Re:it would contain... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:it would contain... (Score:2)
Re:it would contain... (Score:2)
50% about sex... okay..
30% spam... about enlarging penises or porn or sex
29% adolescent mush... about sex....
and 1% calls to a data recovery shrink... about sex...
Yeah, the internet seems to be a bustling house of activity... about sex...
Details of the Policy (Score:5, Informative)
Not even news here yet. (Score:5, Interesting)
As background, the Minister in question is a PD, which makes him pretty close to holding views familiar to those in the US: I'm sure he'd be pretty comfortable in the right of the Democratic party or the left of the Republican, which makes him far right by European standards.
Take Action now! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Not even news here yet. (Score:3, Informative)
Better to be open about it, or not? (Score:2)
Ireland is an interesting case because a few years ago it became public knowledge that the Brits had been covertly monitoring all calls between Ireland and the UK for years.* And personally I don't think you are paranoid if you believe your government (especially if you live in the UK or USA) is electronically monitoring hundreds of thousands of telephone calls, SMS messages, emails etc. right at this very minute. My question is, being that governments already do this, and if it done only in the name of combatting crime and terrorism and not abused, is it not perhaps better if Joe and Janette Public remain blissfully unaware of it?
*I can't recall the exact details, but as I recall people became aware of this because a telecom tower in the east of Ireland was put out of service and up for sale, and it was discovered that its purpose was to monitor calls between Ireland and the UK.
Re:Better to be open about it, or not? (Score:5, Insightful)
With good reason. Terrorism wasn't newly invented in 2001; Irish nationalist groups had been causing trouble in Britain for decades. Eavesdropping on transmissions from Ireland to the UK probably allowed a great many plots to be foiled.
I'd keep it secret, of course, but not out of fear of worrying the public; I'd want the IRA to think their phone communications were secure, the better to exploit this intelligence source. If word gets out that phone calls are routinely tapped, then the bad guys will switch to some other communication; encrypted snailmail, perhaps, which cannot be so easily compromised.
Re:Better to be open about it, or not? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Better to be open about it, or not? (Score:2)
That was probably at the Malvern DRA. I know some of the guys there read Slashdot, but I guess they can't comment on this stuff!
They do some amazing stuff there [ic.ac.uk].
Re:Better to be open about it, or not? (Score:2)
More scary information about interception systems (Score:3, Interesting)
It covers in great detail the state of international communications intelligence, with a focus on Echelon (i.e. the UK/USA alliance secret communications interception system), and the related threats to freedom and economic competitiveness.
It's a big report, but its extremely comprehensive and honest. The kind of thing "M" gets to read in James Bond flicks.
It puts estimated numbers on how many phone calls, emails, web accesses, SMS messages, Faxes etc. are intercepted from different countries; and also describes how they acheive this.
I was very surprised how little attention it got from the media when it was published.
Is it true that he swears at his relatives? (Score:2)
But no, instead I'm reminded of the above remark, supposedly uttered by Her Majesty on being appraised of the content of Charles Haughey's phone calls by Mrs T.
And how reassuring to know that the Capenhurst locals could be bought off with double glazing. UPVC - the patriot's choice.
In Other News... (Score:3, Funny)
Now- (Score:5, Insightful)
Open Source Government (Score:2)
GNU/Democracy!
Ok, I'm going to bed now.
Re:Open Government since 1766 (Score:2)
Re:Now- (Score:2)
In other words, Oswald himself couldn't have identified the "co-conspirators" because he never knew they existed. There was more than one group or individual with a sincere motive to assassinate president K.
Area 51 is no more or less guarded than any other US military post, which is to say, if you have no business there, you won't get in. The same goes for shopping centers on base... If they have experimental aircraft there, you're damn right it'll be kept under a mysterious veil of secrecy.
Given the enigmatic nature of "area 51" itself, if I were commanding that post, I'd nurture the mystery. Then, a few miles away in a nondescript area, I'd do whatever secret stuff there
I just knew it! (Score:5, Funny)
We wanted a large = 1TB file server... (Score:3, Informative)
We wanted a large >= 1TB file server mostly to store backups.
http://www.linux.ie/articles/teraserver/backgroun
Conspiracy!
Re: We wanted a large = 1TB file server... (Score:2, Funny)
Is this new? (Score:5, Interesting)
An odd thing is that in some countries it currently is illegal to keep traffic-data for such a long time; the data is only to be kept for billing purposes and when that is done, the data must be deleted for privacy reasons.
Re:Is this new? (Score:5, Insightful)
This was clearly a decision made on the side of personal freedom and civil liberties. It's worrying that the Council of Europe (a parallel organisation that is comprised of heads of state from around the continent) proceeded to adopt a stance opposite to that of the above directive, and began to mandate all ISP's and telecommunications companies to retain data. The stark contrast between the positions of these two organisations -- one democratic, the other a cabalistic gathering of prime ministers and presidents -- makes the difference in their motivations quite apparent.
The retention of data that has been uncovered here in Ireland is related to the Council of Europe's decision, and we can be certain that something similar is occurring in all the other states.
What's different (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:What's different (Score:1)
Terrorism. It's not just Arabs, you know. If you have reason to suspect someone of involvement with some IRA splinter faction, you can have a look at the phone logs. If he's recorded as having made frequent calls to and from known activists, then you might well have enough material to get a proper wiretap authorised. Then he'll either incriminate himself and get arrested, or he'll spill some solid-gold intelligence, or he'll turn out to be innocent.
It's been done for several years in Denmark (Score:5, Informative)
so? (Score:2, Interesting)
lets put the argument this way.
there is a high probability that your itemised invoice is store a backup tape at the print vendor for a number of months, maybe even years.
there is a 100% probability that the billing system at the telco you use has ALL of the call records you ever made, on ANY network you may have made them (roaming or otherwise)
there is a very high probability that your call records generated by the switching platform the telco uses are stored and backed up accordingly.
most people who read slashdot know that backups are important for both data retention, financial auditing, and customer dispute purposes.
the real question i have, that none of the articles make clear is WHO stores this. if the goverment is intending on marshalling this information then there is a problem. asking the telcos is far more privacy friendly, but only just. chances are, they have this information anyway. is it really all the mess its blown up to be?
Views on the issue (Score:5, Interesting)
It can also be summarized that the Irish government is merely trying to protect the rights (and lives) of the general public considering the turbulent past of the Irish republic.
The question is, where do we draw the line in respecting individual privacy as well as safeguarding the interests of the public at large? Is there a "right way" to do this? I think that this issue is subjective in its essence. No one can tell you what info is private and what should be made known publicly. I bet almost nobody cares if you're having an affair with your neighbour's wife, unless of course the husband... or you/the neighbour is someone famous.
In these times of post-911... every western government is becoming paranoid especially when there's Middle Eastern/Arabic/Islamic people are involved. Deny it as much as you want, but deep down inside you know that this bigotry is true. How else can you explain an airport terminal shutdown just because an Arab sprayed perfume on himself as well as two immigration officers?
Just an example of how screwed the world has become... Now the internet (one of the biggest global hope as an instrument of international unity), as well as other forms of communications are being threatened by "perceived threats".
I'm all for the effort of combatting terrorism... but not at the extent of paranoid delusions that "the al-Qaeda has 0wned the Internet".
Advantages to this type of data retention (Score:5, Insightful)
This type of retention can be used to trace stolen mobile phones and can also greatly assist in the process of criminal investigation - some crime investigations have gone on past the 6 month retention time prevalent in other countries. See the Guerin investigation, or the Omagh bombing for examples.
I have no problem with this retention as long as it requires a court order or equivalent for the release of the information to the relevant authorites, and never to a non-govermental agency.
Re:Advantages to this type of data retention (Score:2)
used to trace stolen mobile phones
That is what the IMEI number is supposed to help with, but the cost of building and maintaining an industry wide database of stolen phones has made it almost non-existant. When the press reported in Britain last year the most common crime was cell phone theft, there was some political movement to start cutting off stolen phones, but the project has not even started yet. The phone companies are resisting having to run such a system, because it would require cooperation between all the providers, and need a small but expensive full time staff to run.
On the plus side, when I want a new cell phone, I just go to the flea market on a saturday morning. Buy a recently stolen phone for about 10, wander into a dodgy phone card centre and pay them another 10 to unblock/recode the phone, and buy a rechargable phone card from them. 45 for the latest Nokia phone with no long term service contract, not too bad if you can ignore the associated bad karma.
as long as it requires a court order
You're new here, aren't you?
In order for retention to be usable, there will be a nice simple point-n-drool interface for investigators to get the data, along with a way to preserve the raw data to be used in prosecutions. When the system becomes simple to exploit, then requirements like court orders will completely disappear. Today, most of the data is handed over with no questions asked, its only when it is time to go to court that the DPP get formal and file proper court reveiwed requests so the defence can not trash the data in court.
never to a non-govermental agency
Once the tools are in place to easily extract this data, then Eir-con (and Orange and all others) will set up a group to market the service to private companies. They already have a working group asking around about how valuable cooked CDR data would be, if combined with customer data. They want 3rd party companies to purchase access to this data and combine it with other data and services to resell to end users. Think services to companies to track their employees both during work hours and after hours, services to worried parents who want to track their children's phone movements and usage 24/24, and private investigators who want to track down skips or deadbeats.
the AC
No, they record the entire conversation, but.... (Score:3, Funny)
"So, are ya goin to da pub?"
"I'll see ya there around 10"
"cheers"
during an initial public meeting (Score:2, Funny)
Mark
Thats NOTHING! In LA,CA the store all payphones! (Score:2, Interesting)
Its a fact, its little known, but was one time announced in a front page story in LA Times, that "for security and the Drug War" every single call made from a pay phone in los angeles is permanently recorded and stored.
Their reasoning for this fascism, much like "echelon" is that they are not listening to these "public conversations" they are just storing them. Ha!
No on complains.
And you think thats sick, in San Francisco city (and extended city area of SF Airport), you cannot call vertain 800 numbers from any public payphone if the numbers belong to pagers.
Pagers are considerred "bomb detonators" and "drug mule contact tools" I guess. I have to BEG private citizens to let me use their restaurant phones.
America is much more evil than UK.
Also front page news in NYT newspaper one august yeasr ago revealed that its a fdederal law that 1% (yes one full percent) of all simultaneous calls made in San Francisco have the ability to be simultaneously stored digitally. ONE PERCENT!
At least its not 100% such as in pay phones. Are you one of the 1% this week?
You are a tool. (Score:2)
Yeah, perhaps this might be considered "non-illegal" today, but who knows what the future would bring. Despite such laws and proto-laws like the DMCA and UCITA, I doubt any of us could have forseen the likes of a law like the PATRIOT Act, nor the ramifications of it (which will reverberate and continue to shape policy for decades to come, BTW). Who is to say what is "legal" today will not be made "illegal" tommorow, where past "confessions" will be used against future "crimes"?
Think it can't happen? It already has.
I agree... (Score:2)
Yes, I too think it will probably get a lot worse before things come to a head - I only hope when that time comes we are prepared for it and the possible consequences - my greatest fear is that in the mad rush to correct things, the ideals will be lost and what gets put back into place will be worse than what was there before.
So let me get this straight.... (Score:4, Insightful)
One would think that with Ireland's experience with terrorism, the Yanks would be applauding this!
I think some other posters have made the point quite well. Just because a government collects the information, doesn't mean they can do anything with it without a court order. I can tell you with some confidence that virutally all governments collect this information,it just that getting at it is hard (as is sifting through it - how many phone , cell, fax transmissions are there in your city or town in one day? Try picking out specific information out of that!).
Collecting information is morally neutral. Use that information to catch the Omagh bombers, and collecting it is good. Use it to track citizens arbitrarily and to detain them without trial or charge and it is evil. I'd be less worried about the collecting and more about how it is used.
Potential for abuse (Score:2)
It's kind of like in the movie Cube, it's wasn't built for a horrid purpose, it was just built.
I know this tendency because I work in government. When doing an IT project, most people forget to ask "Is this legal?"
And, please, cite the source for those thousands of detained U.S. citizens. The few cases I know of have been highly publicized.
Re:So let me get this straight.... (Score:2)
Setting the record straight. (Score:2, Informative)
Slightly related, these records helped secure a prosecution against a persistant abusive caller. The Guards were a great help. If it had been the UK, I would have had to change my telephone number.
Don't loose any sleep over it, unless you like making crank calls.
Privacy is still safe... (Score:2)
Damn. (Score:2)
Re:Why war with the US is necessary (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why war with the US is necessary (Score:2)
Well that's quite allright.
As long as you carry on with that attitude - creating injustice - then people are going to get angry. And they are going to want to blow you up - which you kind of deserve to be honest.
Re:Prediction (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What about NSA Echelon (link to top secret doc) (Score:2)
This is not top secret...
It's not even secret (Even though before the changes were made it used to be classified Secret.)
That's why the work "Secret" has been crossed out and there are a bunch of xxxxx's on the page.
MOD THIS UP! (Score:2)
she has been at the forefront of the Government's commitment to the liberalisation and development of the Telecommunications sector
Har, har! Explain why we're all still waiting for flat-rate ADSL access, so?? The Eircom shares ripoff, etc, etc
Re: Mary O'Rourke (Score:2)
Mary is no longer Minister for Public Enterprise - she lost her seat in the last election and has been kicked upstairs to the Senate. In fact the Department of Public Enterprise no longer exists: it has been replaced with the Department of Transport [www.dpe.ie] under Seamus Brennan.
I think responsibility for the Telecommunications sector now lies with the clumsily-titled Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources [marine.gov.ie]. There are also a number of quangoes operating under the Taoiseach's Department [taoiseach.gov.ie], such as the Information Society Commision [www.isc.ie]. Government chief whip Mary Hannifin is involved in all this somewhere, I'm not sure how. They keep touting her as the "Information Society Minister".
Re:The whole reason for this is... (Score:2)