link to briefings documents at magnacartaplus.org
 

Magna Carta Plus News

back to magnacartaplus.org index page
orientation to the news at MagnaCartaPlus.org

short briefing dcuments at MagnaCartaPlus.org

This page provides occasional items, linked to the original articles, as we attempt to keep up with the rapidly changing situation on civil liberties.
Archive of old news service:
2002 - 2004

1st Jan to 9th Sept 2005

Google
 
Web magnacartaplus.org

IPS produces shortlist of ID scheme suppliers

Posted by James Hammerton @ 9:10 pm on 22 October, 2007.
Categories privacy and surveillance, British politics, the database state.
Edit This Permalink to this article

A significant milestone has been reached on the British National Identity Scheme. The Register reports that the Identity and Passport Service has now produced a shortlist of 8 companies who will compete for work in implementing the National Identity Scheme. The companies are:

  • Accenture,
  • BAE Systems,
  • CSC,
  • EDS,
  • Fujitsu,
  • IBM,
  • Steria, and
  • Thales

It seems a change of government will definitely be required to scrap this scheme.

ACPO and Home Office propose integrated CCTV network

The Register has an article covering the National CCTV Strategy, a report jointly published by the Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers.

After complaining about issues ranging from poor quality of some images, through to the fact that most CCTV systems are privately owned and the police have to have access to the premisses to even establish if CCTV evidence is available from the cameras, the report goes on to propose that all CCTV systems be registered, and eventually, that both live and archived CCTV footage is available via a network, so that people/vehicles can be tracked automatically. The Register states (italics indicate quotations from the report):

This is actually worse than what Jason Bourne has to put up with, as the spooks would one day have no need to know where he was to start following him on camera. Rather, the second he drove the wrong car, used the wrong credit card - or maybe even just took down the top of his hoodie - ding! Nearby cams would swivel round and he would be followed in real time until the cold steel bracelets snapped shut on his wrists.

Honest, that’s the plan:

In future, as technology is developed… such a network will allow the use of automated search techniques (i.e. face recognition) and can be integrated with other systems such as ANPR, and police despatch systems… [there might also be links of] transport system cameras to travel cards [and] shop cameras to Electronic Point of Sale (EPOS) systems… actions can be triggered by associated events and post event CCTV images can be quickly searched against other events/data…

Even the report’s authors note that people might be worried by this.

“Integrated systems significantly increase the capacity to undertake public surveillance,” they say, “and therefore needs to be carefully controlled by Information and Surveillance Commissioners’ guidance…”

Very few of us are in favour of truck bombs in London. The trouble is, this kind of kit - being so much cheaper and easier to access than surveillance teams, aircraft, fortified watchtowers etc. - can, and probably will, get used for many other purposes. The report admits as much.

In addition to the police, there are many other uses and users of CCTV, such as… insurance companies and solicitors… local authority officers… highways enforcement officers, dog wardens, health safety and licensing …

So, potentially your insurers, solicitors acting for your enemies, every petty official in the land, even the bloody dog warden can watch and track you. Unless of course you’re the kind of person who deals only in cash, wears his hoodie up at all times and mainly drives stolen, uninsured or unregistered cars.

I.e. yet another big-brother proposal that the Stasi would have been proud of.

Privacy and surveillance roundup

Continuing in catch-up mode, here’s a round-up of recent privacy and surveillance related stories:

  • Back in July, it was reported that the LTI 20.20, the police’s favourite speed gun, can lie. Amongst it’s many feats, were a recording a bicycle 66mph, a parked car doing 22 mph and a brick wall doing 40mph…
  • [Hat Tip: IanPP]Highlighting just how leaky public bodies can be when it comes to personal data, ZDNet reported in September that an inquiry was being held to find out how a hard drive containing NHS patient data ended up being sold on eBay.
  • The UK’s DNA database currently holds the samples of those who have been investigated of crime, whether they’re charged or cleared or not. This has led to some sections of society being disproportionately represented in the DNA database. Lord Justice Sedley thinks this is unfair. His solution? Every UK resident, plus all visitors to the UK, should be required to have their DNA put on the database. Surely the unfairness would be reduced if only those actually convicted of crime had their DNA permanently stored?
  • The Daily Mail reports that, as of 1st October, all phone companies are required to store information about which people you phone, how long for, from which numbers and in the case of mobile phones, from which location for a minimum of a year. Access to this information must be provided to some 795 public bodies ranging from your local council, the tax authorities and government deparments through to the Food Standards Agency, the Immigration Service and the Charities Commission. This is all down to Statutory Instrument 2199, implementing the European Union’s Data Retention directive. Trevor Mendham comments on this proposal at this blog. Note that in 2009 the plan is for information about your internet communications to be subject to a similar regime, i.e. storing who you email, who emails you, which websites you visit, who visits your website, etc.
  • Part III of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIP Act) was finally brought into force, starting on the 1st October, via this Statutory Instrument. The significance of this is that it means that the police can demand that you provide the encryption key to encrypted data found in your possession, under section 51 of the RIP Act. Note that if you ever knew/had the key to the encrypted data you are presumed to still know/have the key subsequently. Bruce Schneier comments on this policy here. The Strange Stuff blog has created an article which, if you read it on your computer, could lead you to falling foul of this law… How are you going to prove you don’t have the key?
  • The Telegraph reports that scientists have developed a method of tracking people on CCTV that can take account changes such as removing jackets or changing appearance:

    The new system plugs the surveillance gap by enabling an operator to choose a suspect and follow him through dense crowds, and any subsequent changes in appearance.

    It works by attaching about 30 “tags” on small clusters of pixels on the footage, fixing them on different parts of the subject. It then “locks on” to these tags, and as the subject is filmed, the computer is able to follow his or her exact progress on the film, as the target moves about.

    The system has been developed by scientists at the defence company BAE Systems, the University of Reading and Sagem, a French telecoms company.

    Andrew Cooke, the project manager, said: “This kind of technology would allow us to track someone like Bourne.”

    Present CCTV surveillance “hits a brick wall” when a suspect mingles in a crowd or even takes off his jacket. The new system will even be able to pass information from one CCTV camera to another and can be programmed to pick out potential criminals by detecting suspicious body language.

  • The Home Office is currently running a trial of a scheme for fingerprinting airline passengers as they enter the UK at Gatwick Airport, ostensibly as a means of preventing illegal immigration. Such a scheme entails recording every air passenger’s visits to the UK, and is thus yet another form of mass surveillance.

Roundup on Britain’s national identity scheme

Apologies for the lack of posts recently. I hope to post more regularly in future. For the moment I’ll be in catch-up mode, rounding up stories in particular areas. Today’s round up is on Britain’s National Identity Scheme:

  • Under a recent statutory instrument, invoking section 38 of the Identity Cards Act 2006, the Identity and Passport Service(IPS) can now employ credit reference agencies, such as Experian, to verify identity information given during passport applications. The IPS will also be in charge of issuing identity cards (eventually all passport applications will involve registering on the NIR). So it looks like credit reference agencies are likely to be employed to verify data for ID card applications as well.
  • The Register reports that from 2008, the General Register Office, currently part of the Office for National Statistics, will be transferred to become part of the Identity and Passport Service. This means that the IPS will beceome responsible for the register of births, deaths and marriages. The Register comments:

    The government has followed up the effective merger of the ONS’ population register with the NIR by subsuming the GRO in the IPS Borg, and the uncontentious register that previously existed will, as of next April, be run by an organisation which proposes to make money out of compiling and continually updating the “biographical footprint” of every live individual in the UK (see here for more detail on the identity verification service and its roots in IPS’ Personal Identification Project, PIP).

  • At their annual conference, the Tory party re-affirmed their commitment to scrap the identity cards. Both David Davis and David Cameron, the Tory leader, included this pledge in their speeches. However they haven’t yet gone as far as the Liberal Democrats in pledging to repeal the Identity Cards Act 2006 and rolling back other surveillance state measures.
  • As of 2nd October, Spy.org.uk had been waiting for over 1,000 days for a disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act relating to government reports on the ID card scheme, despite both the Information Commissioner and the Information Tribunal ruling that the reports should be disclosed. The government is appealing the decision to the High Court. The High Court has set March 4th & 5th 2008 for the hearing.

2 new sections added to the identity cards briefing document

Posted by James Hammerton @ 7:42 pm on 29 July, 2007.
Categories privacy and surveillance, British politics, the database state.
Edit This Permalink to this article

I’ve added two new sections to my briefing document on the government’s identity scheme, a section describing the obligations individuals will have under the scheme and a section describing the legal powers the government has over individuals under the Identity Cards Act 2006.

I welcome any constructive feedback on the content of these sections, or indeed on the content of the rest of the document.

Glasgow No2ID fundraising gig

Posted by James Hammerton @ 11:30 pm on 16 July, 2007.
Categories privacy and surveillance, British politics, the database state.
Edit This Permalink to this article

Glasgow’s No2ID group, campaigning against the government’s national identity scheme, have organised a fundraising music gig for the 26th July at Barfly, 260 Clyde Street, Glasgow, doors open at 8pm. Tickets are £5 in advance, £6 on the door. You can buy them here.

The gig takes place on both floors at Barfly, downstairs featuring rock/metal and upstairs for acoustic/experimental music.

Bands appearing include: Mama Mayhem, Serpico, Marshan, Stonesthrow, Warped Memories and Traquair.

See also the No2ID music site on myspace.

“Nothing to hide, nothing to fear”, database security and Britain’s national identity scheme

Posted by James Hammerton @ 7:22 pm on 2 June, 2007.
Categories privacy and surveillance, British politics, the database state, US politics.
Edit This Permalink to this article

A common slogan used by many of those who support measures that put the general population under surveillance, such as CCTV and the British national identity scheme, is “if you’ve got nothing to hide, there’s nothing to fear”. I’ve criticised this slogan before, as have Samizdata (e.g. here, at their sister blog White Rose and here), UKLiberty and the No2ID weblog.

However a particularly compelling illustration of why the slogan “nothing to hide, nothing to fear” is so wrong-headed, and how law abiding people can be put at risk by those who gather information about them is provided by the spate of recent stories involving large (often governmental) organisations losing, or otherwise publicly exposing, personal details of the people who deal with them:

The above are just a handful of recent stories, and I’m aware of other examples going back years. For example numerous cases of organisations losing, public exposing or abusing the personal information they store are also documented in UK Liberty’s article on data abuse.

In each of these cases, the personal details of law abiding citizens, often numbered in thousands or tens of thousands, have been compromised and may have fallen into the hands of those who might try and impersonate them or otherwise use the information against them. So much for “nothing to hide, nothing to fear”.

The British government claims its national identity scheme will help combat identity theft, but it seems to me that it is more likely to enable identity theft because not only will it store all all the information needed for someone to pretend to be you in one place, but its National Identity Registration Number will end up indexing both your national identity register entry and your entries in other databases both private and public. The NIRN and much of your personal information on the NIR will be shared with many public and private sector organisations and be accessible by thousand and thousands of officials.

It beggars belief that lapses in security similar to those reported above would be minimised by such a system or that the opportunities for stealing the information would be minimised either. And, unlike the systems above, your participation (if you’re a permanent resident of Britain) in the scheme will not be voluntary if the government gets its way.

David Davis to Gordon Brown: “Will you restore the freedoms we lost under Blair?”

Writing in the Independent, David Davis, the Tories’ Shadow Home Secretary states:

As Tony Blair reflects on his legacy, Taking Liberties, a film released on 8 June, documents how New Labour has undermined our ancient British freedoms over the past decade.

The Government says the rules of the game have changed: the terrorist threat has escalated and we must trade some freedom for our security. That assessment is superficial. New Labour has undermined our freedoms, but the most damning indictment is the liberty taken with our security in the process. Each shortcut the Government takes with our freedoms masks a shortcoming in its counter-terrorism strategy.

And:

In the present control order crisis, the Home Secretary blames the opposition, the courts and human rights for three terror suspects escaping. He complains he has one arm tied behind his back. The truth is he has been sitting on both hands.

More than a third of control order suspects are on the run. Reid’s latest buck-passing masks three mistakes, all his responsibility. Why did he not use all the existing powers available, including tagging, if these individuals were as “dangerous” as he says? Why, when they disappeared, did the Government wait two days to release their names, allowing them to flee the country through Labour’s lax border controls? And why is Reid suggesting we need extra pre-charge detention before exhausting all other avenues, including seeking a derogation from the European Convention on Human Rights, if necessary?

Talking(sic) Liberties charts Tony Blair’s legacy. The question is where does Gordon Brown stand in this debate. It is a sign of the leadership to come that he has said nothing on these issues.

Liberty and security are not tradable commodities. We cannot defend our freedoms by sacrificing them.

Taking Liberties, The Movie

Taking Liberties is a documentary film charting the erosion of civil liberties since 1997 has been produced and is due to be released in cinemas on June 8th. There’s also a book accompanying this. It’ll be interesting to see how much of mountain of the liberty eroding legislation this government has produced gets covered.

On the proposed “Stop and Question” powers

Britain’s (soon to be ex-)Home Secretary, John Reid has apparently proposed that the police should be given powers to stop and question people (see also the Telegraph’s and BBC’s coverage), possibly without needing to have “reasonable suspicion” of those they stop. Those stopped will have to identify themselves and answer questions about their movements, on pain of imprisonment and/or a £5,000 fine. Ironically this would involve establishing powers in mainland Britain that are due to be phased out in Northern Ireland.

Putting the assault on liberty (in particular the assault against the right to silence) this represents to one side, an interesting question here is whether such powers will be effective in combatting terrorism, the ostensible “raison d’etre” behind the proposal.

Now bear in mind that the police can already ask anyone anything they like, but no one is required to answer any of the questions. They can also arrest those that suspect of involvement in terrorism and place people under surveillance and also have stop and search powers. The government can also place control orders on people suspected of involvement in terrorism. For the proposed powers to make a difference they’d somehow have to catch those they aren’t already investigating/catching using existing methods.

There’s a simple reason for thinking it won’t make much difference — an actual terrorist questioned under these laws will simply give a cover story. Unless the police are prepared to surveil those they question, then they are unlikely to uncover the lies told to them by any criminals or terrorists they stop. Yet if they are prepared to surveil them, they don’t need to stop and question them under these proposed powers.

The impact therefore would seem to me to be that the police will get fairly reliable information about what law abiding people are doing, plus unreliable information from others whom they’d use existing powers to investigate anyway. And of course some law abiding people may not wish tell the authorities what they are doing, despite it being perfectly legal, since it may involve betraying confidences, advertising that one is a member of an unpopular group, or revealing an affair. I.e. it may involve revealing sensitive information that could be used against them by unscrupulous police officers.

It’s also worth considering the words of Cardinal Richelieu in this context:

If you give me six lines written by the most honest man, I will find something in them to hang him.

The point being of course that if you get enough information about an individual then a determined mind can cherry pick and/or reinterpret bits of it to paint that individual in a suspicious light, and power such as this, give the authorities the means to obtain such information for the purposes of harassing/silencing individuals who might challenge their power.

Finally, UK Liberty, Iain Dale, Tim Worstall and Samizdata have all given good commentary on this issue.

« Previous PageNext Page »

email feedback@magnacartaplus.org

© magnacartaplus.org2008, 2007, 2006 [1 December]

variable words
prints as variable A4 pages (on my printer and set-up)

abstracts of documents on magnacartaplus.org UK Acts of Parliament click for news from magnacartaplus.org orientation to magnacartaplus.org orientation button links to other relevant sites links

Powered by WordPress