Can 'spooks' track me even if I weren't to leave the house.

[HampshireSeagulls]

Erm no it'd be very difficult for you to be 'automatically' flagged up.......

Not so. Depends on what you type and where you go. Your little electronic footprints can be traced, your ISP can be "requested" to help, and before you know, you are face down on the front room floor, hands cable tied behind your back, and a man stood over you with a balaclava on.


Oops, wrong forum.

 

[Springal]

Not so. Depends on what you type and where you go. Your little electronic footprints can be traced, your ISP can be "requested" to help, and before you know, you are face down on the front room floor, hands cable tied behind your back, and a man stood over you with a balaclava on.


Oops, wrong forum.

Care to explain how this is automatically flagged up and who to? As someone who works as a consultant to ISP's [on a sales level] I'd like to know as it could be a very marketable product

 

[HampshireSeagulls]

Care to explain how this is automatically flagged up and who to? As someone who works as a consultant to ISP's [on a sales level] I'd like to know as it could be a very marketable product

OK - but you won't have access to the software as it's not commercial. I helped to write part of it.

Basically, it's a bastardised version of a hybird of an old product called "TestRunner" and the API from Google (and some other specialised stuff). It runs automatically across certain newsgroups, fora, etc, and collects information based on keywords. It's not echelon, but its much more junior brother. Depending on the keywords, frequency and IP, reports are generated for further investigation, normally by hands-on operators. The automatic flag is converted to human-interaction and checking.

We also wrote something which works on voice recognition, but it's not that good - it has to learn how you talk before it gives up anything useful. No substitute for a good human on that one.

As for the rest of it, you know (or should) about how ISPs are legally bound to keep and provide information based on the issue of warrants. Google also keeps information based on what you type (if you log in) and they are looking at increasing this to feed you adverts based on your IP address. Nice if you use obfuscating software, but then again you know that that's not all it's cracked up to be either....

 

[Springal]

editing due to NDA

 

[Springal]

editing due to NDA

Im not going to argue due to the above, but i can tell you about 60% of the UK traffic is definately not monitored, as I work with the companys that carry that traffic on a daily basis. If you could name some of the ISPs that use this, as none of the large ones do, from a consumer provider basis up to a tier 1 / tier 2 transit provider basis

 

[HampshireSeagulls]

Im not going to argue due to the above, but i can tell you about 60% of the UK traffic is definately not monitored, as I work with the companys that carry that traffic on a daily basis. If you could name some of the ISPs that use this, as none of the large ones do, from a consumer provider basis up to a tier 1 / tier 2 transit provider basis

The program is not used by the ISPs! Check PM.

 

[BensGrandad]

I am not clued up on PCs but would assume that big brother is wwatching simply because of the number of people who get prosecuted for downloading child porn, and rightly so. Somebody is watching them.

 

[Cian]

I am not clued up on PCs but would assume that big brother is wwatching simply because of the number of people who get prosecuted for downloading child porn, and rightly so. Somebody is watching them.

They get prosecuted for -buying- child porn, 99 times out a 100. Its 'easy' to track that way, you catch someone diddling with kids, check their PC, see what they've visited, and demand credit card records for said sites* - then arrest everyone who's number is on the list. A lot easier than traffic sniffing for images which are effectively unidentifiable, or sueing ISPs to get access records to websites, then sueing more ISPs for access logs, etc, etc.


*and, generally, you make sure the site gets closed down too.....

 

[Springal]

They get prosecuted for -buying- child porn, 99 times out a 100. Its 'easy' to track that way, you catch someone diddling with kids, check their PC, see what they've visited, and demand credit card records for said sites* - then arrest everyone who's number is on the list. A lot easier than traffic sniffing for images which are effectively unidentifiable, or sueing ISPs to get access records to websites, then sueing more ISPs for access logs, etc, etc.


*and, generally, you make sure the site gets closed down too.....

you dont need to sue isps, isps by LAW have to retain data. Its an extremely boring subject [i spent half a day at a conference listening about it], any isp that doesnt retain the data 1) has a SERIOUS problem 2) faces heavy fines

 

[readingstockport]

Im not going to argue due to the above, but i can tell you about 60% of the UK traffic is definately not monitored, as I work with the companys that carry that traffic on a daily basis. If you could name some of the ISPs that use this, as none of the large ones do, from a consumer provider basis up to a tier 1 / tier 2 transit provider basis

Can I suggest you go and investigate the system, now old and out of date, called Echelon. First exposed by, I think, a New Zealand journo and Duncan Campbell. Or find someone who used to work at GCHQ to talk to. They are monitoring a damn sight more than you think.

The reason they do not catch some people is simply down to the fact that there is now huge information overload and so much traffic they struggle to keep up with it.

 

[Cian]

you dont need to sue isps, isps by LAW have to retain data. Its an extremely boring subject [i spent half a day at a conference listening about it], any isp that doesnt retain the data 1) has a SERIOUS problem 2) faces heavy fines

They have to retain the data yes, but it doesn't mean they have to or will release it without a court order - BT Ireland certainly won't, for instance.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

They have to retain the data yes, but it doesn't mean they have to or will release it without a court order - BT Ireland certainly won't, for instance.

When the authorities ask for information to be released "on grounds of national security", would the courts EVER fail to give a court order?

What amazes me is that there are people who still believe that if we all had to have identity cards, this would be the START of a 'Big Brother Is Watching You' society.

 

[British Bulldog]

and before you know, you are face down on the front room floor, hands cable tied behind your back, and a man stood over you with a balaclava on.

I bet there's a few on NSC that's played that game!

 

[Cian]

When the authorities ask for information to be released "on grounds of national security", would the courts EVER fail to give a court order?

What amazes me is that there are people who still believe that if we all had to have identity cards, this would be the START of a 'Big Brother Is Watching You' society.

Of course not. But it adds hassle and delays, and then they have to prove that said IP address actually equalled said person, etc, etc. Credit card numbers are much easier to prove - if the person didn't call fraud on the transaction they can't deny it was them.