This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/23/surveillance-limit-gchq-powers
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Surveillance and the limits of GCHQ's powers | Surveillance and the limits of GCHQ's powers |
| (3 months later) | |
| Henry Porter (Mastery of the internet will mean mastery of everyone, 22 June) highlights the great strides made in gathering internet data, but says little about the analysis of it. Most politicians in favour of obtaining this personal information believe there is so much to sift through that any law-abiding individual need not be concerned. How wrong can they be? | Henry Porter (Mastery of the internet will mean mastery of everyone, 22 June) highlights the great strides made in gathering internet data, but says little about the analysis of it. Most politicians in favour of obtaining this personal information believe there is so much to sift through that any law-abiding individual need not be concerned. How wrong can they be? |
| Computers based on, say, neural networks, DNA and laser storage, quantum and nanotechnology and so on, are being actively researched now. Ultimately every email, in whatever language, could be read and analysed by such superfast computers. It would not be beyond GCHQ's capability to find the names of those associated with the emails and record them in its memory banks. Each record could be divided into categories of interest to the government, such as banking transactions, TV viewing, contacts, political groups – or even Guardian subscribers. After all, Google and Amazon are logging all their customers' transactions already. Glyn C Evans Kenilworth, Warwickshire | Computers based on, say, neural networks, DNA and laser storage, quantum and nanotechnology and so on, are being actively researched now. Ultimately every email, in whatever language, could be read and analysed by such superfast computers. It would not be beyond GCHQ's capability to find the names of those associated with the emails and record them in its memory banks. Each record could be divided into categories of interest to the government, such as banking transactions, TV viewing, contacts, political groups – or even Guardian subscribers. After all, Google and Amazon are logging all their customers' transactions already. Glyn C Evans Kenilworth, Warwickshire |
| • Nick Pickles from Big Brother Watch justifiably struggles to understand how GCHQ's indiscriminate access of communications traffic "squares with a process that requires a warrant for each individual intercept" (Report, 22 June). | • Nick Pickles from Big Brother Watch justifiably struggles to understand how GCHQ's indiscriminate access of communications traffic "squares with a process that requires a warrant for each individual intercept" (Report, 22 June). |
| It's the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIP) that squares the surveillance circle. More specifically, section 8, which allows interception without the identification of a particular individual or premises where the origin or destination of the communication is outside the UK. With the majority of the major web destinations, from Amazon to Google to Yahoo, as well as email servers hosted outside the UK, the act allows GCHQ unfettered access to UK citizens' lives online. Parliamentary oversight by the intelligence and security committee is certainly a necessity. However, parliament must also revisit much of the law governing surveillance, which was drafted for an age that never anticipated the dominance of internet-based communication in our daily lives. Neil Macehiter Cambridge | It's the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIP) that squares the surveillance circle. More specifically, section 8, which allows interception without the identification of a particular individual or premises where the origin or destination of the communication is outside the UK. With the majority of the major web destinations, from Amazon to Google to Yahoo, as well as email servers hosted outside the UK, the act allows GCHQ unfettered access to UK citizens' lives online. Parliamentary oversight by the intelligence and security committee is certainly a necessity. However, parliament must also revisit much of the law governing surveillance, which was drafted for an age that never anticipated the dominance of internet-based communication in our daily lives. Neil Macehiter Cambridge |
| • The British press complained that Leveson was encroaching on its rights yet when, in the Bradley Manning and Andrew Snowden cases, the US government has taken the position that even talking to the press is "treason and espionage" most of our media is silent. In the 70s Richard Nixon was impeached for bugging a single building. Barack Obama is complicit in bugging the entire US. Gavin Lewis Manchester | • The British press complained that Leveson was encroaching on its rights yet when, in the Bradley Manning and Andrew Snowden cases, the US government has taken the position that even talking to the press is "treason and espionage" most of our media is silent. In the 70s Richard Nixon was impeached for bugging a single building. Barack Obama is complicit in bugging the entire US. Gavin Lewis Manchester |
| • Your editorial (The world at their fingertips, 22 June) concludes: "We are creating a system of total surveillance … which, in the wrong hands, could severely curtail protest, reporting, privacy and hard-won freedoms of association and speech." Just what is it about the conduct of our affairs that would lead one to believe they are in the right hands? Peter Healey London | • Your editorial (The world at their fingertips, 22 June) concludes: "We are creating a system of total surveillance … which, in the wrong hands, could severely curtail protest, reporting, privacy and hard-won freedoms of association and speech." Just what is it about the conduct of our affairs that would lead one to believe they are in the right hands? Peter Healey London |
| • The security establishment tells us that if we have nothing to hide we have nothing to fear. Well, up to a point. If they have the whole UK population under surveillance, say 60 million, and their systems are 99.9% accurate at detecting terrorists, that means 60,000 innocent people will be accused. Meanwhile, let us say there are 2,000 genuine terrorists, then a 99.9% accurate system would still miss two of them. And it beggars belief that their systems can be 99.9% accurate. Owen Wells Ilkley | • The security establishment tells us that if we have nothing to hide we have nothing to fear. Well, up to a point. If they have the whole UK population under surveillance, say 60 million, and their systems are 99.9% accurate at detecting terrorists, that means 60,000 innocent people will be accused. Meanwhile, let us say there are 2,000 genuine terrorists, then a 99.9% accurate system would still miss two of them. And it beggars belief that their systems can be 99.9% accurate. Owen Wells Ilkley |
| • I'm getting rather tired of all this hand-wringing about the NSA and GCHQ (and other members of the "five eyes") intercepting our communications. In 2001 a committee of the European parliament published a substantial report (goo.gl/gSNpS) on the Echelon system, and recommended that we all encrypt our emails using, for example, an OpenPGP system such as GnuPG (GPG, free) or PGP (commercial). Anyone who followed that advice has nothing to worry about when it comes to interception of email content. This does not address the metadata problem, in particular traffic analysis: to deal with that you need to use a Tor system, which is rather more complex to set up. | • I'm getting rather tired of all this hand-wringing about the NSA and GCHQ (and other members of the "five eyes") intercepting our communications. In 2001 a committee of the European parliament published a substantial report (goo.gl/gSNpS) on the Echelon system, and recommended that we all encrypt our emails using, for example, an OpenPGP system such as GnuPG (GPG, free) or PGP (commercial). Anyone who followed that advice has nothing to worry about when it comes to interception of email content. This does not address the metadata problem, in particular traffic analysis: to deal with that you need to use a Tor system, which is rather more complex to set up. |
| The EU Parliamentary Committee report can be found at: http://goo.gl/gSNpS | The EU Parliamentary Committee report can be found at: http://goo.gl/gSNpS |
| If you have a Windows computer, install GPG4Win: http://gpg4win.org | If you have a Windows computer, install GPG4Win: http://gpg4win.org |
| If you have a Mac, install GPGTools: https://gpgtools.org | If you have a Mac, install GPGTools: https://gpgtools.org |
| There's a good how-to on Ars Technica: http://goo.gl/QrJnX | There's a good how-to on Ars Technica: http://goo.gl/QrJnX |
| If you're running Linux or one of the BSDs, you probably have GPG installed already. | If you're running Linux or one of the BSDs, you probably have GPG installed already. |
| Don't forget to upload your public key to the keyserver network, so people can send you encrypted emails. Now stop sending people e-postcards and start sending them e-letters (in a sealed envelope). Perhaps the Guardian could set an example by publishing its OpenPGP public key for letters@guardian.co.uk? | Don't forget to upload your public key to the keyserver network, so people can send you encrypted emails. Now stop sending people e-postcards and start sending them e-letters (in a sealed envelope). Perhaps the Guardian could set an example by publishing its OpenPGP public key for letters@guardian.co.uk? |
| Dr Alun J Carr School of mechanical and materials engineering, University College Dublin | Dr Alun J Carr School of mechanical and materials engineering, University College Dublin |
| • On behalf of GCHQ's trade union, I'm writing to offer Iain Lobban and his colleagues our strong support as they seek to minimise the damage being done. The entire workforce is outraged, not so much at the lies being told about us (no one expects thanks serving their country) but at the thoughtless disregard for the welfare of Britain and the safety of people around the world. We've also appreciated the public statements in support of GCHQ staff and their ethics by politicians who understand the value of GCHQ to the UK. At a time of extended pay freezes, uncertainty about the future of pay and pensions, and casual denigration of public servants by politicians, these statements of support have been very welcome. Julia MacGregor Chair, Government Communications Group | • On behalf of GCHQ's trade union, I'm writing to offer Iain Lobban and his colleagues our strong support as they seek to minimise the damage being done. The entire workforce is outraged, not so much at the lies being told about us (no one expects thanks serving their country) but at the thoughtless disregard for the welfare of Britain and the safety of people around the world. We've also appreciated the public statements in support of GCHQ staff and their ethics by politicians who understand the value of GCHQ to the UK. At a time of extended pay freezes, uncertainty about the future of pay and pensions, and casual denigration of public servants by politicians, these statements of support have been very welcome. Julia MacGregor Chair, Government Communications Group |
| • Why the indignation over the actions of Edward Snowden, Bradley Manning, Julian Assange? If the NSA, GCHQ, etc have done nothing wrong they have nothing to worry about. Bill May Kirkcaldy, Fife | • Why the indignation over the actions of Edward Snowden, Bradley Manning, Julian Assange? If the NSA, GCHQ, etc have done nothing wrong they have nothing to worry about. Bill May Kirkcaldy, Fife |
| • How many people still feel happy that their 2011 census data was processed by an American defence contractor (Report, 19 February 2011)? Tony Green Ipswich | • How many people still feel happy that their 2011 census data was processed by an American defence contractor (Report, 19 February 2011)? Tony Green Ipswich |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. | Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |
Previous version
1
Next version