Homestead mailing list

[bobf <bobford79 AT yahoo.com>]

If you have no interest in the protection of your personal privacy, don't 
waste your time with this post.  All of this tracking crap seems to start in 
the UK.  I read another article similar to this article stating that we, the 
u.s. is beginning , with our postal system, to implement the future use of 
rfid chips in stamps , so that the history of every contact made by what is 
now called 'snail mail' can be tracked in real time, and recoreded for all 
time.  Just like the tracking and record keeping of these contacts in this 
article through emails and telephone calls.  Soon, there will be no privacy, 
no anonymity, at all.  Some of the reader's comments to the article are 
interesting................................................

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Private firm may track all email and calls 'Hellhouse' of personal data will 
be created, warns former DPP

 Alan Travis and Richard Norton-Taylor 

The Guardian, 

Wednesday 31 December 2008 

The private sector will be asked to manage and run a communications database 
that will keep track of everyone's calls, emails, texts and internet use 
under a key option contained in a consultation paper to be published next 
month by Jacqui Smith, the home secretary.

A cabinet decision to put the management of the multibillion pound database 
of all UK communications traffic into private hands would be accompanied by 
tougher legal safeguards to guarantee against leaks and accidental data 
losses.

But in his strongest criticism yet of the superdatabase, Sir Ken Macdonald, 
the former director of public prosecutions, who has firsthand experience of 
working with intelligence and law enforcement agencies, told the Guardian 
such assurances would prove worthless in the long run and warned it would 
prove a "hellhouse" of personal private information.

"Authorisations for access might be written into statute. The most senior 
ministers and officials might be designated as scrutineers. But none of this 
means anything," said Macdonald. "All history tells us that reassurances like 
these are worthless in the long run. In the first security crisis the locks 
would loosen."

The home secretary postponed the introduction of legislation to set up the 
superdatabase in October and instead said she would publish a consultation 
paper in the new year setting out the proposal and the safeguards needed to 
protect civil liberties. She has emphasised that communications data, which 
gives the police the identity and location of the caller, texter or web 
surfer but not the content, has been used as important evidence in 95% of 
serious crime cases and almost all security service operations since 2004 
including the Soham and 21/7 bombing cases.

Until now most communications traffic data has been held by phone companies 
and internet service providers for billing purposes but the growth of 
broadband phone services, chatrooms and anonymous online identities mean that 
is no longer the case.

The Home Office's interception modernisation programme, which is working on 
the superdatabase proposal, argues that it is no longer good enough for 
communications companies to be left to retrieve such data when requested by 
the police and intelligence services. A Home Office spokeswoman said last 
night the changes were needed so law enforcement agencies could maintain 
their ability to tackle serious crime and terrorism.

Senior Whitehall officials responsible for planning for a new database say 
there is a significant difference between having access to "communications 
data" - names and addresses of emails or telephone numbers, for example - and 
the actual contents of the communications. "We have been very clear that 
there are no plans for a database containing any content of emails, texts or 
conversations," the spokeswoman said.

External estimates of the cost of the superdatabase have been put as high as 
£12bn, twice the cost of the ID cards scheme, and the consultation paper, to 
be published towards the end of next month, will include an option of putting 
it into the hands of the private sector in an effort to cut costs. But such a 
decision is likely to fuel civil liberties concerns over data losses and 
leaks. Macdonald, who left his post as DPP in October, told the Guardian: 
"The tendency of the state to seek ever more powers of surveillance over its 
citizens may be driven by protective zeal. But the notion of total security 
is a paranoid fantasy which would destroy everything that makes living 
worthwhile. We must avoid surrendering our freedom as autonomous human beings 
to such an ugly future. We should make judgments that are compatible with our 
status as free people."

Maintaining the capacity to intercept suspicious communications was critical 
in an increasingly complex world, he said. "It is a process which can save 
lives and bring criminals to justice. But no other country is considering 
such a drastic step. This database would be an unimaginable hell-house of 
personal private information," he said. "It would be a complete readout of 
every citizen's life in the most intimate and demeaning detail. No government 
of any colour is to be trusted with such a roadmap to our souls." 

The moment there was a security crisis the temptation for more commonplace 
access would be irresistible, he said.

Other critics of the plan point to the problems of keeping the database 
secure, both from the point of view of the technology and of deliberate 
leaks. The problem would be compounded if private companies manage the 
system. "If there is a breach of security in that database it would be 
utterly devastating," one said.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/dec/31/privacy-civil-liberties