11 ms·

MI5 'secretly collected phone data' for decade

279 points by yexponential 11y ago

mst 11y ago
That ... would be what MI5 is for. My objections only begin when law enforcement start getting access to spook grade data (which means I'd object to them sharing with the NSA, who're clearly rather permeable to law enforcement currently).
- spacecowboy_lon 11y ago
  That's because unfortunately the FBI have a dual role - the FBI and Secret Service should have been merged/split into the traditional policing roles and into the roles performed in the by MI5
- agd 11y ago
  Many British people (including myself) would disagree with your assessment of the role of MI5. Personally, I don't think they are there to carry out mass surveillance.
  - walshemj 11y ago
    How would you say identify associates, handlers, spotters or more bombers after the 7/7 bomb attacks?
  - mst 11y ago
    I am British, you twit.
zer0defex 11y ago
I used to want to visit the UK, not so much anymore... when you find yourself mulling over how best to protect yourself in the same way you'd prep for attending something like defcon, it sort of loses its zeal. Edit: wow, the downvotes are coming fast on this one, guess i found a nerve. needle
- draugadrotten 11y ago
  It won't matter if you visit the UK. The UK law extends the rights of surveillance world-wide, These laws comes in handy at times. As part of the "five eyes" spy agrement, UK and US are intentionally spying on one another's citizens and sharing the collected information with each other in order to circumvent restrictive domestic regulations on spying. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes
- schoen 11y ago
  It is a legitimate, practical concern whether visiting somewhere will increase your risk of attacks on your devices and data. I was struck by a New York Times article from 2012, before organized governmental hacking was the topic of the day, setting out some of the precautions that people took. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/11/technology/electronic-security-a-worry-in-an-age-of-digital-espionage.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/11/technology/electronic-secu... This was particularly focused on hacking by China (something we in English-speaking countries had learned to hate and fear over the years), and I found it sad to learn that the same precautions can be appropriate for visiting liberal democracies.
- harkyns_ruins 11y ago
  Seems to be a pretty common theme going on now, at least among the five eyes and any beholden countries. The one thing that makes me (grimace) laugh is that with this level of surveillance, they seem to be either a) incredibly incompetent because of all the corruption, paedophilia and so on that seems to go unpunished/uncaught, or b) a tool used by people higher up the chain for other purposes.
  - spacecowboy_lon 11y ago
    Probably because the data is only used for intelligence / contra intelligence purposes and quiet rightly the plod (Police) are not allowed to go on fishing expeditions.
    - harkyns_ruins 11y ago
dijit 11y ago
* MI5. * GCHQ/Tempora * SIS * GDS (Government Digital services) * Anti-encryption laws being chased through the houses of parliment. * It's illegal to not provide, when questioned, the encryption key of a device in your possession. * ISP Logging. I've wanted to be in tech all my life and I felt that british people have facilitated a lot of good things in the tech world- but I have never been so ashamed to carry my passport. This country is one that had great laws for librarians especially after world war 2 which aided in privacy of the people. but now, we seem to have forgotten that once data is collected, it can be used to target and harm people in swathes- it can be used actively to destroy individual people- or even, in moderation, can cause people to self-censor (which carries it's own problems). I'm a British citizen, I will not return to the UK while archaic laws and boneheaded policy makers are eroding the very fabric of computer culture. Looks like the next election is in 2020.
- yitchelle 11y ago
  What are the alternatives, and how much can you trust these alternatives?
  - harkyns_ruins 11y ago
    I can't speak for the OP, but the Nordic countries seem to be pretty progressive in this aspect. I'd gladly relocate to a country that doesn't have this invasiveness (hint hint, 20 odd years in software and devops, hook me up). The chilling effect is bad enough, but having agencies that sit outside of the light of public/democratic scrutiny is a foul thing. How much you can trust the alternatives? That's a trickier question.
    - vidarh 11y ago
      Norwegian secret services for decades conducted illegal political surveillance going far beyond "just" phone taps. I personally knew people who were regularly harassed because of membership in legal political organizations. One was the newspaper editor of the newspaper "Friheten" ("Liberty"), linked to the communist party, who told me how he for years was now and against stopped by officers from the police surveillance service (POT; now PST) who would make a point out of commenting on conversations that he and his wife had face to face in his home to prove they were listening in. There was no legal basis for the surveillance - POT had legal powers to initiate surveillance in cases where there were legitimate surveillance needs, but this surveillance never went through proper channels because they knew full well it wouldn't have been approved. Another was a trade union rep whose commute to work had him walking past the Soviet embassy, which was the only reason he could think of for why he was tailed to and from work every day for years. They didn't try to hide it - making it obvious was part of their regular harassment. (To be clear, while most of this surveillance was directed at left wing groups, the most likely instigator was the Norwegian social democrats in the 50's and 60's, not the right wing - the social democrats were if anything more worried about the groups to their left than they were about the conservatives at the time) This was rolled up in the mid 90's, and during the parliamentary investigation it was revealed that one of the committee members - a socialist MP - was under illegal surveillance by POT while he was investigating them... POT was "rebranded" the Police Security Service (PST), and we were assured it won't happen again, but the oversight is a total joke. Last year one of the largest papers revealed extensive amounts of illegal IMSI catchers in Oslo, for example, and it's all just petered out. The various agencies insisted it was nothing to worry about awfully quickly for someone who also denied having anything to do with it - if they had nothing to do with it, presumably they'd have been all over figuring out what was going on; their fast denials only makes sense if they denied because they knew exactly who and why. Norway has also figured in Snowden documents as providing significant intelligence to the NSA. Sweden has the infamous "FRA law", a signals intelligence law that makes every signal that passes the Swedish border free game for Swedish military intelligence. Which is pretty nasty when you consider that the host interchange points that a lot of European internet traffic travels through. So don't assume you can escape this, because we can't. The only option is to find ways to fight back.
junto 11y ago
What's painfully not funny, is that the vast majority of the British public won't see this as a problem, and won't see any need to do anything about it. There is a reason why all the data and calls go through the BT Tower in London, and why it is guarded like a fortress. All the taps are there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BT_Tower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BT_Tower
- harkyns_ruins 11y ago
  The tyranny of the majority. If you can control what they watch on tele, you can basically control what they think.
  - noir_lord 11y ago
    Panem et Circenses (bread and circuses). As long as the average voter in this country has a job, x-factor, can visit the pub on a sunday afternoon and get away on holiday once a year nothing is going to change.
- bobm_kite9 11y ago
  really? I know electronic miniaturization is an amazing thing, but is this big enough for all data and calls to be tapped from?
  - junto 11y ago
    See my comment above about Telehouse London
- coldtea 11y ago
  >What's painfully not funny, is that the vast majority of the British public won't see this as a problem, and won't see any need to do anything about it. You mean the same public that accepts and sponsors a "royal" class in 2015?
  - hahainternet 11y ago
    > You mean the same public that accepts and sponsors a "royal" class in 2015? We make money from the royals, does that change your opinion?
0xFFC 11y ago
Tadaa ... . The surprising fact for me is when I was talking with mostly programmer located in USA in Reddit (I am not from us), they didn't even care about NSA/etc agency collect their data. They act in a way I thought they think their data belongs to NSA. that really got me to thinking. This is my right as human being to have privacy.
SturgeonsLaw 11y ago
The blatant contempt they have for their people is astounding. > The draft bill's measures include: > Allowing the security services to hack into phones and computers around the world in the interests of national security > A new criminal offence of "knowingly or recklessly obtaining communications data from a telecommunications operator without lawful authority", carrying a prison sentence of up to two years In the same breath they threaten prison sentences for doing exactly what they state they're doing. > The Wilson doctrine - preventing surveillance of Parliamentarians' communications - to be written into law Come on guys, now you're just taking the piss
- pjc50 11y ago
  preventing surveillance of Parliamentarians' communications .. except when authorised by the PM. Who recently called the leader of the opposition a threat to national security.
  - SFLemonade 11y ago
    The creepiest implication with this is if you get the wrong person in power at the right time, they might be able to keep their party or interests in power for an atypically long time, given access to these new tools. We all know that keeping one political interest in control for any extended period of time is never good.
mootothemax 11y ago
The scary thing about web history logging is that it makes you question your web habits, if not become actively paranoid. For instance, the article quotes the head of MI5 regarding preventing the bombing of the London Stock Exchange in 2010. I wanted to know more about this, so Googled London Stock Exchange Bomb, and clicked on a few stories, and wanting to find out a bit more about the people involved, I then Googled their names and clicked on a few more links. All this time, I had the thought at the back of my head: will these searches and clicks put me on a list somewhere? (for anyone who wants to be saved searching for these terms, here's a quick overview: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/9072455/Terrorism-gang-jailed-for-plotting-to-blow-up-London-Stock-Exchange.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/9...) It's this feeling that I most dislike about it all; something, or someone, somewhere may be watching, and so now I'm questioning myself because some discussion on some site has potentially questionable keywords in its URL.
- omellet 11y ago
  Welcome to the surveillance state in your head: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-surveillance-state-in-your-head/ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-surveill...
- junto 11y ago
  Your CSRS just increased. CSRS = Citizen Subversive Risk Score. A couple more internet searches like that and you'll be hauled into "the Cage" for questioning, held without charge for 72 hours under the "Anti-Terrorism and Subversives Act 2018" and released after a good beating. Your credit score may or may not be affected. Employers may call upon your CSRS score before employing you. Increases over 5% a year are grounds for dismissal.
  - rmc 11y ago
    > held without charge for 72 hours Today, if you're arrested in the UK under Terrorism charges you can be held for up to 14 days. https://www.gov.uk/arrested-your-rights/how-long-you-can-be-held-in-custody https://www.gov.uk/arrested-your-rights/how-long-you-can-be-...
JupiterMoon 11y ago
NO worries it'll all be legal soon. If there are any senior ex-Statsi left alive they will be looking at the UK spying systems and wishing they had had this level of access.
tome 11y ago
They secretly collected phone data for a decade and nothing untoward seems to have happened! Sounds like the powers that be are reasonably responsible after all.
mildweed 11y ago
Real world events make for such an awful James Bond spoiler. http://www.wired.com/2015/11/spectre-james-bond-video-review/ http://www.wired.com/2015/11/spectre-james-bond-video-review...
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

279 points by yexponential 11y ago

mst 11y ago

That ... would be what MI5 is for. My objections only begin when law enforcement start getting access to spook grade data (which means I'd object to them sharing with the NSA, who're clearly rather permeable to law enforcement currently).

spacecowboy_lon 11y ago
That's because unfortunately the FBI have a dual role - the FBI and Secret Service should have been merged/split into the traditional policing roles and into the roles performed in the by MI5
agd 11y ago
Many British people (including myself) would disagree with your assessment of the role of MI5. Personally, I don't think they are there to carry out mass surveillance.
- walshemj 11y ago
  How would you say identify associates, handlers, spotters or more bombers after the 7/7 bomb attacks?
- mst 11y ago
  I am British, you twit.

zer0defex 11y ago

I used to want to visit the UK, not so much anymore... when you find yourself mulling over how best to protect yourself in the same way you'd prep for attending something like defcon, it sort of loses its zeal. Edit: wow, the downvotes are coming fast on this one, guess i found a nerve. needle

draugadrotten 11y ago
It won't matter if you visit the UK. The UK law extends the rights of surveillance world-wide, These laws comes in handy at times. As part of the "five eyes" spy agrement, UK and US are intentionally spying on one another's citizens and sharing the collected information with each other in order to circumvent restrictive domestic regulations on spying. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes
schoen 11y ago
It is a legitimate, practical concern whether visiting somewhere will increase your risk of attacks on your devices and data. I was struck by a New York Times article from 2012, before organized governmental hacking was the topic of the day, setting out some of the precautions that people took. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/11/technology/electronic-security-a-worry-in-an-age-of-digital-espionage.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/11/technology/electronic-secu... This was particularly focused on hacking by China (something we in English-speaking countries had learned to hate and fear over the years), and I found it sad to learn that the same precautions can be appropriate for visiting liberal democracies.
harkyns_ruins 11y ago
Seems to be a pretty common theme going on now, at least among the five eyes and any beholden countries. The one thing that makes me (grimace) laugh is that with this level of surveillance, they seem to be either a) incredibly incompetent because of all the corruption, paedophilia and so on that seems to go unpunished/uncaught, or b) a tool used by people higher up the chain for other purposes.
- spacecowboy_lon 11y ago
  Probably because the data is only used for intelligence / contra intelligence purposes and quiet rightly the plod (Police) are not allowed to go on fishing expeditions.
  - harkyns_ruins 11y ago

dijit 11y ago

* MI5. * GCHQ/Tempora * SIS * GDS (Government Digital services) * Anti-encryption laws being chased through the houses of parliment. * It's illegal to not provide, when questioned, the encryption key of a device in your possession. * ISP Logging. I've wanted to be in tech all my life and I felt that british people have facilitated a lot of good things in the tech world- but I have never been so ashamed to carry my passport. This country is one that had great laws for librarians especially after world war 2 which aided in privacy of the people. but now, we seem to have forgotten that once data is collected, it can be used to target and harm people in swathes- it can be used actively to destroy individual people- or even, in moderation, can cause people to self-censor (which carries it's own problems). I'm a British citizen, I will not return to the UK while archaic laws and boneheaded policy makers are eroding the very fabric of computer culture. Looks like the next election is in 2020.

yitchelle 11y ago
What are the alternatives, and how much can you trust these alternatives?
- harkyns_ruins 11y ago
  I can't speak for the OP, but the Nordic countries seem to be pretty progressive in this aspect. I'd gladly relocate to a country that doesn't have this invasiveness (hint hint, 20 odd years in software and devops, hook me up). The chilling effect is bad enough, but having agencies that sit outside of the light of public/democratic scrutiny is a foul thing. How much you can trust the alternatives? That's a trickier question.
  - vidarh 11y ago
    Norwegian secret services for decades conducted illegal political surveillance going far beyond "just" phone taps. I personally knew people who were regularly harassed because of membership in legal political organizations. One was the newspaper editor of the newspaper "Friheten" ("Liberty"), linked to the communist party, who told me how he for years was now and against stopped by officers from the police surveillance service (POT; now PST) who would make a point out of commenting on conversations that he and his wife had face to face in his home to prove they were listening in. There was no legal basis for the surveillance - POT had legal powers to initiate surveillance in cases where there were legitimate surveillance needs, but this surveillance never went through proper channels because they knew full well it wouldn't have been approved. Another was a trade union rep whose commute to work had him walking past the Soviet embassy, which was the only reason he could think of for why he was tailed to and from work every day for years. They didn't try to hide it - making it obvious was part of their regular harassment. (To be clear, while most of this surveillance was directed at left wing groups, the most likely instigator was the Norwegian social democrats in the 50's and 60's, not the right wing - the social democrats were if anything more worried about the groups to their left than they were about the conservatives at the time) This was rolled up in the mid 90's, and during the parliamentary investigation it was revealed that one of the committee members - a socialist MP - was under illegal surveillance by POT while he was investigating them... POT was "rebranded" the Police Security Service (PST), and we were assured it won't happen again, but the oversight is a total joke. Last year one of the largest papers revealed extensive amounts of illegal IMSI catchers in Oslo, for example, and it's all just petered out. The various agencies insisted it was nothing to worry about awfully quickly for someone who also denied having anything to do with it - if they had nothing to do with it, presumably they'd have been all over figuring out what was going on; their fast denials only makes sense if they denied because they knew exactly who and why. Norway has also figured in Snowden documents as providing significant intelligence to the NSA. Sweden has the infamous "FRA law", a signals intelligence law that makes every signal that passes the Swedish border free game for Swedish military intelligence. Which is pretty nasty when you consider that the host interchange points that a lot of European internet traffic travels through. So don't assume you can escape this, because we can't. The only option is to find ways to fight back.

junto 11y ago

What's painfully not funny, is that the vast majority of the British public won't see this as a problem, and won't see any need to do anything about it. There is a reason why all the data and calls go through the BT Tower in London, and why it is guarded like a fortress. All the taps are there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BT_Tower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BT_Tower

harkyns_ruins 11y ago
The tyranny of the majority. If you can control what they watch on tele, you can basically control what they think.
- noir_lord 11y ago
  Panem et Circenses (bread and circuses). As long as the average voter in this country has a job, x-factor, can visit the pub on a sunday afternoon and get away on holiday once a year nothing is going to change.
bobm_kite9 11y ago
really? I know electronic miniaturization is an amazing thing, but is this big enough for all data and calls to be tapped from?
- junto 11y ago
  See my comment above about Telehouse London
coldtea 11y ago
>What's painfully not funny, is that the vast majority of the British public won't see this as a problem, and won't see any need to do anything about it. You mean the same public that accepts and sponsors a "royal" class in 2015?
- hahainternet 11y ago
  > You mean the same public that accepts and sponsors a "royal" class in 2015? We make money from the royals, does that change your opinion?

0xFFC 11y ago

Tadaa ... . The surprising fact for me is when I was talking with mostly programmer located in USA in Reddit (I am not from us), they didn't even care about NSA/etc agency collect their data. They act in a way I thought they think their data belongs to NSA. that really got me to thinking. This is my right as human being to have privacy.

SturgeonsLaw 11y ago

The blatant contempt they have for their people is astounding. > The draft bill's measures include: > Allowing the security services to hack into phones and computers around the world in the interests of national security > A new criminal offence of "knowingly or recklessly obtaining communications data from a telecommunications operator without lawful authority", carrying a prison sentence of up to two years In the same breath they threaten prison sentences for doing exactly what they state they're doing. > The Wilson doctrine - preventing surveillance of Parliamentarians' communications - to be written into law Come on guys, now you're just taking the piss

pjc50 11y ago
preventing surveillance of Parliamentarians' communications .. except when authorised by the PM. Who recently called the leader of the opposition a threat to national security.
- SFLemonade 11y ago
  The creepiest implication with this is if you get the wrong person in power at the right time, they might be able to keep their party or interests in power for an atypically long time, given access to these new tools. We all know that keeping one political interest in control for any extended period of time is never good.

mootothemax 11y ago

The scary thing about web history logging is that it makes you question your web habits, if not become actively paranoid. For instance, the article quotes the head of MI5 regarding preventing the bombing of the London Stock Exchange in 2010. I wanted to know more about this, so Googled London Stock Exchange Bomb, and clicked on a few stories, and wanting to find out a bit more about the people involved, I then Googled their names and clicked on a few more links. All this time, I had the thought at the back of my head: will these searches and clicks put me on a list somewhere? (for anyone who wants to be saved searching for these terms, here's a quick overview: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/9072455/Terrorism-gang-jailed-for-plotting-to-blow-up-London-Stock-Exchange.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/9...) It's this feeling that I most dislike about it all; something, or someone, somewhere may be watching, and so now I'm questioning myself because some discussion on some site has potentially questionable keywords in its URL.

omellet 11y ago
Welcome to the surveillance state in your head: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-surveillance-state-in-your-head/ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-surveill...
junto 11y ago
Your CSRS just increased. CSRS = Citizen Subversive Risk Score. A couple more internet searches like that and you'll be hauled into "the Cage" for questioning, held without charge for 72 hours under the "Anti-Terrorism and Subversives Act 2018" and released after a good beating. Your credit score may or may not be affected. Employers may call upon your CSRS score before employing you. Increases over 5% a year are grounds for dismissal.
- rmc 11y ago
  > held without charge for 72 hours Today, if you're arrested in the UK under Terrorism charges you can be held for up to 14 days. https://www.gov.uk/arrested-your-rights/how-long-you-can-be-held-in-custody https://www.gov.uk/arrested-your-rights/how-long-you-can-be-...

JupiterMoon 11y ago

NO worries it'll all be legal soon. If there are any senior ex-Statsi left alive they will be looking at the UK spying systems and wishing they had had this level of access.

tome 11y ago

They secretly collected phone data for a decade and nothing untoward seems to have happened! Sounds like the powers that be are reasonably responsible after all.

mildweed 11y ago

Real world events make for such an awful James Bond spoiler. http://www.wired.com/2015/11/spectre-james-bond-video-review/ http://www.wired.com/2015/11/spectre-james-bond-video-review...

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]