3 ms·

> The required data covers only the domain name of each site visited - www.facebook.com or www.bbc.com, for example - not the individual pages within them. So

by peeters 10y ago

> The required data covers only the domain name of each site visited - www.facebook.com or www.bbc.com, for example - not the individual pages within them. So this article was the first time I learned the law only requires host logging. But now I'm even more confused...how does the UK Gov argue that logging your access of facebook.com, but not what you do in facebook.com, will help fight terrorism? Like, are terrorists going to isisrecruiting.com? I would've thought they would just use subportions of more popular and general hosts.

roryisok 10y ago
yes it does seem pretty silly. Even googling "how to make a homemade bomb" will just be logged as "google.com"
MarcScott 10y ago
For the first year... Then there'll be amendments that force ISPs to log the pages viewed, time spent on each page, downloads, etc.
- NTripleOne 10y ago
  >time spent on each page Is that even universally loggable? Once a page has finished downloading, that's it, your connection is closed and you were technically only 'on' the site for as long as the total transfer took. Of course you could track it via some other (semi)persistant means - but that's more of a site thing than an ISP thing.
lucozade 10y ago
I haven't read the legislation but I would fully expect that it would need a warrant to know the details. This sounds like they are formalising the collection of metadata rather than blanket access.
- CmdrSprinkles 10y ago
  Sounds reasonable (to the extent any of this does). In the event of an actual terrorist, this gives them a lot of data so that they can argue they have the UK equivalent of probable cause to subpoena various sites for more detailed browsing history. In theory, it would be something like "Crazy Joe Devola spent 16 hours a day at some hacking site. Better find out what he was looking at". In practice it will be "Facebook, give us access to his file"

by peeters 10y ago

roryisok 10y ago

yes it does seem pretty silly. Even googling "how to make a homemade bomb" will just be logged as "google.com"

MarcScott 10y ago

For the first year... Then there'll be amendments that force ISPs to log the pages viewed, time spent on each page, downloads, etc.

NTripleOne 10y ago
>time spent on each page Is that even universally loggable? Once a page has finished downloading, that's it, your connection is closed and you were technically only 'on' the site for as long as the total transfer took. Of course you could track it via some other (semi)persistant means - but that's more of a site thing than an ISP thing.

lucozade 10y ago

I haven't read the legislation but I would fully expect that it would need a warrant to know the details. This sounds like they are formalising the collection of metadata rather than blanket access.

CmdrSprinkles 10y ago
Sounds reasonable (to the extent any of this does). In the event of an actual terrorist, this gives them a lot of data so that they can argue they have the UK equivalent of probable cause to subpoena various sites for more detailed browsing history. In theory, it would be something like "Crazy Joe Devola spent 16 hours a day at some hacking site. Better find out what he was looking at". In practice it will be "Facebook, give us access to his file"