4 ms·

If you are routing your traffic through VPN and anon proxies or use Tor then you must be a terrorist! Totally retarded, but I bet they will look at your traffi

by kamjam 14y ago

If you are routing your traffic through VPN and anon proxies or use Tor then you must be a terrorist! Totally retarded, but I bet they will look at your traffic harder if you did this, even though I have nothing to hide... Interesting read from something that was posted on HN yesterday: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4105485 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4105485

mike-cardwell 14y ago
My understanding is that they need a warrant to look at the log of your traffic. Presumably they'd need to look at the log of your traffic in order to see if you're using a VPN or Tor. So what you're suggesting means they'd need to look at your traffic without a warrant in order to determine if they need a warrant to look at your traffic. [edit] Also, presumably they can already get a warrant to tap your traffic. All this new legislation means is that they can look at historic traffic too? Don't get me wrong. I am British, and I do think it's fucking disgusting. But don't forget, it's just a proposal. [edit2] I was wrong. It seems they wont need a warrant to see who you're talking to. Just a warrant to see what you're saying. So yes, I guess they'll be able to tell that you're using a VPN without getting a warrant first.
- kamjam 14y ago
  Don't know to be honest, unless EVERYONE is running encrypted traffic/VPN/Tor then the few that are using it stick out like a sore thumb. It is bound to raise some suspicion. I am British too btw and hoping it is just a proposal at the moment, but these things have a way of being watered down to make them "more acceptable" or revived under a different guise still have a whilst still have the core concepts in them. Problem is I don't trust our government with our data, they've shown sheer incompetence far too many times when it comes to IT systems. And it's always a case of do as we say, not as we do as the expenses scandal and the current Leveson enquiry is showing.
nicholassmith 14y ago
That was one of the more interesting parts to come out, the clever word politik of saying 'only terrorists, paedos or criminals would dare to be upset about this'. So ordinary man thinks "I'm neither of those 3, rummage away".
blibble 14y ago
when the percentages of people that use these kinds of technologies are low then yes, it's a big sign to the spooks that "LOOK AT ME, I'M PROBABLY DOING SOMETHING INTERESTING" ... this is the reason several people I know don't use PGP signed/encryted email.

by kamjam 14y ago

mike-cardwell 14y ago

My understanding is that they need a warrant to look at the log of your traffic. Presumably they'd need to look at the log of your traffic in order to see if you're using a VPN or Tor. So what you're suggesting means they'd need to look at your traffic without a warrant in order to determine if they need a warrant to look at your traffic. [edit] Also, presumably they can already get a warrant to tap your traffic. All this new legislation means is that they can look at historic traffic too? Don't get me wrong. I am British, and I do think it's fucking disgusting. But don't forget, it's just a proposal. [edit2] I was wrong. It seems they wont need a warrant to see who you're talking to. Just a warrant to see what you're saying. So yes, I guess they'll be able to tell that you're using a VPN without getting a warrant first.

kamjam 14y ago
Don't know to be honest, unless EVERYONE is running encrypted traffic/VPN/Tor then the few that are using it stick out like a sore thumb. It is bound to raise some suspicion. I am British too btw and hoping it is just a proposal at the moment, but these things have a way of being watered down to make them "more acceptable" or revived under a different guise still have a whilst still have the core concepts in them. Problem is I don't trust our government with our data, they've shown sheer incompetence far too many times when it comes to IT systems. And it's always a case of do as we say, not as we do as the expenses scandal and the current Leveson enquiry is showing.

nicholassmith 14y ago

That was one of the more interesting parts to come out, the clever word politik of saying 'only terrorists, paedos or criminals would dare to be upset about this'. So ordinary man thinks "I'm neither of those 3, rummage away".

blibble 14y ago

when the percentages of people that use these kinds of technologies are low then yes, it's a big sign to the spooks that "LOOK AT ME, I'M PROBABLY DOING SOMETHING INTERESTING" ... this is the reason several people I know don't use PGP signed/encryted email.