3 ms·

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 yo

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.