PDA

View Full Version : Police to be granted powers to view your internet browsing history



Martin Scroatman
30th October 2015, 13:06
Police to be granted powers to view your internet browsing history

d000hg
30th October 2015, 13:09
Link? Comment?


Seems reasonable that if/when they can search your home, they can search your internet history. Can't they also search your phone records already too?

MicrosoftBob
30th October 2015, 13:26
They'll have to spend a considerable time watching redtube/youporn/xhamster and cat memes in our house then

JRCT
30th October 2015, 13:33
What if you go 'incognito'? Not that I do, unless I'm buying the wife a lovely surprise gift that I don't want her to know about.

LucidDementia
30th October 2015, 13:35
I find this quite odd. The folk they tend to investigate will have nothing but porn and Facebook on their histories.

FatLazyContractor
30th October 2015, 13:38
What if you go 'incognito'? Not that I do, unless I'm buying the wife a lovely surprise gift that I don't want her to know about.

Ride up the OXO tower?

Martin Scroatman
30th October 2015, 13:41
Comment?

PURR-IDDY CONTROVERSIAL! :smile

WTFH
30th October 2015, 13:43
PURR-IDDY CONTROVERSIAL! :smile



I think what he meant was can you provide a link to the article or at least make some comment rather than just the 1 line title repeated as the text.




All you needed to do was this:


Police to be granted powers to view your internet history - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11964655/Police-to-be-granted-powers-to-view-your-internet-history.html)

NibblyPig
30th October 2015, 13:46
Time to fire up the ugandan proxy server

original PM
30th October 2015, 13:51
I am pretty sure that anyone surfing for kiddie porn or how to make a bomb from household objects will be at the very least using incognito browsing if not some form of proxy.....

suppose it will help them catch the stupid ones though

Antman
30th October 2015, 13:53
Complete non-techy here, but wouldn't they get this information from your ISP so incognito becomes a moot point?

original PM
30th October 2015, 13:57
Complete non-techy here, but wouldn't they get this information from your ISP so incognito becomes a moot point?

I guess this is where using a proxy comes in handy??

WTFH
30th October 2015, 14:00
Complete non-techy here, but wouldn't they get this information from your ISP so incognito becomes a moot point?



Depends on whether you have a static or dynamic IP address and how often you reboot your router (if it's dynamic), I think.

NibblyPig
30th October 2015, 14:06
Incognito does not protect your browsing history from the government, it just means that it doesn't store it locally and doesn't let your incognito session send any cookies or other data that was stored on your computer previously that might identify you.

It offers no protection from people asking your ISP what's going on.

You'd need to use a proxy server and make sure your traffic is https encrypted.

fullyautomatix
30th October 2015, 14:07
How many of you are actually worried about police accessing your history ? Privacy matters aside, if they come knocking on your door and want to look at the history, I would gladly let them.

MarillionFan
30th October 2015, 14:12
How many of you are actually worried about police accessing your history ? Privacy matters aside, if they come knocking on your door and want to look at the history, I would gladly let them.

WHS. Nothing illegal about fat shaven haven big black cock transsexual nurses is there.

WTFH
30th October 2015, 14:13
How many of you are actually worried about police accessing your history ? Privacy matters aside, if they come knocking on your door and want to look at the history, I would gladly let them.



I'd be embarrassed by the number of times I've inadvertently clicked on a link and ended up being redirected to a page belonging to the Daily Mail.

VectraMan
30th October 2015, 14:17
Depends on whether you have a static or dynamic IP address and how often you reboot your router (if it's dynamic), I think.

If the ISP are logging what you're doing then they're going to know who uses which IP and when. The only way round it is to use a VPN, but then the fact you're using a VPN makes you stand out as suspicious and then they can demand logs from the VPN provider.

What slightly worries me (to be serious for a moment) is that you don't need to enter a URL to visit a site. A lot of times you get redirected to something you weren't expecting. So you might click on something on nicechristianladies.com and actually find yourself at andywsmum.com, but if the police are looking at your logs they can't tell that you didn't intend to look at such filth, and you can't prove it either.

WTFH
30th October 2015, 14:20
So you might ... actually find yourself on andywsmum.com...


...and how many of us can say that we have found ourselves on andywsmum?

SueEllen
30th October 2015, 14:39
If the ISP are logging what you're doing then they're going to know who uses which IP and when. The only way round it is to use a VPN, but then the fact you're using a VPN makes you stand out as suspicious and then they can demand logs from the VPN provider.

What slightly worries me (to be serious for a moment) is that you don't need to enter a URL to visit a site. A lot of times you get redirected to something you weren't expecting. So you might click on something on nicechristianladies.com and actually find yourself at andywsmum.com, but if the police are looking at your logs they can't tell that you didn't intend to look at such filth, and you can't prove it either.

Using a VPN isn't suspicious lots of companies make you to use one to connect to their servers if working away site.

DodgyAgent
30th October 2015, 14:48
...and how many of us can say that we have found ourselves on andywsmum?

:o

VectraMan
30th October 2015, 14:54
Using a VPN isn't suspicious lots of companies make you to use one to connect to their servers if working away site.

I'm connected to one right now in fact. But if they can see what sites you visit they can see who you VPN to, and a paid or overseas VPN service is more suspicious than a company VPN server.

TestMangler
30th October 2015, 14:57
They'd need to have some amount of staying power to review my GrannyPorn videos history

DaveB
30th October 2015, 15:14
Linkies :

Top cops demand access to the UK's entire web browsing history (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/30/police_want_access_britons_browsing_histories/)
Investigatory Powers Bill to update UK communications data laws (http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2015/may/investigatory-powers-bill-to-update-uk-communications-data-laws/)
Q&A: what is the Investigatory Powers Bill? | The Times (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/defence/article4597808.ece) (paywall)

Resurrection of the original "Snoopers Charter" that was proposed by the Tories in the past government and scuppered by the LibDems.

Essentially an extension of what was required under RIPA but now becomes a blanket collection of internet usage metadata by ISP's. They will be required to log traffic info such as date, time, type of traffic and destination of anything that goes through their networks and keep it for later use by Law Enforcement agencies.

Using Private Browsing locally won't help you. That just stops it being saved in your browser history for when you are "Buying a surprise gift for your wife".

Using a VPN will hide the content but not the source and destination so they will still see you visiting www.Jihadies4You.com or sending an email to baddies@daesh.com

Even if you are jumping onto a Tor node the fact that you are doing that will still be logged. Same with going via a Proxy, that will be recorded and if the proxy is keeping logs they can go get those as well or get the ISP the proxy is on to give them the info on whats leaving the proxy.

Changing your IP won't help, DHCP records at the ISP will still link you to the ones you use if it's dynamic, or DNS records if you change it manually. It's all backed up so they can trawl through it if needs be.

As ever, the proposals are "For our own safety" and "in the interests of national security" but will doubtless come in very handy when the next "threat" is identified. Especially if it happens to be a civil liberties group, investigative journalists or anyone who disagrees with the government of the day.

d000hg
30th October 2015, 15:53
Complete non-techy here, but wouldn't they get this information from your ISP so incognito becomes a moot point?Maybe there's different levels of warrant needed? Searching your history can be done in a few moments, accessing your ISP records requires asking the ISP for the data, etc?

And you have to remember the vast majority don't know anything about IT, and most criminals are not that bright.

Pondlife
30th October 2015, 15:59
4G PAYG simcards.

NickFitz
30th October 2015, 16:39
Depends on whether you have a static or dynamic IP address and how often you reboot your router (if it's dynamic), I think.

The ISP still knows which customer had which IP address at any given time. I think that's among the data they're required to keep for some ridiculous length of time, too.

SpontaneousOrder
30th October 2015, 17:02
As ever, the proposals are "For our own safety" and "in the interests of national security" but will doubtless come in very handy when the next "threat" is identified. Especially if it happens to be a civil liberties group, investigative journalists or anyone who disagrees with the government of the day.

Or gay men anally fisting their husbands, women who ejaculate, or people who like to pee on one another.

Security is one thing (and I still don't think it can be morally justified) but when they've already proven that they can't be trusted to have access to our data without discriminating against certain demographics (e.g. the previously mentioned gays who are overrepresented), then this sounds absurd.

SueEllen
30th October 2015, 17:41
4G PAYG simcards.

People have been arrested wrongly, for the use of 3G PAYG sims. The sim seller is required to take a name and address for the sim.

Zero Liability
30th October 2015, 17:42
If the ISP are logging what you're doing then they're going to know who uses which IP and when. The only way round it is to use a VPN, but then the fact you're using a VPN makes you stand out as suspicious and then they can demand logs from the VPN provider.

I wonder if that will apply to ones like UnblockUS, as well.


What slightly worries me (to be serious for a moment) is that you don't need to enter a URL to visit a site. A lot of times you get redirected to something you weren't expecting. So you might click on something on nicechristianladies.com and actually find yourself at andywsmum.com, but if the police are looking at your logs they can't tell that you didn't intend to look at such filth, and you can't prove it either.

That crossed my mind, too.


Linkies :

Top cops demand access to the UK's entire web browsing history (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/30/police_want_access_britons_browsing_histories/)
Investigatory Powers Bill to update UK communications data laws (http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2015/may/investigatory-powers-bill-to-update-uk-communications-data-laws/)
Q&A: what is the Investigatory Powers Bill? | The Times (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/defence/article4597808.ece) (paywall)

Resurrection of the original "Snoopers Charter" that was proposed by the Tories in the past government and scuppered by the LibDems.

Essentially an extension of what was required under RIPA but now becomes a blanket collection of internet usage metadata by ISP's. They will be required to log traffic info such as date, time, type of traffic and destination of anything that goes through their networks and keep it for later use by Law Enforcement agencies.

Using Private Browsing locally won't help you. That just stops it being saved in your browser history for when you are "Buying a surprise gift for your wife".

Using a VPN will hide the content but not the source and destination so they will still see you visiting www.Jihadies4You.com or sending an email to baddies@daesh.com

Even if you are jumping onto a Tor node the fact that you are doing that will still be logged. Same with going via a Proxy, that will be recorded and if the proxy is keeping logs they can go get those as well or get the ISP the proxy is on to give them the info on whats leaving the proxy.

Changing your IP won't help, DHCP records at the ISP will still link you to the ones you use if it's dynamic, or DNS records if you change it manually. It's all backed up so they can trawl through it if needs be.

As ever, the proposals are "For our own safety" and "in the interests of national security" but will doubtless come in very handy when the next "threat" is identified. Especially if it happens to be a civil liberties group, investigative journalists or anyone who disagrees with the government of the day.

I wonder if looking at sites like ZH (critical of most govts du jour), YT videos not in line with 'received wisdom', etc. will be a red flag. Who knows, even browsing CUK could be one. :D

The only positive is that they're so badly resourced at present that they don't have the time to sift through the browsing histories of all and sundry who disapprove of a given govt and its policies, but the potential for abuse is what bothers me.

NibblyPig
30th October 2015, 17:47
Proxy in another country would be sufficient, it's very unlikely that the government would have the ability to subpoena records from another country, especially if they are only holding someone on suspicion without proof.

SueEllen
30th October 2015, 17:52
Proxy in another country would be sufficient, it's very unlikely that the government would have the ability to subpoena records from another country, especially if they are only holding someone on suspicion without proof.

Governments are very happy to pass information about supposed terrorists to each other. Though they don't always take the info onboard.

Also probably a good idea not to use a US based VPN.....

xoggoth
30th October 2015, 17:54
you might click on something on nicechristianladies.com and actually find yourself at andywsmum.com

Yeh, often when browsing charity sites I get directed to pigporn.net. Damn hackers.

TestMangler
30th October 2015, 18:01
Yeh, often when browsing charity sites I get directed to pigporn.net. Damn hackers.

I was looking for a picture of two Walking Dead type zombies for a poster I was making for a pub gig.

Google autifilled "Two zombies" with "Two zombies buggered my cat"

As someone on here used to say.....inneresting !

Sysman
30th October 2015, 19:06
How many of you are actually worried about police accessing your history ? Privacy matters aside, if they come knocking on your door and want to look at the history, I would gladly let them.

Have you not heard of the cases where local authorities have abused the existing anti-terrorist powers to snoop on the use of wheelie bins?

quis custodiet ipsos custodes? - who will guard the guardians? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quis_custodiet_ipsos_custodes%3F)


The phrase, as it is normally quoted in Latin, comes from the Satires of Juvenal, the 1st/2nd century Roman satirist. Although in its modern usage the phrase has universal, timeless applications to concepts such as tyrannical governments, uncontrollably oppressive dictatorships, and police or judicial corruption and overreach, in context within Juvenal's poem it refers to the impossibility of enforcing moral behaviour on women when the enforcers (custodes) are corruptible (Satire 6.346–348)

Sysman
30th October 2015, 19:09
I'd be embarrassed by the number of times I've inadvertently clicked on a link and ended up being redirected to a page belonging to the Daily Mail.

Also hijacked websites which take you off to a hard porn site etc etc.

Sysman
30th October 2015, 19:23
I wonder if looking at sites like ZH (critical of most govts du jour), YT videos not in line with 'received wisdom', etc. will be a red flag. Who knows, even browsing CUK could be one. :D

The scary bit is that they might completely misconstrue some of the stuff you search for.

Apparently at one point the FBI got pretty excited at the thought of nicking anyone interested in Apache Subversion (https://subversion.apache.org/) :rollin: :rollin: :rollin:

EternalOptimist
30th October 2015, 19:24
whinge, whinge, whinge.

you are contractors FGS. How can you make some money out of this ?

My plan is to set up a little university course then get people to sign up for 1000 quids a year. Their course work will involve a fair bit on internet web searching, so they will be pre-alibied when plod calls

my first course will be 'A history Rug munching lesbo sado-masochists in squirting orgy building nail bombs in the 21st century'

greenlake
30th October 2015, 19:42
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/e4/17/8d/e4178d4de24bf244dc67c38226220841.jpg

Pondlife
30th October 2015, 20:23
People have been arrested wrongly, for the use of 3G PAYG sims. The sim seller is required to take a name and address for the sim.

I have a foreign SIM card that has no tie to my name or address and I can top up with cash.

AtW
30th October 2015, 20:34
I have a foreign SIM card that has no tie to my name or address and I can top up with cash.

Yes, very good. It's the people like you attract most attention, please continue...

Pondlife
30th October 2015, 20:52
Yes, very good. It's the people like you attract most attention, please continue...

My calls to the local taxi and pizza companies will divert a huge amount of scrutiny.

greenlake
30th October 2015, 21:11
My calls to the local taxi and pizza companies will divert a huge amount of scrutiny.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0noXEknyS5w/Tsu4buOSSnI/AAAAAAAAE3I/WMq0O1VdKME/s800/Girls-snorting-Cocaine-from-a-Pizza.jpg

SueEllen
31st October 2015, 04:37
I have a foreign SIM card that has no tie to my name or address and I can top up with cash.

You clearly haven't been topping it up ONLY with cash.

Anyway they will just use CCTV footage which loads of shops have as well as banks and random streets. They are only interested in CCTV footage if it's a "terrorist" or crime against the person.

lilelvis2000
31st October 2015, 21:49
I come here almost everyday...will the police than think this is a terrorist chat room?

EternalOptimist
31st October 2015, 21:57
I come here almost everyday...will the police than think this is a terrorist chat room?

Nope, the most they can get you on for coming here, is being a pdf file

AtW
31st October 2015, 22:07
I come here almost everyday...will the police than think this is a terrorist chat room?

Nope - people on here got big mouth to talk the talk but never walk the walk...


It's safer for the society to keep you lot on here though, I am sure admin is getting some tax kickback for keeping you all in one place - it's the only reason most people in General don't get banned :eyes

vetran
2nd November 2015, 11:26
Or gay men anally fisting their husbands, women who ejaculate, or people who like to pee on one another.

Security is one thing (and I still don't think it can be morally justified) but when they've already proven that they can't be trusted to have access to our data without discriminating against certain demographics (e.g. the previously mentioned gays who are overrepresented), then this sounds absurd.

So glad in the 50 Shades film they ruled it out...

LondonManc
2nd November 2015, 11:46
Can't believe people got excited when I googled about helping my uncle jack off a horse. By the time I'd been released, dear old Uncle Jack had fell off and broke his hip.

WTFH
2nd November 2015, 11:50
Does it matter that this was a made up scare story and that they have said they will NOT be looking at browser history?

rl4engc
2nd November 2015, 12:03
All theoretical obviously, but supposing someone used a VPN as they frequented lots of torrent sites.

They download this file: sometorrentsite.com/spectre.1080p.bluray.torrent

Would they be right in saying that the only thing the ISP would see was a secure connection from their router to [Some IP] which doing an nslookup would come back as somevpn.com ?

I.e. the ISP wouldn't see any connection from the persons router to [IP of sometorrentsite.com] Correct?

VectraMan
2nd November 2015, 12:16
All theoretical obviously, but supposing someone used a VPN as they frequented lots of torrent sites.

They download this file: sometorrentsite.com/spectre.1080p.bluray.torrent

Would they be right in saying that the only thing the ISP would see was a secure connection from their router to [Some IP] which doing an nslookup would come back as somevpn.com ?

I.e. the ISP wouldn't see any connection from the persons router to [IP of sometorrentsite.com] Correct?

Yep. Though if you're not using the VPN's DNS server they may see the DNS lookup of sometorrensite.com. And that's just the torrent file; if you were to drop your VPN connection then it would download via your normal (insecure) connection which they could see. And if you keep bittorrent running and so sharing, and you didn't have the VPN connected again the ISP could see that you were sharing that file.

And I guess if they really wanted to they could break the VPN encryption.

DaveB
2nd November 2015, 13:18
Does it matter that this was a made up scare story and that they have said they will NOT be looking at browser history?

We've already posted some actual facts further down the thread.


Linkies :

Top cops demand access to the UK's entire web browsing history (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/30/police_want_access_britons_browsing_histories/)
Investigatory Powers Bill to update UK communications data laws (http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2015/may/investigatory-powers-bill-to-update-uk-communications-data-laws/)
Q&A: what is the Investigatory Powers Bill? | The Times (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/defence/article4597808.ece) (paywall)

Resurrection of the original "Snoopers Charter" that was proposed by the Tories in the past government and scuppered by the LibDems.

Essentially an extension of what was required under RIPA but now becomes a blanket collection of internet usage metadata by ISP's. They will be required to log traffic info such as date, time, type of traffic and destination of anything that goes through their networks and keep it for later use by Law Enforcement agencies.

Using Private Browsing locally won't help you. That just stops it being saved in your browser history for when you are "Buying a surprise gift for your wife".

Using a VPN will hide the content but not the source and destination so they will still see you visiting www.Jihadies4You.com or sending an email to baddies@daesh.com

Even if you are jumping onto a Tor node the fact that you are doing that will still be logged. Same with going via a Proxy, that will be recorded and if the proxy is keeping logs they can go get those as well or get the ISP the proxy is on to give them the info on whats leaving the proxy.

Changing your IP won't help, DHCP records at the ISP will still link you to the ones you use if it's dynamic, or DNS records if you change it manually. It's all backed up so they can trawl through it if needs be.

As ever, the proposals are "For our own safety" and "in the interests of national security" but will doubtless come in very handy when the next "threat" is identified. Especially if it happens to be a civil liberties group, investigative journalists or anyone who disagrees with the government of the day.

WTFH
2nd November 2015, 13:24
We've already posted some actual facts further down the thread.



The most recent one of those was from 30/10.


On 31/10...
Theresa May forced to backtrack on internet 'snooping' plans | World news | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/31/theresa-may-backtracks-on-internet-snooping)


and then this...
Online surveillance bill 'will fall without judicial oversight' | Politics | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/online-surveillance-bill-will-fall-without-judicial-oversight-david-davis)


(linked to the gruniad because they don't have a paywall (FT), or a side bar of soft porn (DM) )

NickFitz
2nd November 2015, 13:47
Does it matter that this was a made up scare story and that they have said they will NOT be looking at browser history?

But they will be looking at browsing history :eyes

This stuff about them only seeing "a basic domain address, and not a full browsing history of pages within that site or search terms entered" is essentially meaningless.

To paraphrase the EFF presentation on the NSA's phone metadata-gathering activities: they'll know that somebody at your address went to the website of an escort agency, and a couple of weeks later to the site of an STD clinic, and a florist, and a jeweller; and that evening, somebody at your home went to the website of a local hotel, and a solicitor. But how could any of that basic information possibly reveal anything about your private life? :rolleyes:

MrMarkyMark
2nd November 2015, 13:53
This stuff about them only seeing "a basic domain address, and not a full browsing history of pages within that site or search terms entered" is essentially meaningless.

You are indeed correct, sir.


To paraphrase the EFF presentation on the NSA's phone metadata-gathering activities: they'll know that somebody at your address went to the website of an escort agency, and a couple of weeks later to the site of an STD clinic, and a florist, and a jeweller; and that evening, somebody at your home went to the website of a local hotel, and a solicitor. But how could any of that basic information possibly reveal anything about your private life?

I think I just felt a little bit of wee come out :laugh

WTFH
2nd November 2015, 13:58
I think I just felt a little bit of wee come out :laugh




Go home and google Tenna.

MrMarkyMark
2nd November 2015, 13:59
Go home and google Tenna.

Why not from client co :rolleyes:

SueEllen
2nd November 2015, 19:07
Heard something really scary on the way home. The bill will give HMRC the right to seize your computer to look for financial irregularities. :eek:

greenlake
2nd November 2015, 20:30
Go home and google Tenna.

Looks nice!

http://www.tr3ntino.it/images/cms/754x435/B-9608-tenna.jpg

Tenna - La perla della Valsugana - Trentino (http://www.tenna.info/)