Confidentiality

[Emigre]

On what grounds would Admin of this site release registration details to UK or overseas authorities? What documentation, if any, would site admin require to see before releasing details? Would a simple request from the police, without evidence of any impropriety, be sufficient?

[Scotchpie]

I'm intrigued. Why ask?

[Emigre]

This is an open forum where we are disguised only by our user names. We discuss issues and concerns. In the Accounting/Legal end of the Board eg IR35 issues are regularly and widely debated. Those individuals could represent good targets for HMRC investigations.

There was an issue I remember a few months ago when the police were involved with 1 or more member of this site. As an example on what basis/evidence were their identities given up?

[pmeswani]

On what grounds would Admin of this site release registration details to UK or overseas authorities? What documentation, if any, would site admin require to see before releasing details? Would a simple request from the police, without evidence of any impropriety, be sufficient?

They could request the information via Interpol, or via the Home Secretary Office / UK Police, if they have reason to believe if you have broken the law by virtue of a posting / activity on this site. Otherwise, they have not jurisdiction. AFAIK.

IANAL

[DaveB]

IANAL

They can request data held under the terms of the Data Protection Act via a warrant specifically for that information. If the custodian of that information feels the warrant is not specific enough or not correctly presented they can refuse it. They can request other information as they see fit. If the request is refused then they can can obtain it under warrant anyway.

In the case of a bulletin board like CUK the account names and IP logs of user activity would not fall under Data Protection so would not specifically require a warrent to obtain.

Going to the ISP's concerned to find out who owns the account used on that IP address would be covered by data protection and would require a warrant.

On top of this you can add in powers under the RIPA which allows them to compell service providers to retain information about all communication activity including emails, web surfing, IM etc for a specific individual. The provider is not allowed to disclose or discuss the fact that they are doing it or the fact that they are working under a RIPA instruction, even internally, under penalty of prosection and jail time. The term "Provider" include ISP's, Universities, colleges and anyone else providing access to the internet or other communications directly or indirectly.

Finally there is legislation in place under the Computer Misuse Act that allows Police to legally "hack" the computers of suspect individuals including the use of viruses, trojans, keylogging software, wireless network intrusion etc.

Essentially, if the Police or security services want information about an individual from a provider they can get it. One way or another.

[Emigre]

IANAL

They can request data held under the terms of the Data Protection Act via a warrant specifically for that information. If the custodian of that information feels the warrant is not specific enough or not correctly presented they can refuse it. They can request other information as they see fit. If the request is refused then they can can obtain it under warrant anyway.

In the case of a bulletin board like CUK the account names and IP logs of user activity would not fall under Data Protection so would not specifically require a warrent to obtain.

Going to the ISP's concerned to find out who owns the account used on that IP address would be covered by data protection and would require a warrant.

On top of this you can add in powers under the RIPA which allows them to compell service providers to retain information about all communication activity including emails, web surfing, IM etc for a specific individual. The provider is not allowed to disclose or discuss the fact that they are doing it or the fact that they are working under a RIPA instruction, even internally, under penalty of prosection and jail time. The term "Provider" include ISP's, Universities, colleges and anyone else providing access to the internet or other communications directly or indirectly.

Finally there is legislation in place under the Computer Misuse Act that allows Police to legally "hack" the computers of suspect individuals including the use of viruses, trojans, keylogging software, wireless network intrusion etc.

Essentially, if the Police or security services want information about an individual from a provider they can get it. One way or another.

Thank you. This is a very full response for a non-lawyer. Bottom line then is that for most requests, at least as far as CUK is concerned, it will be at the discretion of Admin.

[HairyArsedBloke]

Those individuals could represent good targets for HMRC investigations.

Actually, I've checked before - they can't do anything even if they trace me.

Message for Hector:

[BrilloPad]

I'm intrigued. Why ask?

Certain people on bn66 thread have implied that if they lose they would move abroad. HMRC might think these people worthy of jeopardy assessments.

[BrilloPad]

Thank you. This is a very full response for a non-lawyer. Bottom line then is that for most requests, at least as far as CUK is concerned, it will be at the discretion of Admin.

Admin seems quite happy to hand anything over at any time for a quiet life.

Though in the case a few months ago the police did not want much so no harm done.

[dude69]

Admin seems quite happy to hand anything over at any time for a quiet life.

Though in the case a few months ago the police did not want much so no harm done.

What did the police want?