back to article Wasn't too hard, was it? UK has made 'significant progress' in spy control

The UK's surveillance regime is no longer "worse than scary" – but there are still a number of imperfections, the UN special rapporteur on the right to privacy has said. Over the past week, Joseph Cannataci has met public bodies, spy agencies, civil rights groups, politicians and the judiciary to assess the UK's privacy and …

  1. smudge
    Black Helicopters

    "hands dirty"

    There should also be a "strong contingent" of techies who were able to "get their hands dirty" with the nitty-gritty checking of spy agencies' systems.

    Yeah, right. As if the spooks would let an outsider touch their systems. Even if they had the necessary stratospheric clearance, need-to-know would surely be used to deny access.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Black Helicopters

    "Intelligence sharing must not result in a backdoor to obtain or facilitate for others the obtaining of intelligence free from domestic safeguards, nor a loophole for foreign Governments with lower standards on the protection of privacy (or other human rights) to obtain intelligence from UK intelligence"

    Preach!!! However, I fear that this is at least part of the reason that the 5 Eyes alliance is in place.

  3. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Gimp

    "could possibly pass the test of necessity and proportionality,""

    Because it's not?

    But then who thinks holding every car number plate going through ANPR for 5 years is either "necessary" or "proportionate" ?

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: "could possibly pass the test of necessity and proportionality,""

      The Police and the home secretary ?

    2. David 164

      Re: "could possibly pass the test of necessity and proportionality,""

      Can you prove it isn't?

      1. David 164

        Re: "could possibly pass the test of necessity and proportionality,""

        So from the five that voted me down, I take that as a no, you can't disprove the government claims that it needs these records for 5 years.

  4. adnim
    Joke

    "Wasn't too hard, was it? UK has made 'significant progress' in spy control"

    They shut down GCHQ?

    1. David 164

      Re: "Wasn't too hard, was it? UK has made 'significant progress' in spy control"

      Nah of cause not, they just have to palm some more work out to the NSA, ASD, CSE, NZSIS. An of cause congress pass some laws restricting NSA, so GCHQ been doing the job NSA no longer allowed to do, whilst NSA being doing the work GCHQ is no longer allow to. An if either of those agencies can't do the job they ask the other three to see if they can.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The UK's surveillance regime is no longer "worse than scary"

    So "just as bad as scary" then ?

    If the members of the Government have got nothing to hide then they've nothing to Fear.

    ... and therefore certainly nothing they can be blackmailed over to be forced to continue or pass adverse legislation.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I'm sure Joseph Cannataci had a nice expensive lunch in Cheltenham.....

    Quote: "...Joseph Cannataci has met public bodies, spy agencies, civil rights groups, politicians and the judiciary to assess the UK's privacy and surveillance set up..."

    *

    As we learned from the Snowden disclosures, what "spy agencies" and "public bodies" admit to doing, and what they are actually doing are worlds apart. Some examples:

    [GCHQ Hacks our friends in Belgium]

    https://theintercept.com/2014/12/13/belgacom-hack-gchq-inside-story/

    [HMRC builds secret voiceprint database] https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/06/25/hmrc_taxpayer_voiceprints_legal_basis_gdpr_questioned_database/

    [Interpol builds secret voiceprint database]

    https://theintercept.com/2018/06/25/interpol-voice-identification-database/

    The last two items have been in the news in the last month. What else is going on? It would be prudent to work on the assumption that privacy is non-existent, and that GDPR is simply a useful political fiction to hide that fact.

    1. Waseem Alkurdi

      Re: I'm sure Joseph Cannataci had a nice expensive lunch in Cheltenham.....

      t would be prudent to work on the assumption that privacy is non-existent, and that GDPR is simply a useful political fiction to hide that fact.

      Well, better safe than sorry, they say?

      I believe that the whole concept of the Internet is fundamentally flawed, because it was built upon having no privacy.

      To fix "privacy", the idea of a data-driven economy needs to be revised, if not eradicated.

      But how "realistic" is that?

      1. David 164

        Re: I'm sure Joseph Cannataci had a nice expensive lunch in Cheltenham.....

        An do the general public even want that? A lot of these discussions are being led by people with agendas more complex than just providing the public with privacy.

        1. ardj

          Re: I'm sure Joseph Cannataci had a nice expensive lunch in Cheltenham.....

          @David 164: Ah yes, the Russians are coming. Well, maybe you didn't quite mean that. But, leaving aside Saudi Arabia chairing the UN Human Rights Council, surely those who are with us are for the most part not against us, or something ?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like