"into a personal relationship with the third party/group member."
As if there aren't enough opportunities for official cyber stalking.
A Scottish council has published a new policy paper which justifies its "investigating officers" creating fake accounts for snooping purposes on social media, though it denies ever having conducted such covert surveillance. Bordering the city of Edinburgh, East Lothian Council has published a nine-page Surveillance through …
True. The correct policy, which would have satisfied the law, would have been "It is not acceptable for any member of the council to create a false social media profiles for the purpose of their employment. Anyone found to have done so will be dismissed, and appropriate legal investigations begun. Anyone who knew about it and failed to report it will also be dismissed, and legal options considered." It could also put in a statement about use of information found through social contacts of any type outside of work, too.
The fact that the council didn't do this undermines their argument that they would never do it.
Wouldn't deliberately creating an account with false details be in breach of Facebook's user agreement, and therefore constitute unauthorised use?
Wouldn't that in turn be illegal under the Computer Misuse Act?
If the want information on peoples' Facebook account, they should get a secret court order and/or intercept the data like all the other agencies seem to be doing.
The legality is suspect, but surely this fails the basic moral sniff test:
- Would I want someone to investigate me in this manner?
- Would I do this to a friend or family member?
- Would I want this on the front page of a national newspaper?
- Would I want this detailed on my CV?
It's not so much the investigation of criminals that is the issue, but the investigation of people who are *not* criminals. We have the police to investigate possible crimes, we do not need council jobsworths who fancies themselves as being a budding Sherlock Holmes sticking their oars in. Things such as putting rubbish in the wrong bin are not serious enough to justify such deception and intrusions of privacy.
I can understand why you'd say with that kind of thing being bandied about by the London centric media.
But there's a massive hint that the council isn't led by the SNP in the Scotsman story: no political party is mentioned.
Actually the majority of councils in Scotland are not controlled the SNP - again something that some might find surprising in a "one party state"...
As it turns out, East Lothian council is led by a Labour/tory/independent coalition: http://www.eastlothian.gov.uk/info/695/council_information_performance_and_statistics/625/who_runs_the_council
That type of arrangement is actually far from uncommon.
It is not clear in what circumstances a covert identity would be necessary to access the information contained in a private group on Facebook. RIPSA legislation already allows for a wide number of authorities to seek the info directly from Facebook.
Presumably it's for when they seek to entrap a suspect into revealing something that Facebook really would not have any details on after weaselling their way into their lives - "I conned them into paying for kids I did not have and for a house I did not own. Have you ever pulled a fast one on the council and got away with it?".
Yes, this is a perfect answer for why in 2016, we will tell you that your experience is totally out of date and you are no longer employable, despite all that "valuable mainframe experience" in the 70s... go and get your pension granddad... and let the current generation who understand social networks actually talk sense instead of your sweary old nonsense.
Are you sure that your syrname isn't 'Clarkson'?
As for retiring because my experience is out of date?
Are you kidding. My 30+ years of connecting all sorts of stuff up and making it work pays very well. Why should I retire when I'm earning close to 6 figures a year? And, I'm enjoying myself as well.
A lot of you young whippersnappers are still wet behind the ears when it comes to large scale integration design and implementation. The cost of the buildings and plant on my present project is well in excess of $450M. This is a far cry from making a few webpages or a phone app.
Ah! Another 16 year old numpty who thinks he has all the answers because he is, well, young!
The people who really understand Social Networking are the ones who invented and own it ( Mostly not so young) and are making billions out of the 'Generation That Understands Social Networks' like you.
Tell us about your day, did you have a good experience in the toilet this morning or anything else that is life changingly rivettingly important?
Jeremy, I was going to throw a tantrum at you for that, but then decided to click on your name and see what you had to say before (very social networky of me, wont you agree?), so I'll just write this off as an attempted sarcasm, or pointing out how HR drones work now in an exaggerated way.
I was asked for my FB account as well at applications, and was frowned upon when explaining I didn't have one, and even if I did I wouldn't accept "friend" requests from non-friends.
Anyways, if I was a job hunter and got a resume which fielded "understand social networks", I'd find them a nice job as a internet cafe desk admin at most.
Now if it was "understand how social networks work, technically, and how to keep things secure", they might have a chance to do something more useful.
@Jeremy
I've been challenged at interviews for not having a social media profile (of any kind) before.
However, when I explained that since they were hiring me to design the security for their entire global network and the less people knew about me the better, they got the point.
There's nothing that shouts 'breach of contract' quicker than being targeted by state-level hackers so they can take all those designs of their actual target and use them, nefariously :)
"the less people knew about me the better"
Just over a decade ago you could search the internet for "Secret Project" + CV and get all the main engineers involved. They'd boast about it online, perhaps inadvertently through recruitment agencies.
In 2003 I found the main engineer behind the UK's '4 minute warning' of a nuclear attack. Brian Dreary. I wanted to trigger the warning, at least for high ranking officials, but I was persuaded by a wiser soul that was irresponsible and potentially dangerous.
For the record, at that time at least, the 'four minute warning' consisted of a pre-recorded telephone call to every British land-line, telling you Armageddon was imminent but not to panic. Guess whose voice they used to reassure us? Joanna Lumley!
Good choice. My plan was to either steal the recording or hire a voice impersonator, and call all the key folk just to panic them into heart attacks. I was talked out of that but I sort of wish I had.
"Highly unlikely" does not cut it. Government has no right to do spy on citizens, period.
Take whatever lines concerning this practice out and clean up the practice.
Change "is highly unlikely to" to "is legally obliged NOT to" and things will be slightly better.
" ... a policy must be put in place to include all eventualities even if they are not used."
So how about "entering into a personal relationship with the third party/group member" in meatspace, not cyberspace? As practised by the Met Police.
It's an "eventuality", so what does their policy say?
I actually did have someone try to break my door down this morning (well, afternoon) - it was the police.
Sent by mental health services. I told the police to fuck off. They were good about it. They had their time wasted too. All because someone wanted to be passive-aggressive. These fuckers have power. Don't deal with them. Especially if you have problems. They are incompetent and dangerous. I'm talking about any of the council government services now. Not the police. I criticise them elsewhere, but here I have nothing but good to say about them - lovely ladies they were.
Last time I had the police breaking my door down was when my stalker called them from another country. Same shit, different day.
I have never once had the police darken my doorstep for any other reason what so ever.
I wonder what the neighbours think? All these police turning up, hammering at my door, me with my headphones on and sleeping. Yes, last time I had my headphones on and was sleeping in the day when they came. This time too. I just send them packing. They must think it is a new way of dealing with the police, just tell them to do one and they go away. Perhaps they see more as a hero than a paedeophile. Guess I'll never know as they never talk to me.
Whatever next, getting S.W.A.T.T.E.D. by the fucking council coz you had the temerity to request the bin men don't chuck all the bins all over the floor after we have lovingly stacked them up and ordered them for them?
I spent about 20 hours on the phone to them and suffered much abuse. And the best part is, like your local housing association, they can access your medical files, if they feel like it.
You jest, but...
Sorry, this one rung a bell with me (or rather reminded me of my door coming off it's fucking hinges at 2pm in the afternoon when I was trying to get some shut-eye).
I'm ok now. Thanks for listening. As you were. It was a bit of a shock, but I'll get over it at some point...
Thank you for your sincere concern on an otherwise traumatic day JJ Carter.
The GP has nothing to do with the meds. Besides, I don't take meds as they are absolutely totally irrefutably useless for dealing with my extremely rare condition: Not being a bastard in a society full of bastards.
Bitter, maybe. But I don't torture kittens, and I help old people across the road, so I can't be that much of a fucking menace to others.
However, make an out of place comment to an authority driven jobsworth, because you are on the spectrum, and well, get a rude awakening.
Thanks for taking the time. I'll tell Dr. Payne you sent me.
My new Facebook friend told me that if I falsified X on my application, I could get benefit Y from the West Lothian Council and "totally get away with it".
Getting East Lothian residents to claim benefits from West Lothian Council would be a neat idea, at least for East Lothian Council. I wonder if that was their plan all along.
Who knew they were as 'into' the fascist totalitarian thing as much as everyone else?
Like the named person scheme, where perfectly happy healthy kids have to have a guardian of the state, up to 4 of them in fact, to check that they are being treated well at home, that their gender issues are being dealt with in a serious manner by their parents, that they got jam on their toast that morning, and that mummy and daddy don't smoke lots of dope before having it off in the greenhouse.
This is fascism. This is totalitarianism. It can have no other name.
They had the power a while back, and then they worked out the best way to abuse that power with impunity.
The message is clear: Do not go on fcukbook. You will be tracked. Do not go doing anything without knowing, we are watching you, and we have spies, you know. In fact, don't even go on the internet, except for when we tell you to sign in for the daily 2 minutes of hate. And we'll know if you do go on the internet. Because we are watching every single little thing you do.
Be seeing you....
Oh, the Scots are way more into totalitarianism than the rest of the UK.
But you know what? All this handwringing about privacy from the rest of the UK is pretty hollow, too. In Britain's finest hour, when it stood alone against the forces of totalitarianism and fascism...
... that was when people were positively encouraged to go through their neighbours' rubbish, and rat on them if they were throwing out too much food.
And that's not an isolated example. Extreme, maybe, but not isolated. "Privacy" in Britain is a very recent invention, it simply doesn't mean what most of the younger generation think it does.
What I do in the privacy of my own home is none of the government's business. Not because they don't or can't know what it is - long before I ever saw a computer, I was resigned to the fact that they absolutely can know that if they want to - but because it's nothing that requires them to intervene. That's the hill we should be fighting on - not criminalising behaviours that don't harm anyone in the first place - not "no spying".
There was a massive embarrassment when Argyll and Bute council bullied an 8 year old girl for letting people find out what school dinners were like. It happenned because one of their communications team was doing the fake social media thing. This meant the whole team were on administrative leave when the schoolgirl hit the press and the story was addressed by ... one of the cleaners or something. Anyway, not someone with any PR skillz.
This post has been deleted by its author
Inaccurate and misleading article.
East Lothian Council detailed in a public paper the full powers available to all councils under current RIPSA legislation. Following advice provided by the Scrutiny Commissioner to update, taking into account social media, the policy was debated at a public Cabinet meeting on Tuesday. The meeting heard that the use of fake social media accounts had never been undertaken at the council and, following cross party approval, the decision was taken that it would never be used.
Unfortunately a local paper chose to inaccurately report this matter and despite a full and clear discussion with a representative from The Register this inaccuracy continues.
For those interested in finding out more about East Lothian Council’s Data Protection, Freedom of Information and RIPSA policies please contact foi@eastlothian.gov.uk
For similar approaches also see:
https://www.dartford.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/79502/LSP-RIPA-Guide-for-Officers-February-2015.pdf
http://eastdevon.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/council-business/our-key-policies/directed-surveillance-and-covert-human-intelligence-sources-policy/use-of-social-media-in-gathering-evidence/
We have reported that it is only a matter of current council policy not to engage in covert surveillance through social media. That such surveillance is a capability of the council's, provided by law, is indisputable, and is the reason the council has been required to publish this policy document.
A fair reading of our coverage will either determine that there is (a) never going to be an incident in which the council uses these powers, in which case they should not exist, or (b) that there may well come a time in which the council has met the proportionality requirements to use these powers, in which case their existence and the council's internal guidance regarding them should be brought to public attention.
It may additionally be noted that there is no indication that the council supports the repeal of these powers' inclusion in RIPSA.
What you don't seem to get, Mr Martin, is that this is really a non-starter as most other councils, particularly in England, have had these policies in places for ages. Here's a council that finally catches up because it has been told to do so by the Regulator, and they do so in a nice open way and then they get grief for it. Wow. Responsible reporting. But hey, why let the truth get in the way of a nice sensationalist story that can really incite the conspiracy theorists....
Since you are now monitoring this website, how about you explain your "We didn't do it, but if if we did do it, this is how we did it" OJ Simpson defence?
While you are at it, do you want to explain why council-tax payers money is used to promote and fund the singing career of one Rena Gertz?
"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you."
I'm not quite sure what you want me to say - I don't know these people, I do not live in East Lothian, why ask me weird stuff like this? All I can see is you racially abusing somebody who, I assume from your comments, is German and who seems to sing. What on earth does that have to do with the matter here?
Councillor Willie Innes, council leader, said the policy would protect staff and was simply the council acting responsibly. He said: “We are using all mechanisms possible to protect the public and the public expect us to do that, as well as ensuring people’s privacy is maintained.”
Councillor Stuart Currie, SNP opposition leader, said while the measures appeared draconian they were, in reality, the council catching up with social media. He said: “We are only going to use these sorts of powers when it is appropriate. It is about prevention of crime and protecting the public.”
http://www.eastlothiancourier.com/news/14485943.Council_workers_given_guidelines_on_how_to_snoop_on_people_through_Facebook
Who's off-message?