Quoi de neuf ?

Bienvenue sur Psychonaut.fr !

Le forum des amateurs de drogues et des explorateurs de l'esprit

Wirtetapping by Canadian ISPs

  • Auteur de la discussion Auteur de la discussion GOD
  • Date de début Date de début

GOD

Holofractale de l'hypervérité
Inscrit
14/1/06
Messages
14 944
"Bill Forces Canadian ISPs to Install Wiretapping Equipment

Subscriber information to be released without warrants


Canada considers forcing ISPs to install wiretapping equipment on their networks

According to a new bill introduced in Canada, Internet service providers will have to dig deep into their own pockets in order to acquire, install and maintain "intercept-capable" equipment. The bill also makes it very clear that subscriber information must be released to law enforcement in a timely manner, without the need of warrants.

Speaking about the bill, Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan said that it did not increase the wiretapping powers of the police, but rather adapted the older legal framework to the new technological reality. Law enforcement agencies are already able to request the interception of communications based on a warrant, a requirement that will also be kept under the new proposed legislation.

However, the major problem was not the ability of law enforcement to request wiretapping, but the ability of providers to answer such requests. Many of them lack the necessary technology to intercept communications, thus becoming safe havens for outlaws. "They identify them and gravitate towards them to exploit them and continue their criminal activities undetected, out of the reach of the investigative powers of law enforcement," Minister Van Loan commented, according to CBC.

The matter of releasing customer information to the authorities was a subject of certain unclarity in the past, something that this new bill tries to address. Some ISPs were cooperating fairly well with law enforcement and were releasing subscriber information without being served with a warrant, while others feared that, if they did it, they could be sued under the Privacy Act.

Law enforcement officials expressed satisfaction with the bill, but representatives for the ISPs were not that happy. Their main concern was implementation costs, which could prove devastating for some smaller businesses. The government is ready to provide "reasonable compensations," but the ISPs will generally have to pay for the new equipment themselves. If the bill passes, companies will have 18 months to comply with its requirements, but the ones with under 100,000 subscribers will benefit from a three-year exemption.

A different bill introduced this week will require ISPs to preserve data related to certain communications or subscribers relevant to police investigations, based on a preservation order. The data can be later obtained through a production order or warrant. This doesn't pose any serious technical problems for ISPs, and is similar to the legislation in most Western countries. "
 
and is similar to the legislation in most Western countries. "

In Holland we have saying that go's like this "If one cheap jumps over the dam, the rest will follow."
 
Got a bill number for us GOD? I'd very much like to try and stop this. We have some of the best privacy laws in the world right now, I'd hate to see that flushed down the toilet.
 
onions anyone? http://www.torproject.org/
Its slow and it may seem to make sense if you have to use it (china, looking at sick shit you shouldnt perv, haxoring or exploring as it should be). But It needs to grow its like a protest, people need to show officials they demand anonymity by forcing it upon them.
 
mrvitorsky a dit:
onions anyone? http://www.torproject.org/
Its slow and it may seem to make sense if you have to use it (china, looking at sick shit you shouldnt perv, haxoring or exploring as it should be). But It needs to grow its like a protest, people need to show officials they demand anonymity by forcing it upon them.

Found that as soon as I read the article. First thing I did was look for (more) privacy tools.
 
Your best bet for the moment is still good 256 bit encryption... although they would be able to decrypt it if they had a good reason to.

But just think about how deep the subject of privacy goes... it honestly makes no sense at all. You think the government gives a shit if you grow 100 cannabis plants, or even if you synthetise hard drugs ? They honestly do not, depending on how deep you are willing to stand in the shit lake to hold their pathetic paradigm for them. Thats how the illuminati works, we are all initiates, and for them the net is part of their god figure Jahbulon.

Thats our job to discern, to use our free arbiter to judge how much it upsets you that the one world order is already here, mundane people are never going to bloom into a lotus, but they don't care if you do, cause the sun is eclipsed by the moon.

If you need privacy its because you have things to hide, obviously, or you can just settle for intimacy ? You HAVE intimacy with enCRYPTion... oh hmm lookie, is that a strange choice for a word or what ?

Up and down.
But in the end it's only round and round.
Haven't you heard it's a battle of words
The poster bearer cried.
Listen son, said the man with the gun
There's room for you inside.

"I mean, they're not gunna kill ya, so if you give 'em a quick short,
sharp, shock, they won't do it again. Dig it? I mean he get off
lightly, 'cos I would've given him a thrashing - I only hit him once!
It was only a difference of opinion, but really...I mean good manners
don't cost nothing do they, eh?"

d
 
Retour
Haut