Bob E sent me this splendid spoof of a BBC article:
The Home Office says it has no current plans to force the Royal Mail to store data on all letters and postcards passing through its system.
The provision is included in the government's draft communications data bill, published this week. But the Home Office said the bill would just maintain existing powers relating to postal data. And it stressed that only data about mail - not its contents - would be retained if the law was ever enacted.
Under the draft bill, the Royal Mail and other postal services could be asked to retain "anything written on the outside" of items for up to 12 months so they can be accessed by the police, security services and HM Revenue and Customs.
But a Home Office spokesman said only information relating to the "communications data of mail — who sent the letter to whom, when it was sent and the origin and destination" would, potentially, be stored.
Ah... right.
Dark thoughts
2 hours ago
2 comments:
Didn't you know, the RM was originally intended for a tool to spy for the king?
I actually know a bit about what this bill is about. As in, why it's being introduced. Make your own mind up about what's being proposed is right or not, but this needs to be explained more fully than either side is talking about it (all debate on TV and radio is shallow).
Roll back 10 years, or even perhaps, 5 years. How did people communicate with each other on the internet? Well, they either sent emails, or else visited web sites. Scanning email headers or examining basic log information (like URL of a web site), or knowing who sent a phone call or SMS to who was good enough to know who was talking to who.
Roll forward to today and you've got things like Google talk (that thing where you click a sidebar and can send a message) or else you can send an email to someone via Gmail. As far as the current data goes, all it tells you is that you were on Gmail, not that you sent someone an email, or even who you sent it to. In other words, this isn't about opening up a letter, it's about not being able to see the address, or even if a letter was sent.
If the likes of Henry Porter can come up with an alternative to what is being proposed, then let's hear it, because despite my deep reservations about giving the state power in most situations, this is one of those times where it's necessary.
Post a Comment