Private firm may track all email and calls

[Eugen Leitl]

(Ahahahahaha).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/dec/31/privacy-civil-liberties


Private firm may track all email and calls

'Hellhouse' of personal data will be created, warns former DPP

Alan Travis and Richard Norton-Taylor
    
The Guardian, Wednesday 31 December 2008

The private sector will be asked to manage and run a communications database
that will keep track of everyone's calls, emails, texts and internet use
under a key option contained in a consultation paper to be published next
month by Jacqui Smith, the home secretary.

A cabinet decision to put the management of the multibillion pound database
of all UK communications traffic into private hands would be accompanied by
tougher legal safeguards to guarantee against leaks and accidental data
losses.

But in his strongest criticism yet of the superdatabase, Sir Ken Macdonald,
the former director of public prosecutions, who has firsthand experience of
working with intelligence and law enforcement agencies, told the Guardian
such assurances would prove worthless in the long run and warned it would
prove a "hellhouse" of personal private information.

"Authorisations for access might be written into statute. The most senior
ministers and officials might be designated as scrutineers. But none of this
means anything," said Macdonald. "All history tells us that reassurances like
these are worthless in the long run. In the first security crisis the locks
would loosen."

The home secretary postponed the introduction of legislation to set up the
superdatabase in October and instead said she would publish a consultation
paper in the new year setting out the proposal and the safeguards needed to
protect civil liberties. She has emphasised that communications data, which
gives the police the identity and location of the caller, texter or web
surfer but not the content, has been used as important evidence in 95% of
serious crime cases and almost all security service operations since 2004
including the Soham and 21/7 bombing cases.

Until now most communications traffic data has been held by phone companies
and internet service providers for billing purposes but the growth of
broadband phone services, chatrooms and anonymous online identities mean that
is no longer the case.

The Home Office's interception modernisation programme, which is working on
the superdatabase proposal, argues that it is no longer good enough for
communications companies to be left to retrieve such data when requested by
the police and intelligence services. A Home Office spokeswoman said last
night the changes were needed so law enforcement agencies could maintain
their ability to tackle serious crime and terrorism.

Senior Whitehall officials responsible for planning for a new database say
there is a significant difference between having access to "communications
data" - names and addresses of emails or telephone numbers, for example - and
the actual contents of the communications. "We have been very clear that
there are no plans for a database containing any content of emails, texts or
conversations," the spokeswoman said.

External estimates of the cost of the superdatabase have been put as high as
#12bn, twice the cost of the ID cards scheme, and the consultation paper, to
be published towards the end of next month, will include an option of putting
it into the hands of the private sector in an effort to cut costs. But such a
decision is likely to fuel civil liberties concerns over data losses and
leaks. Macdonald, who left his post as DPP in October, told the Guardian:
"The tendency of the state to seek ever more powers of surveillance over its
citizens may be driven by protective zeal. But the notion of total security
is a paranoid fantasy which would destroy everything that makes living
worthwhile. We must avoid surrendering our freedom as autonomous human beings
to such an ugly future. We should make judgments that are compatible with our
status as free people."

Maintaining the capacity to intercept suspicious communications was critical
in an increasingly complex world, he said. "It is a process which can save
lives and bring criminals to justice. But no other country is considering
such a drastic step. This database would be an unimaginable hell-house of
personal private information," he said. "It would be a complete readout of
every citizen's life in the most intimate and demeaning detail. No government
of any colour is to be trusted with such a roadmap to our souls."

The moment there was a security crisis the temptation for more commonplace
access would be irresistible, he said.

Other critics of the plan point to the problems of keeping the database
secure, both from the point of view of the technology and of deliberate
leaks. The problem would be compounded if private companies manage the
system. "If there is a breach of security in that database it would be
utterly devastating," one said.