Snoopers Charter

[All that jazz]

Tonsko said:

Can you summarise? Daily Mail is blocked on my filter.

Not sure if serious or trying to be funny.

[carinaman]

Former Detective Constable, black, female, former poster girl for the Met was off sick with depression, told her Police Federation rep she was going to Caribbean with her daughter, but not her police line Manager.

The Met. used anti-terror legislation to snoop on what she'd done.

A police officer invented something called the '2007 Police Act'. Seems such a law may not exist and the police officer that used it was criticised for a casual grasp of the law.

Checking on whether the '2007 Police Act' exists it returned this link from digital spy:

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=21...

[Tonsko]

Thanks carinaman. @allthatjazz it's true I've blocked the dailymail domain on my network filter.

[All that jazz]

Tonsko said:

Thanks carinaman. @allthatjazz it's true I've blocked the dailymail domain on my network filter.

I thought you couldn't access the link because it was blocked by someone else, which in a thread about snooping and censorship would be rather ironic.

[Jasandjules]

carinaman said:

Former Detective Constable, black, female, former poster girl for the Met was off sick with depression, told her Police Federation rep she was going to Caribbean with her daughter, but not her police line Manager.

And no officer is disciplined or sacked for it either.

Who watches the watchers? This is why such powers should not exist in what is supposed to be a free country.

[glazbagun]

Hre we go. A week into the collection of your web history (because terrorism), ISP's warning those believed to be downloading pirated content. And the digital economy bill yet to come...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38583357

[rscott]

glazbagun said:

Hre we go. A week into the collection of your web history (because terrorism), ISP's warning those believed to be downloading pirated content. And the digital economy bill yet to come...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38583357

Unrelated to the recent Act though. The letters are based on information from content producers. The records required to be captured by the new Act aren't sufficient to identify what a device was actually doing .

[jjlynn27]

glazbagun said:

Hre we go. A week into the collection of your web history (because terrorism), ISP's warning those believed to be downloading pirated content. And the digital economy bill yet to come...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38583357

Had to double check the date your post. Only peer2peer, does anyone actually uses that anymore?

[Einion Yrth]

jjlynn27 said:

Had to double check the date your post. Only peer2peer, does anyone actually uses that anymore?

I guess you've never heard of BitTorrent. Often used to share completely legit stuff BTW, should you bother to look it up.

[Jonesy23]

glazbagun said:

Hre we go. A week into the collection of your web history (because terrorism), ISP's warning those believed to be downloading pirated content. And the digital economy bill yet to come...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38583357

a) 'Nice unfounded allegation you've been spreading there.'
b) 'Prove it.'

It sounds like this is a third party harvesting peer/seed data then getting the ISPs to forward letters; I know they were roped into this but history has proven these sorts of accusations often don't stand up to scrutiny and it's hardly likely to endear you to the ISP if they send you something like this. Though they have held off for years.

[p1stonhead]

Jonesy23 said:

glazbagun said:

Hre we go. A week into the collection of your web history (because terrorism), ISP's warning those believed to be downloading pirated content. And the digital economy bill yet to come...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38583357

a) 'Nice unfounded allegation you've been spreading there.'
b) 'Prove it.'

It sounds like this is a third party harvesting peer/seed data then getting the ISPs to forward letters; I know they were roped into this but history has proven these sorts of accusations often don't stand up to scrutiny and it's hardly likely to endear you to the ISP if they send you something like this. Though they have held off for years.

I was going to ask how they would track someone streaming. I'm guessing it's very difficult. Does anyone download illegal stuff these days now that streaming sites exist?

[glazbagun]

p1stonhead said:

I was going to ask how they would track someone streaming. I'm guessing it's very difficult. Does anyone download illegal stuff these days now that streaming sites exist?

Game of Thrones and The Grand Tour/latest US shows are still torrented a whole load. I agree that pinning down the actual end user of a connection is difficult, but perhaps it's hoped that even by putting this in the news it will reduce things.

Re:tracking streaming, surely if the ISP logging each site you visit for the govt and one of those is streampiratestuff.com then the evidence is there. The snoopers charter doesn't allow it to be used unless requested by a particular govt agency, so can't be behind this particular spate of emails, but it might be enough to scare people. Surely if they wanted to charge you with something it would be easy to then ask the ISP for your log as you are being charged with a crime?

[768]

glazbagun said:

Re:tracking streaming, surely if the ISP logging each site you visit for the govt and one of those is streampiratestuff.com then the evidence is there.

That you went to a website, discovered it wasn't legit and decided not to download stuff? Assuming SSL/TLS, DPI might signal that you did more than that, but maybe you downloaded a Linux ISO.

The easier way is to simply connect as a peer and wait for a client to connect, then send the IP and file details onto the owning ISP.

[techguyone]

Yes that's how the speculative wkers did it, no one with any sense uses p2p for downloading illegal media anymore

In other news (sorry it's a few days old)

Legal challenge launched

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38565083

I don't know if any ISP's have (yet) started to collect, there probably isn't any way to find out either.

[Tonsko]

techguyone said:

Yes that's how the speculative wkers did it, no one with any sense uses p2p for downloading illegal media anymore

Nonsense.

[wc98]

techguyone said:

Yes that's how the speculative wkers did it, no one with any sense uses p2p for downloading illegal media anymore

In other news (sorry it's a few days old)

Legal challenge launched

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38565083

I don't know if any ISP's have (yet) started to collect, there probably isn't any way to find out either.

personally i have no problem with people being prosecuted for downloading material they should be paying for. same for people using dodgy boxes to watch sky/virgin content for free.
if everyone did it there would be no money made to make the content in the first place. the dodgy boxes is a real piss boiler for me as i have a couple of friends that earn serious money that have used them in the past though i suppose level of earnings is no indicator of greed or ignorance.

[techguyone]

Tonsko said:

techguyone said:

Yes that's how the speculative wkers did it, no one with any sense uses p2p for downloading illegal media anymore

Nonsense.

You could of course use a seedbox or a VPN to get around that, but for the users who were just openly downloading p2p illegal media, it's not nonsense at all.

How else did you think the speculative letters assholes got that information?

[8bit]

SystemParanoia said:

Using Streisand... Absolutely fantastic!
was a nightmare to set it up on debian jessie, so i just did as i was supposed to and ran the install on an ubuntu 16.04 vm..

10mins later.. job done.. effortless!

So I set up a little Ubuntu droplet on Digital Ocean recently and got streisand running fine. I can connect with L2TP/IPSec using my Android phone and that seems to work from pretty much anywhere over wifi or 4G. Couldn't get my Windows 10 PC to connect the same way but I think that may be an issue with Windows IPSec implementation when the device is behind a NAT firewall.

I have a number of devices I want to route through my VPN and some that I don't (things we run iPlayer on, for example as these won't work if they think you're in another country). I had planned to just configure VPN connections individually on the devices that I do want protected and leave the others to just go over the internet as normal but apparently L2TP/IPsec will only work for one client behind a single NAT firewall at a time.

Do you or anyone else here know of another way around that? I have a Draytek router, I work in IT but not networks so I'm not totally clued up on VPN technologies but not totally clueless, I presume the Draytek could be set up to run a tunnel from there and only channel certain devices on the LAN side through it but I haven't got that far into it yet.

[NoIP]

Does anyone here use a VPN provider other than Cyberghost? Any recommendations? (not Streisand, thanks)

I'm coming to the end of my term with Cyberghost and their actual VPN service has been good, but I begrudge paying extra for more than one device and that really annoys me when I use my laptop as I have to queue to use their free service and the constant ad pop-ups with offers piss me off no end. I am aware I can disconnect the VPN account from my primary device and use it on my laptop, but it involves going into the settings each time to re-assign the device which is also annoying.

Wondering if there's a better option out there for the same money which will allow more than 1 device? I mostly connect through Holland, France and Germany but need UK as well for some sites.

[glazbagun]

Digital Economy bill on it's way now. In 9 months any legal porn site will require you to somehow prove your age or else risk being blocked and having their payment provider leaned on to cut their funding. How to prove one's age has yet to be determined, however. Anyone would think they haven't thought it through!

Maximum penalty for piracy has been raised to ten years, too. So half of the F1 and Game of Thrones viewers on here will be fked!

Anyone want to guess how long before they try to make VPN's either illegal or require a licence?