Comment on London's police asked Big Tech for private communications data over 700,000 times last year
Corporal_Punishment@feddit.uk 1 week agoTo help understand, it might be useful to know that the basic principle in the UK is that communications networks are considered to be a public utility. Anything you do on that network is considered to be a public communication. Now the detail of what you’re actually doing is hidden becaise of encryption. But your identity is not.
Its the same principle as if you call or text people. Your phone number,like your IP is owned by the service provider.
Finding out who the IP is registered to is no different than asking a mobile company who the number belongs to.
Same as your car number plate.
Looking up an identifier to see who it is linked to isn’t an abuse of process
Hirom@beehaw.org 1 week ago
Thanks for the background, I’m not familiar with UK’s regulation on telcos.
I stand corrected, this isn’t like wiretap as the article mention Communication Data (CD) is metadata rather than content. It’s still very intrusive as it show who is talking to who, when, and possibily where (location is metadata).
The scale is still surprising, what kind of crime is London police investigating at a scale of 700k (or even 100k) a year ? It still beaches privacy so it should be proportional. It make sense to make access to metadata a bit easier than metadata+content. That’s food for thought for citizens and lawmakers.
Corporal_Punishment@feddit.uk 1 week ago
I agree, 700k is suspiciously high but without additional information its hard to say what is driving it. Unless each separate component of a request is considered to be a separate request. But who knows
Hirom@beehaw.org 1 week ago
Apparently not the public. Lack of transparency makes it hard for citizens and lawmakers to make informed policy decisions.
Corporal_Punishment@feddit.uk 1 week ago
I agree