dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
10

hm
@videotron.ca

hm to resa1983

Anon

to resa1983

Re: Government killing online surveillance bill

said by resa1983:

Lawful Access is Dead; Long Live Lawful Intercept
»www.christopher-parsons. ··· tercept/

Chris Parsons puts out good stuff. But usually a heavy read that requires 2 readings. Just looked at it fast, and yup... with the references, that is a 4 coffee reading (I measure time by coffee, pls synchronize your logs files to that).

Short version:
It's not dead. It's just been shuffled into something else. It's out of the fire and into the frying pan.

JunjiHiroma
Live Free Or Die
join:2008-03-18
Renfrew, ON

JunjiHiroma

Member

said by hm :

said by resa1983:

Lawful Access is Dead; Long Live Lawful Intercept
»www.christopher-parsons. ··· tercept/

Chris Parsons puts out good stuff. But usually a heavy read that requires 2 readings. Just looked at it fast, and yup... with the references, that is a 4 coffee reading (I measure time by coffee, pls synchronize your logs files to that).

Short version:
It's not dead. It's just been shuffled into something else. It's out of the fire and into the frying pan.

Just like how CISPA's returning and SOPA's back under a new name (SNOPA).It doesn't matter how these governments slice it,it's the SAME bill with the same wording,just with a bill name change.Even with different wording, it is STILL a bad bill which the government wants to push onto the internet users.This internet snooping war is NOT over by any means,we won the battle (with the Supreme Court decision) but we haven't won the war.

dillyhammer
START me up
Premium Member
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON

dillyhammer to hm

Premium Member

to hm
said by hm :

Short version:
It's not dead. It's just been shuffled into something else. It's out of the fire and into the frying pan.

You have to read the pertinent sections of the code the way they exist now, and compare them to the amendments they are proposing.

The concept of "lawful intercept" has been around a long time, and so has a peace officer's ability to intercept private communications without a warrant under certain circumstances.

There's no "short version" here. Taken as a whole, line by line, C55 is far less a threat to privacy than C-30.

Mike
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

Judges are on-call 24/7 in many jurisdictions.
There's not need for immediate intercept without a warrant.
The carrier/ISP can't do it any faster without a warrant.

Seems to me the Conservatards are watching re-runs of Jack Bauer.

random
@teksavvy.com

random

Anon

>Seems to me the Conservatards are watching re-runs of Jack Bauer.

or Person of Interest...

dillyhammer
START me up
Premium Member
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON

dillyhammer to MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

to MaynardKrebs
You'd be shocked at how hard it is to get a warrant.

It is not as simple or fast a thing as you might think. Most are not given out by judges at all, but rather a Justice Of The Peace.

Most JPs will deny if they're not overwhelmed by the bona fides in an affadavit. If it's done over the phone or via fax, even more so.

I think that's why the clause is there. The bureaucracy of a warrant could easily result in injury or death, and in the case of either being imminent, the officer would be indemnified if acting in good faith.

Quite frankly, I have no problem with that.

But conversely, if they act without a warrant and it's in bad faith, there should be an awful price to pay.

Mike
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

said by dillyhammer:

But conversely, if they act without a warrant and it's in bad faith, there should be an awful price to pay.

Instruments of medieval torture come to mind.
Who7
join:2012-12-18

Who7

Member

As an active and vocal Conservative supporter.....let me say something without saying anything.....

The minister involved think they are doing a greater good without realizing the extent of the greater harm. It's one of those "save the bunnies" bills that the politicians think will "make a difference" with more good then harm to the average citizen. Entirely opposite to the concept that due process, assumption of innocence and privacy.

Politics is not about principles by highly principled people, it's about doing what looks good and effective to the sheep.

Before any of you jump on the "evil Conservative agenda", remember, with a little bit of education, the bill is dead.......while the lefts darling, obama is giving himself judge jury and executioner powers on top of strengthening the Patriot Act.

We need more principled politicians.... and smarter sheep to demand better from them.

booj
join:2011-02-07
Richmond, ON

1 recommendation

booj

Member

said by Who7:

Before any of you jump on the "evil Conservative agenda", remember, with a little bit of education, the bill is dead...

The unpopular bill is dead because the public is sour on it... Only to be revived the next day as C55 and unlawful access snuck into spectrum auction rules.

There has been no change in their agenda.