CyberLaw Blog

Archive for the ‘RIPA 2000’ Category

Activists say consultation on RIPA was ’secretive and short’: “

Home Office’s changes to e-comm intercept law ‘hard to find’

Digital rights activists have criticised a Home Office consultation on the UK’s main interception law that they say is shorter and more secret than it should be.…

“

(Via The Register – Public Sector.)

Police force more suspects to give up crypto keys: “

Password powers practised

Police have expanded their use of powers to force suspects to decrypt files by 50 per cent in the last year, figures released today reveal.…

“

(Via The Register – Public Sector.)

Government begins RIPA review: “The Government will review the use of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), the law that governs state tapping of phone, email and internet use. The law will be looked at as part of a wider review of counter-terrorism laws.“

(Via OUT-LAW News.)

RIPA III: A legislative turkey comes home to roost: “

The tragic consequences of anti-crypto law

Comment The first conviction of a man under the draconian powers of RIPA Part III tragically bears out a prediction I made at the time: that these powers would do little or nothing to tackle serious crime or terror, but would create a power the police could use to harass people and undermine their right to remain silent.…

“

(Via The Register – Public Sector.)

Only in the UK……

UK jails schizophrenic for refusal to decrypt files: “

Terror squad arrest over model rocket

Exclusive The first person jailed under draconian UK police powers that Ministers said were vital to battle terrorism and serious crime has been identified by The Register as a schizophrenic science hobbyist with no previous criminal record.…

“

(Via The Register – Public Sector.)

Home Office accused of sexing-up mobile phone rescue: “

Comms data ‘essential’? Not really

The Home Office is once again under attack for the standard of the evidence it uses to support its policies, this time over plans to harvest much more communications data.…

“

(Via The Register – Public Sector.)

More delays for UK.gov’s net snooping programme: “

Queen to keep schtum on IMP

Protests from ISPs and phone providers have further delayed government plans to massively increase monitoring of phone calls, web browsing and emails, it’s revealed today.…

“

(Via The Register – Public Sector.)

Number of local council snoopers clipped: “

RIPA abuse curtailed

The number of local officials who can authorise access to communications records and order surveillance operations will be cut under changes to snooping regulations announced today.…

“

(Via The Register – Public Sector.)

EU – Telecoms: Commission steps up UK legal action over privacy and personal data protection:  (RAPID)
The Commission has moved to the second phase of an infringement proceeding over the UK to provide its citizens with the full protection of EU rules on privacy and personal data protection when using electronic communications. European laws state that EU countries must ensure the confidentiality of people’s electronic communications like email or internet browsing by prohibiting their unlawful interception and surveillance without the user’s consent. As these rules have not been fully put in place in the national law of the UK, the Commission will send the UK a reasoned opinion. Specifically, the Commission has identified three gaps in the existing UK rules governing the confidentiality of electronic communications: 1) There is no independent national authority to supervise interception of communications 2) The current UK law ? the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) ? authorises interception of communications not only where the persons concerned have consented to interception but also when the person intercepting the communications has ‘reasonable grounds for believing’ that consent to do so has been given. These UK law provisions do not comply with EU rules defining consent as freely given, specific and informed indication of a person’s wishes 3) The RIPA provisions are limited to ‘intentional’ interception only, whereas the EU law requires Members States to prohibit and to ensure sanctions against any unlawful interception regardless of whether committed intentionally or not.

(Via QuickLinks Update.)

Two convicted for refusal to decrypt data

Up to five years in jail after landmark prosecutions

Two people have been successfully prosecuted for refusing to provide authorities with their encryption keys, resulting in landmark convictions that may have carried jail sentences of up to five years.…

(Via The Register – Public Sector.)