The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

Snoop more, share less - Home Office spurns EU advice

Databases not safe, says database-loving gov

What you need to know about cloud backup

Government responses to two outwardly unrelated bits of EU policy go a long way to explain what it really thinks about the War on Terror and the rights of individual citizens.

At present, the government collects data on passenger movements across UK borders. This is gathered from sources such as travel agents and airlines, and is handed over to the Home Office through the e-borders programme.

According to the Telegraph, it includes personal information such as a passenger's name, address, itinerary, meal preference, sex, credit card numbers and details of their travel companions.

The Home Office admits it has collected this level of detail on 54 million people since the launch of e-borders in January 2005. There are also plans afoot to extend the e-borders scheme to some internal travel within the UK - between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK.

For once, the EU appears to be on the side of the angels, as it has asked the UK to restrict the use of "Passenger Name Record" data to fighting terrorism and organised crime. In this it is supported by a recent Lords report calling on the government to draw up a list of specific list of offences that would be covered by the e-borders programme – with officials not allowed to use information to probe any further.

As expected, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith rejected this on the grounds that such rules would be too narrow and the government preferred to retain the ability to use the data to pursue “any serious crime”. Given the gov's record on RIPA, this presumably could also include dog-fouling and failing to fill your bins properly.

Meanwhile, in another story, also in today’s Telegraph, the government appears to be resisting EU suggestions that the fight against terror could be enhanced if security agencies such as MI5 and MI6 were prepared to share data with their European counterparts.

Under these plans, all countries would feed secret information into a central intelligence unit so that any member state can use it.

Clearly there are pros and cons to such a scheme. The British rightly object that such a database would be as secure as the weakest access point to it – an argument that oddly doesn’t seem to hold much weight with the Home Office when it comes to its own plans for a centralised UK database containing details of all citizens.

Still, its nice to see what this government really means when it comes to “joined up thinking”.

Terror is such an enormous threat that centuries old civil liberties must be sacrificed and overturned within the UK. Anyone who fails to buy into the government’s latest hare-brained scheme for fighting terror is obviously at some remove a closet collaborator. At least, that appeared to be the argument when it came to “42 days”.

When someone else has a scheme that might actually be useful in combating terror, the burden of proof is suddenly reversed – and the Government’s answer is an instant Gaullist “Non”.

When it comes to collecting our personal data, however, terror just isn’t enough. Of course it would be useful to store personal data in order to fight terror. But it would also help the fight against organised crime. And serious crime. And anything else that happens to occur to Whitehall at the time. ®

Agentless Backup is Not a Myth

Latest Comments

Terrorists use Paypal

My son, who lives in the US, needed to borrow some money, so I sent it via Paypal, as it's quicker and easier than a bank wire transfer. It got through no problem. When he sent it back, however, my Paypal account was frozen due to "EU" money laundering regs. As I recall, these regs were foisted on the EU by The Supreme Brown Leader in order to starve terrorists of funds. Al Quaeda use Paypal all the time, apparently. Fortunately our NuSoviet government are much more on the ball with this stuff than their cronies in the US.

0
0

Wait

Weren't you mad at us yanks for collecting such data ??? Hell at least we told you were doing it. You wanted the UK to be reciprocal. you got it. All you need now is to fly through t5 to get finger printed.

0
0

"arguing the same thing from two different sides"

Can't do that in a court of law. It's forbidden by the legal doctrine of estoppel.

0
0

More from The Register

SCO vs. IBM battle resumes over ownership of Unix
Zombie lawsuit back and wants to suck the brains out of Linux
 breaking news
NSA whistleblower to tech firms, Obama: 'Grow a pair!'
Ed Snowden: Email tracking grabs 'IPs, raw data, content, headers, attachments, everything'
 breaking news
Ecuador: All right, Julian, you CAN stay on our sofa - it's your human right
Minister and Wikileaker share cosy chat in tiny London flat
Google flings another £1m at online child sex abuse vid CRACKDOWN
See, see, we're trying, ad giant tells Daily Mail UK.gov
 breaking news
NSA PRISM-gate: Relax, GCHQ spooks 'keep us safe', says Cameron
Whatever they are up to, it's all above board, we're told
 breaking news
BBC lied to Parliament about doomed £100m IT monster, thunder MPs
Axed DMI ballooned and burst while watchdogs sang Kumbaya
PRISM snitch claims NSA hacked Chinese targets since 2009
Snowden suddenly looks safer in Hong Kong after revelations
 breaking news
US chief spook: Look, we only want to spy on 6.66 BEELLLION of you
Americans assured they are not in the NSA's sights