Pirate Party UK - The party is registered!

The party is registered! Submitted by Andy_R on 11 August 2009 The long-awaited news has finally arrived, the Pirate Party UK is now officially registered as a political party! This means we can raise funds, have Pirate Party Candidates at the next general election, and do all the other things that political parties do. Getting to this stage has been a long process, we've had to elect officers, raise funds, fill out forms, meet with some (very helpful) people at the Electoral Commission, and learn far more about electoral law and the special party funding rules that apply to Gibraltar than any same person would ever want to. Andrew Robinson, Party Leader and Eric Priezkalns, Party Treasurer at the Electoral Commission offices in Westminster. Andrew Robinson, Party Leader and Eric Priezkalns, Party Treasurer at the Electoral Commission offices in Westminster. Now the party can really start. It's time for us to tell the world that we exist, to recruit members, raise funds and gear up to fight the General Election. The officers and web team have built the framework that the party needs to get going, now it's time for YOU to make things happen. Join the party, tell the media about the party,tell your friends about the party, take part in policy and news debates on the forum, join our Facebook group, donate or set up a regular payment to provide financial support, set up a branch in your constituency, school or workplace, join the specialist workings groups for members with key skills like lawyers and journalists and volunteer to take part in canvassing and campaigning in your constituency at the general election... The success of Britain's newest party depends on you, the members!

[From Pirate Party UK - Blog - The party is registered!]

Half A Million Intercepts of Communications Data in 2008

Via eff.org

This week, the United Kingdom's Interception of Communications commissioner, Sir Paul Kennedy, announced his latest statistics for Britain's phone and email surveillance systems, to generally shocked responses by the British Public. In 2008, law enforcement, local authorities and the secret services in that country demanded "communication data" — the "who, how, when and where", but not the actual content of messages — 504,073 times. That's 1,381 times a day; or one inquiry every year for every 78 people in the UK.

Sir Kennedy's report is, in many ways, all the public oversight these half a million requests get.
In the United Kingdom, there is no judicial review of these requests; law enforcement together with the Information Commission regulate their own regime, and are bound only to a government "code of conduct".

Communications data continues to be viewed by lawmakers as non-invasive and therefore not regarded as requiring strict regulation, despite the growing range of personal information that can now be revealed by a communications data intercept request. These orders can reveal lists of websites visited, email headers, name and address lookups, and, perhaps most controversially, the real-time location of a particular mobile telephone.

Such a breadth of information so readily available make these intercepts increasingly tempting for law enforcement; modern technology makes them far easier to capture and process en masse; and with no probable cause or other conditions on obtaining such data, these numbers will keep rising. To guard against the misuse of these invasive powers, we need more than just aggregate statistics presented at the end of the year. Across the world, these frequent invasions of privacy need full judicial oversight, once case at a time.

-----------------

This has got to stop soon!

Plan To Monitor All Internet Usuage

From the BBC

Communications firms are being asked to record all internet contacts between people as part of a modernisation in UK police surveillance tactics.

The home secretary scrapped plans for a database but wants details to be held and organised for security services.

The new system would track all e-mails, phone calls and internet use, including visits to social network sites.

The Tories said the Home Office had "buckled under Conservative pressure" in deciding against a giant database.

Announcing a consultation on a new strategy for communications data and its use in law enforcement, Jacqui Smith said there would be no single government-run database.

But she also said that "doing nothing" in the face of a communications revolution was not an option.

The Home Office will instead ask communications companies - from internet service providers to mobile phone networks - to extend the range of information they currently hold on their subscribers and organise it so that it can be better used by the police, MI5 and other public bodies investigating crime and terrorism.

Ministers say they estimate the project will cost £2bn to set up, which includes some compensation to the communications industry for the work it may be asked to do.

"Communications data is an essential tool for law enforcement agencies to track murderers, paedophiles, save lives and tackle crime," Ms Smith said.

"Advances in communications mean that there are ever more sophisticated ways to communicate and we need to ensure that we keep up with the technology being used by those who seek to do us harm.

"It is essential that the police and other crime fighting agencies have the tools they need to do their job, However to be clear, there are absolutely no plans for a single central store."

Blackout Europe

Everyone really needs to help out on this one, the link to the website can be found here.

Please take action!

---------------------------

The European open internet is under imminent threat

URGENT - VOTING IN EU PARLIAMENT 5th of MAY 2009

Don't let the EU parliament lock up the Internet! There will be no way back!

Act now!

Internet access is not conditional

Everyone who owns a website has an interest in defending the free use of Internet... so has everyone who uses Google or Skype... everyone who expresses their opinions freely, does research of any kind, whether for personal health problems or academic study ... everyone who shops online...who dates online...socialises online... listens to music...watches video...

The internet as we know it is at risk because of proposed new EU rules going through end of April. Under the proposed new rules, broadband providers will be legally able to limit the number of websites you can look

at, and to tell you whether or not you are allowed to use particular services. It will be dressed up as ‘new consumer options' which people can choose from. People will be offered TV-like packages - with a limited

number of options for you to access.

It means that the Internet will be packaged up and your ability to access and to put up content could be severely restricted. It will create boxes of Internet accessibility, which don't fit with the way we use it today. This is because internet is now permitting exchanges between persons which cannot be controlled or "facilitated" by any middlemen (the state or a corporation) and this possibility improves the citizen's life but force the industry to lose power and control. that's why they are pushing governments to act those changes.

The excuse is to control the flow of music, films and entertainment content against the alleged piracy by downloading for free, using P2P file-sharing. However, the real victims of this plan will be all Internet users and the democratic and independent access to information, culture goods.

Think about how you use the Internet! What would it mean to you if free access to the Internet was taken away?

These days, the Internet is about life and freedom. It's about shopping, booking theatre tickets ... holidays, learning, job-seeking, banking, and trade. It's also about the fun things - dating, chatting, invitations, music, entertainment, joking and even a Second Life. It is a tool to express ourselves, to collaborate, innovate, share, stimulate new business ideas, reach new markets - thrive without middlemen..

Just think - what's your web address? Unless people have that address in their "package" of regular websites - they won't be able to find you. That means they can't buy, or book, or register, or even view you online. Your business won't be able to find niche suppliers of goods - and compare prices. If you get any money at all from advertising on your site, it will diminish. Yes, Amazon and a select few will be OK, they will be the included in the package. But your advertising on Google or any other website, will be increasingly worthless. Skype could be blocked. (As it is in Germany in the use from iPhone, already). Small businesses could literally disappear, especially specialist, niche or artisan businesses.

If we don't do something now - we could lose free and open use of the internet. Our freedom (of choice in information, market, culture, pleasure) will be curtailed. The EU proposals hold an enormous risk for our future. They are about to become Law - and will be virtually impossible to reverse. People (even the members of the European Parliament who are voting on it) don't really seem to understand the full implications and the legal changes are wrapped up in something called "Telecoms Package" which lulls people into thinking it is just about industry.

However, in reality, hiding from public view, the amendments are about the way the Internet will operate in future! Text that expresses your rights to access and distribute content, services and applications, is being crossed out. And the text that is being brought in, says that broadband providers must inform you of any limitations, or restrictions to your broadband service. Alternative versions use the word ‘conditions' - and it is seriously being proposed that you will be told the conditions of use of Internet services. This is made to sound good - it is dressed up as ‘transparency' - except that of course it means that the broadband providerwill have the legal right restrict your access or impose conditions,otherwise why would they need tell you? If the Telecoms Package amendmentsare voted in, the changes will not be reversible.

We all have a stake in the Internet! You need to act now to save it!

What can you do about it?

Tell the European Parliament to vote against conditional access to the Internet! Remind them that they need your vote in June and that internet still give us the tools to be watching and judging what they are doing! (link a la quadrature du net) You must know you are not alone: hundreds of organizations are working on that and thousands of people have already contact their parliamentarians about this issue.

So, act now:

1 - Email, write to or phone your MEP - follow this link to get theirdetails - a suggested template letter is attached. You can also use the following software that send the letter directly to all the parliamentarians. Believe, they will really receive it and they will really feel the pressure. You are welcome to personalize the letter and include information that will make MEPs wake up, take note and take appropriate action.

2 - Forward this email to everyone you know so that they can take action.

3 - Syndicate this page so that you keep been informed: disinformation is what they count on, we must be aware. Text for people to cut and paste to MEP: The coalition version needs to have instructions for people from each country. coalition members need to get a translated version online in their own languages and link to the LQ site for their own MEPs.

More on the BBC botnet issue!

Securiteam has a very good post on this issue, well worth a read.

Read it here here

When the BBC does it's not illegal...

This really gets to be, as if any security researcher were to do this in the UK, we'd loose our jobs, and probably be locked up for a minimum of ten years, but yet when the BBC does it, it's fine?

Taken from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/7938201.stm

"For a short time in February, I had complete control over 21,696 personal computers around the world. These were machines whose owners had not taken the basic security precautions necessary to stay safe online.

While their owners were busy checking their e-mails, or playing Solitaire, or doing their accounts, I could have made their computers do anything I wanted without anyone knowing.

I could have ordered the machines to log keystrokes as they were typed, and then send me anything that looked like a banking user name and password.

I could have redirected the users to fake shopping websites - identical to the originals, apart from the fact that come point of sale, the credit card and security numbers would have been delivered to me.

Or I could have used them to spread spam and phishing e-mails to thousands of other computers.

I did not, of course. That would have been illegal. "

So, let me get this straight, it's fine to have control of 21,696 PC's from around the world, and to gain access to them illegally, and some of these may have even been corporate PC's, so other laws could have been broken here as well.

It's fine though for Spencer Kelly to do this, and have the British Broadcasting Centre air this on a show on national television though, but yet he feels it's illegal to do the things mentioned above, is he serious?

I'd like to see documented proof that nothing was changed on any of these PC's that were under control, and were all the owners of these PC's made aware of what was going on?

Yet Gary Mc Kinnon hacks into some PC's in the US in search of UFO's, and they wanted to press charges of terrorism, and put him in Guantanamo bay.

What the hell is happening to this country?

UK = 1984

I know that I've mentioned this issue countless times before, but seriously, the UK government really is going to far, with their whole anti-terrorism kick.

As humans we have rights, and I don't care which way they dress it up, someone has either been watching or reading 1984 way too many times, to the point that they're now recommending it to everyone!

From The Times Online:

Everyone who buys a mobile telephone will be forced to register their identity on a national database under government plans to extend massively the powers of state surveillance.

Phone buyers would have to present a passport or other official form of identification at the point of purchase. Privacy campaigners fear it marks the latest government move to create a surveillance society.

A compulsory national register for the owners of all 72m mobile phones in Britain would be part of a much bigger database to combat terrorism and crime. Whitehall officials have raised the idea of a register containing the names and addresses of everyone who buys a phone in recent talks with Vodafone and other telephone companies, insiders say.

The move is targeted at monitoring the owners of Britain’s estimated 40m prepaid mobile phones. They can be purchased with cash by customers who do not wish to give their names, addresses or credit card details.