Hot on the heels of the good news that the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that DNA fingerprint records of individuals that were not convicted may not be retained in police (or other) databases, comes less welcome news of the developing Surveillance State.

The Independent reports that the Government is to push through legislation to permit a variety of public bodies to share and exchange sensitive data they hold on us.

I got another email from the moderators over at the BT beta broadband forums.  This was in response to a post I made in which I referred to another posting which mentioned BT-Webwise- here is my posting (I removed a name, indicated by ***, and I think the post is obviously a little tongue-in-cheek):

Whoops, now you've done it, ****, you've mentioned it in your sig. Well, your post has lasted 15 minutes so far!
R 

Some recent developments regarding the obnoxious Phorm:

The Telco 2.0 conference feature discussions from the CEO of a web marketing company.   Because the meeting was held under Chatham House rules, individuals and companies could not be named.  However, it's a reasonable assumption this was someone from Phorm.  The Register reports.

Well, it turns out BT have decided to censor their broadband fora and remove all traces of discussion about the vile Phorm/webwise system by which they planned to spy on all their customers' internet habits.  Their somewhat pathetic announcement can be read here.

There have been several threads to which all messages concerning Phorm/Webwise have been consigned.  Messages elsewhere concerning Phorm/Webwise get edited to remove such references. 

The Register reports that Wacky Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, is pushing ahead with plans to implement one of the biggest (if not the biggest) intrusions into the privacy of the UK population.

This batty "anti-terrorism" measure seeks to monitor all communications, including telephone, mobile phone, internet and email.  The claim is that content of communications will not be recorded, merely the details of who is communicating with whom.  But don't forget the tendency of function creep.

BT's major PR blunder of deleting all reference to the vile Phorm/Webwise system from its broadband support fora continues to whizz through the internet as the Streisand effect builds.

The Register weighs in - "BT silences customers over Phorm":

A group of contributors to the nodpi.org website braved the vile elements in Manchester to hand out leaflets outside the "Privacy by Design" meeting, to highlight issues surrounding the vile Phorm and BT's implementation BT Webwise.  Here is their report.

Back on 11th October, the Open Rights Group (together with a number of other concerned organisations) held a protest in Parliament Square to publicise the growing surveillance we are all subjected to.  A large mosaic constructed from images of CCTV installations was assembled.  The image (below) has been released under a Creative Commons licence.  A bigger version is available. 

From the ORG "The Big Picture" wiki:

The Register reports that the anti ID card campaigners No2ID have succeeded in their long standing aim to obtain samples of Home Secretary Jacqui Smith's fingerprints.

Hot on the heels of announcing plans for draconian new communications monitoring Smith is taking forward the batty ID card agenda (first victims: overseas people, second victims: airport workers).  Now it seems a glass bearing her dabs has been "borrowed" and those precious prints preserved, presumably for some nefarious purpose.

One of the anti-Phorm gang has set up a concise web page outlining the objections many have to the BT-Phorm data snooping system. What's particularly useful is that every assertion has a citation supporting it.  Read it and weep over what has become of British Telecom. [update: apologies, I botched the link, now corrected]

Reports broke yesterday on fora (such as nodpi) and The Register that a PlusNet customer had received an invitation to join BT Webwise.  Plusnet is an ISP acquired by BT in 2006, but run as a separate business.  The current trials of the vile Phorm system of data snooping began on BT customers 30th September and were supposed to last for 30 days.  There had been much speculation that these trials either had not started, that they were late starting, and that BT were having trouble finding the desired naive users to sign up.

So, what's a PlusNet customer doing receiving an invitation to BT Webwise?  What kind of botched system is in place here, and can we actually trust BT to manage the hardware and software that Phorm have placed in their system?

Here in the UK, there has been a pretty large storm about BT's trials (and  proposed implementation) of the obnoxious Phorm system in which all users' web browsing sessions are intercepted and data extracted in order to deliver targeted advertising.  A No 10 petition has collected a large number of signatories, and several websites have been set up to explain the problems associated with Phorm and to campaign against it.  See isphormlegal for example.

Over in the USA, a company called NebuAd have been playing the same game.  Working with several ISPs, they have been playing fast and loose with customer rights.  Now it seems the chickens may be coming home to roost. Ars Technica reports that a class action has been launched against NebuAd and its ISP collaborators. As Ars Technica reports:

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is planning to implement even more draconian snooping powers that previously reported, according to a report in the Telegraph. 

In an astonishing non sequitur, Smith is quoted as saying that communications data of the sort which helped convict Soham killer Ian Huntley and the 21/7 bombers was not at present being routinely stored, and needed to be if terrorists and serious criminals were to be prevented from striking.   So what Smith appears to be saying is that phone call evidence of the type that was used to convict people after committing a crime could be used to collar them before committing a crime.  Now here we have a distinct sense of thoughtcrime. 

Recent political developments in the UK seem to be directed towards a loss of individual privacy and liberty, bandied about as politicians seek to be viewed as having the "hardest policies on terror".  Currently newsworthy topics are the drive of the Government to have a 42 day detention period without charge for terrorism suspects (fortunately thrown out by the House of Lords) and the move to greater communications surveillance, the latest plans for which appear to be a fit of pique from the Home Secretary in response to her detention plans being thwarted.  Jacqui Smith's opinions on personal freedom and liberty seem so far removed from common decency and the democratic ideal that one wonders why she is thought fit to hold public office, let alone one of the highest ministerial positions in the country.

The human rights organisation Liberty says:

"Privacy is in our DNA, so we need to be honest and clear about what we are doing. We have decided not to be in Phorm because of that... The way it was proposed, the privacy issue was too strong." 

The BBC are reporting that an initiative to curb drug use in Aberdeen will test pub-goers for drug use.  It's a relatively non-invasive test involving hand swabs.  Te odd thing about this is the way the test is being carried out.

People are tested when entering pubs and clubs: the test is apparently not compulsory, but those declining to be tested will be refused entry.  An unusual definition of "not compulsory", that!  So, let me get this right.  I could be lawfully going about my business, and wish to visit a pub for a beer.  I can be stopped for drug testing, and on declining to be tested will be refused entry.

Further evidence of abuse of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) is reported by the Daily Telegraph (1/11/08).  Their investigation involved FOI requests to councils: over half of them are using RIPA powers for such trivia as monitoring abuse of refuse collection, littering and fly-tipping.

This is far from the first such occasion: earlier this year, Poole Borough Council spied on a family to check if they live in a school catchment area.  (BBC News 10/4/08), and Bury Metropolitan Council spied on their binmen to catch them over-enthusiastically collecting refuse (The Register 10/9/08) -an action that cost the council a £100,000 settlement - three days before the case was due to go to trial.

Back at the end of 2007, Privacy International published this map of world surveillance societies. The full report is here.  Each country is rated on a number of categories, and the results pooled to give an overall rating.  The dear old United Kingdom doesn't come out of the analysis too well.

Lest readers feel I (and others) overstate the dangers of the deep packet inspection that is about to be perpetrated on BT Internet customers, here is a quote from Kent Ertegrul, CEO of Phorm, Inc.:

Ofcom have published a consultation document entitled "Delivering super-fast broadband in the UK": this is an interactive affair, and I notice that the comments on one particular paragraph exceed the others.  Guess what that's about?

1.38  The introduction of new business models can be controversial, but may be very important in the delivery of new access networks. Regulation can have a role, for example in helping to increase consumer confidence in new services. One example is improving consumers' perception of behavioural advertising. We are interested in views on where else Ofcom can assist in new commercial developments.