Re:Tech firms seek to frustrate internet history log law
by zmmmmm on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @10:39AM
(#13023318)
Yes, that's a step towards it. But at least the person has to be a "suspect" in another crime (however low the bar for that is) and an explicit demand has to be made for the key. Not that it does a lot of good since anybody can become a suspect and the demand for the key is retrospective to when you weren't a suspect.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Tech firms seek to frustrate internet history log law
by anexprogrammer on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @01:36PM
(#13024698)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BO8EpfyCG2Y (Constable Savage)
Suspect of being Muslim, wearing a beard and using an ISP that the public hasn't heard of that isn't price competitive is more than enough for a media hatchet job. How low does the bar have to be?
This should be the preserve of Uganda and N Korea.
Re:Tech firms seek to frustrate internet history log law
by mcherm on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @11:42AM
(#13023782)
I really don't think that having to be a suspect is in ANY way meaningful, since there is absolutely no bar to being a suspect. It is perfectly reasonable to state "we have no idea who did this so every UK resident is a possible suspect".