For instance, the article quotes the head of MI5 regarding preventing the bombing of the London Stock Exchange in 2010.
I wanted to know more about this, so Googled London Stock Exchange Bomb, and clicked on a few stories, and wanting to find out a bit more about the people involved, I then Googled their names and clicked on a few more links.
All this time, I had the thought at the back of my head: will these searches and clicks put me on a list somewhere?
(for anyone who wants to be saved searching for these terms, here's a quick overview: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/9...)
It's this feeling that I most dislike about it all; something, or someone, somewhere may be watching, and so now I'm questioning myself because some discussion on some site has potentially questionable keywords in its URL.
This is the loss of freedom we face when our privacy is taken from us. This is life in former East Germany, or life in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. And it’s our future as we allow an ever-intrusive eye into our personal, private lives.”
— Bruce Schneier, The Eternal Value of Privacy, Wired, 05.18.06
> potentially questionable keywords
Keywords aren't even the problem; the inferences - legitimate or not - that can be found with modern data analysis techniques and machine learning practically guarantee we will see people being wrongly accused or otherwise affected. This much data is an endless arena for the human tendency to interpret data until they see whatever they want to see. If search a bunch of web histories looking for problems, you will find something.
Oh and this problem is why some of us have a strong reaction against any kind of tracking, especially ad networks. Facebook/Google/etc are just as worrying, and accessing their data simply requires a national security letter (or UK equivalent).
A couple more internet searches like that and you'll be hauled into "the Cage" for questioning, held without charge for 72 hours under the "Anti-Terrorism and Subversives Act 2018" and released after a good beating.
Your credit score may or may not be affected. Employers may call upon your CSRS score before employing you. Increases over 5% a year are grounds for dismissal.
Today, if you're arrested in the UK under Terrorism charges you can be held for up to 14 days.
Far as I understand it, the current draft will require ISPs to log all IP connections made, and some other metadata from the packets.
This will be a potentially huge amount of data that ISPs will have to store for 12 months, and it will largely be useless data; as by the time this is enshrined in law and ISPs have this implemented, we will be a lot further down the path that we are currently headed with regards to increasing use of HTTPS and HTTP/2.
All you will be able to gain from this information is ip addresses & hostnames connected to. URLs and other information are all transmitted inside the encrypted session.
Aside from this, terrorists, nefarious types, and increasingly; any technically competent, law abiding citizen with a reasonable desire for privacy will use VPNs, TOR, etc, making it even more pointless.
And Theresa May's analogy with itemised phone bills is completely ridiculous. Web domain logging is not the same.
[edited] added 2nd para.
I envision a modified browser that has a registry of all your private information and enforces it's protection from the web browsing activity. You will not be able to send over the net your name, email, nickname, identifying cookies, your IP will be hidden, basically it will be like a nanny protecting you from sending any identifying information over the lines. That would be a place where people will be anonymous, but, again, you can't contact anyone you know or use any account that you have used from your real IP in the past, so it will be a different kind of browsing experience.