// Home / News

Government reveals "black box" snooping plans

By Nicole Kobie

Posted on 10 Jul 2012 at 17:34

The government plans to use "black boxes" to collect network traffic from overseas services that don't comply with the Communications Data Bill.

The controversial bill looks to extend the government's ability to collect communications data, such as email message headers. While the proposed legislation has raised privacy and surveillance concerns, the government has argued it's necessary to battle terrorism and crime.

A trio of policing and security officials told a parliamentary committee looking into the bill that major communications service providers - "including those that are household names" - were willing to work with authorities to supply the right data.

To be really clear, so-called black boxes, DPI, are not the cornerstone of this programme

Charles Farr, director of the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism, told MPs that the bill's "obligations" to collect specific types of message data would apply to overseas companies with UK users.

While major firms - such as Facebook and Google, although the big brands weren't mentioned by name - are likely to continue to respond to legal requests for data, Farr admitted some online services may choose not to.

For those services, the government will turn to "black boxes", deep-packet inspection systems that will allow ISPs to grab data from networks to hold onto in case police or security services decide they require it.

"To be really clear, so-called black boxes, DPI, are not the cornerstone of this programme... not the central plank of it," said Farr. "Black boxes... are not the key issue on this bill."

He added it will only be used in certain circumstances, such as when an overseas provider that authorities believe is used for crime is "not prepared to provide data". The only alternative is to ignore such data exists, he claimed.

Peter Hill, head of the Policy and Strategy Unit at the Home Office, suggested some ISPs would already have such technology in place, and said the authorities would work with networks to install approved systems.

Not 100% coverage

Even with black boxes, the bill still won't allow perfect collection of data, merely closing the "capability gap", said Farr. At the moment, 25% of data is inaccessible, he estimated, saying the bill would close that to 15% by 2018. He stressed that the legislation would not offer 100% coverage. "Those days have gone," he admitted, saying workarounds would always exist.

Of the half million requests for data under the current system - which the panel stressed didn't necessarily equate to half a million people - 99% are made by police and security services, with 1% by other public authorities, predominately local authorities and the FSA.

Farr said 27% of that data is for drugs related offences, 15% for property crimes such as burglary, and 12% for financial offences.

The MPs questioning the policing officials repeatedly raised the issue of whether the bill was "too loosely" written, saying that helped "fuel suspicions" about the looming legislation.

Subscribe to PC Pro magazine. We'll give you 3 issues for £1 plus a free gift - click here

User comments

Hmmm...

So let me see if I've got this right then:

The powers described in this bill, and associated bills, will only allow the government to spy on good, honest, law abiding citizens.

The nasty, low life, law breaking scum will just use one of the many services readily available that circumvent the monitoring systems.

Have I got it right?

By mrajs on 10 Jul 2012

Any idea of what the other 46% of Farr's breakdown was (second to last paragraph)?

"He added it will only be used in certain circumstances" such as whenever someone feels like taking a peek, as there'll be little or no oversight.

By Mark_Thompson on 10 Jul 2012

"...saying workarounds would always exist."

@mrajs
Yes, you are quite correct.

As the director admits, anyone that wants (feels the need) to avoid surveillance has a number of options open, while Mr. & Mrs. Average will be under close scrutiny in case they suddenly become radicalised & make threats against airports in Nottingham or the like.

The writing of the bill is not what's "fuelling suspicions"

By greemble on 10 Jul 2012

Government reveals "black box" snooping plans

the same old toffee comes out of the bag again I see....it's necessary to battle terrorism and crime.

By invalidscreenname on 10 Jul 2012

@greemble

I wonder if by trying to make it easier, they will make it harder to find real criminals.

By tech3475 on 11 Jul 2012

Pen, Paper and Secret Codes

All this will amount to the private and law abiding citizen feeling watched, which in turn can make you feel spooked. Meanwhile the heavy criminals are surely smart enough to use invisible ink and in made up gobledygook.

By Roger_Andre on 11 Jul 2012

Sounds about right

Yes Mrajs I beleive that you have hit the nail right on the head there,this bill will only allow the government to snoop on and go after good, honest, law abiding citizens.

As you say the nasty, low life, law breaking scum will just use one of the many services readily available that circumvent the monitoring systems.

Even if they don't they will employ an army of crooked lawyers who will spend years in court complaining about the infringement of their clients human rights.

The government, any government will do what they always do best take the easy option and just go after the ordinary citizen, Joe bloggs just like you and me people that they think wont complain.

Let's face it, it's much easier that way! Anything else would require that some civil servants somewhere would actually have to do some work!

And of course that would never do old boy, that would be unheard of.

By Citizen_s on 12 Jul 2012

TrueCrypt Containers

I used to communicate on a regular basis with a friend who was a contractor for the Home Office, Works & Pensions & later that building that feature in the 007 movies by the Thames. We often included triple encrypted TrueCrypt attachments. He reckoned this was driving them nuts at GCHQ.

By roberttrebor on 12 Jul 2012