Yes, I know. It is very early to start any discussion. But an interesting article in the Telegraph. "Lazy WiFi providers offer data-free risks for terrorists and criminals ... Venues that provide WiFi are responsible for this under the Data Protection act, European Directive for Data Retention Regulations 2009, the Code of Practice (Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001), Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 and Digital Economy Act 2010. When somebody supplies a WiFi hotspot, these legal requirements must be complied with, such as holding data and logging all URLs visited. Moreover, another potential problem for suppliers is that of content filtering, which allows venues to block certain content – such as porn and illegal content. ..." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/internet-security/10468317/Lazy-WiFi-p... So how will Wifi access be organised in London? Gordon
On 24 Nov 2013, at 08:13, Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13@gmail.com> wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/internet-security/10468317/Lazy-WiFi-p...
So how will Wifi access be organised in London?
This article is a sales pitch for a wifi service provider who would love to collect people's personal data. It is not an accurate representation of the law in this area. I have and will continue to run events in the UK with open or semi-open wifi (UKNOF, EMFCamp, etc) without the need to invasively snoop on users and retain their personal data. -- Will Hargrave +44 114 303 4444
Hi everybody, Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13@gmail.com> writes:
"Lazy WiFi providers offer data-free risks for terrorists and criminals
I didn't expect these "terrorists and criminals" to be that stupid---we can offer them risks without having to provide them data? Maybe we can convince them to get into the social networking and search engine business instead.
When somebody supplies a WiFi hotspot, these legal requirements must be complied with, such as holding data and logging all URLs visited.
As Will pointed out already, this is a rather shameless marketing plug. Let's just hope that this article drives away more customers than it actually wins them...
So how will Wifi access be organised in London?
<sarcasm><!-- In case our friends at the GCHQ don't get it --> I suggest a checkbox on the registration form: Are you a terrorist and criminal? ( )Yes ( )No People clicking "yes" should then receive a popup stating that We are sorry to inform you that due to legal requirements you are not permitted to use our free Wifi. We do however provide a separate SSID "terrorists_and_criminals_only" with all the latest logging and monitoring features for you. On second thought, maybe we could integrate this with the "job title" field. </sarcasm> What really drives me mad with this sort of article is the way this kind of misinformation aimed at the uninitiated masses is used by unscrupulous marketing people. The good news in this case however is the side effect that it may make people aware of the state of legislation when it comes to privacy. Cheers, Benedikt -- Business Grade IPv6 Consulting, Training, Projects Benedikt Stockebrand, Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/
In message <A0B7463F-59DB-4D56-8DAB-E03B5AC65C69@gmail.com>, at 14:13:53 on Sun, 24 Nov 2013, Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13@gmail.com> writes
Venues that provide WiFi are responsible for this under the Data Protection act, European Directive for Data Retention Regulations 2009, the Code of Practice (Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001), Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 and Digital Economy Act 2010.
When somebody supplies a WiFi hotspot, these legal requirements must be complied with, such as holding data and logging all URLs visited.
Only if they've been instructed to do that. Otherwise any such responsibility is with the upstream (who may or may not have been so instructed also). -- Roland Perry
On 24 Nov 2013, at 13:13, Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, I know. It is very early to start any discussion. But an interesting article in the Telegraph.
Hmmm. If it's in the Torygraph and on the interwebs it must be true, mustn't it? The article is interesting Gordon. But perhaps not in the way you thought. IMO, the article is a good example of churnalism: a press release given a cursory makeover by a lazy reporter to turn it into "news". There's no reasonable attempt to report the detail or check the facts. My understanding is that RIPA obligations (and the rest) apply to Communications Service Providers: essentially the main telcos and ISPs based in the UK. It's highly unlikely those requirements would be directly imposed on someone providing Internet access for an IETF or RIPE or ICANN meeting. So money launderers, pornographers, drug dealers and terrorists will still be able to attend and get connectivity just like the rest of us when they show up. :-) I'm sure the RIPE meeting team will be aware of what needs to be done about compliance, if anything, since much of that legislation was in place for RIPE49.
participants (5)
-
Benedikt Stockebrand -
Gordon Lennox -
Jim Reid -
Roland Perry -
Will Hargrave