Graham Smith
Coming up: 10 changes the government should make to the #IPBill but almost certainly won't.
-
4/10 Failing 3/10, require any proposed use of data retention powers beyond ICRs to be publicly consulted on beforehand.
5/10 Better statutory safeguards on the use that can be made of bulk intercepted related communications data. (cf ISC report para 23.)
-
-
6/10 Require greater specificity than ‘general’ for operational purposes described in a warrant.
- View other replies
-
7/10 Future-proof not the powers, but the privacy/intrusion balance settled on by Parliament.
-
8/10 Thus abandon technology-neutral drafting, use concrete definitions, sunset the powers and bring them back to Parliament frequently.
-
9/10 Oversight body should proactively seek out and publish legal interpretations on the basis of which powers are exercised and asserted.
-
10/10 Avoid sloughing everything off to Codes of Practice. They are no substitute for properly limited and clearly drafted powers.
- View other replies
-
Still no Bill definition of 'internet service' or 'internet communications service' for ICRs. Sloughed off to CoP.pic.twitter.com/t8CiG9yDoT
-
Critical ICR definitions consigned to Code of Practice footnotes.
#facepalm#IPBillpic.twitter.com/nDWT2tr8z7
- View other replies
- Show more
-
-
-
Home Office has defended the draft Bill position on RCD and other bulk CD.pic.twitter.com/wbffABHQMQ
-
@cyberleagle Although now we have new terminology to get to grips with: 'secondary data', 'systems data', 'identifying data'. Farewell RCD.
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.