As always, the Chief Surveillance Commissioner tends to reveal a little more than either the Interception of Communications Commissioner or the Intelligence Services Commissioner ever do in their Annual reports.
Unlike the other two RIPA Commissioners, Sir Christopher Rose does actually have something to report about RIPA Part II:
CHIS = Covert Human Intelligence Sources
i.e. spies , undercover agents, paid informers, unpaid informers etc.
CHIS
4.8 There were 5,320 CHIS recruited by law enforcement agencies during the year; 4,495 were cancelled (including some who were recruited during the previous year) ; and 3,767 were in place at the end of March 2010. The figures for the previous year which were 4,278, 4,202 and 3,722 indicate a slight increase in usage.
4.9 During the current reporting year other public authorities recruited 229 CHIS of whom 182 were cancelled during the year with 90 in place on 31 March 2010.
During the previous year 234 were recruited, 153 cancelled and 106 were in place at the end of the year. Again just over half of CHIS usage was by government departments. The light use of RIPA/RIP(S)A powers by local authorities is even more pronounced in relation to CHIS recruitment. 97% recruited five or fewer and 86% did not use CHIS.
There are some criticisms of CHIS management and tradecraft:
5.9 There are too many occasions when inspections reveal poor tradecraft in managing CHIS. Infrequent physical meetings and reliance on communication by text messages are rarely adequate. There have also been instances where law enforcement officers have pretended to be the CHIS when communicating with his associates online, without properly providing the CHIS with an alibi. It seems to me that this is an unsafe practice.
The protection of CHIS is one of the main reasons cited for the vast amount of secrecy and lack of freedom of information and transparency in the Police and Intelligence Agencies etc.
Such amateurism in the handling of CHIS should be punished by removal of those responsible from any positions of power or authority involving CHIS - they could literally get people killed through such incompetence.
Encryption Keys and RIPA Part III
At last a few details about RIPA Part III:
NTAC = National Technical; Assistance Centre, now run by GCHQ, politically controlled by the Foreign Secretary.
Section 49 - encryption
4.10 During the period reported on, NTAC granted 38 approvals. Of these, 22 had permission granted by a Circuit Judge, of which 17 have so far been served. Six were complied with and seven were not complied with, the remainder were still being processed. Of the seven that were not complied with, five people were charged with an offence, one was not charged and the other is still being processed. So far there has been one conviction with other cases still to be decided.
4.11 The conviction related to the possession of indecent images of children and this offence is the main reason why section 49 notices are served. Other offences include: insider dealing, illegal broadcasting, theft, evasion of excise duty and aggravated burglary. It is of note that only one notice was served in relation to terrorism offences.
These statistics further aggravate the injustice to someone who does not fall into any of these categories see the previous Spy Blog article: "JFL" provides some more details about his imprisonment for refusing to divulge his cryptographic keys under a RIPA Part III section 49 notice
4.12 These statistics are provided by NTAC which is able to be accurate regarding the number of approvals it has granted. But it is reliant on those processing notices to keep it informed regarding progress. It appears that there has been delay in serving some notices after approval has been granted (hence the difference between the number approved and the number served) . Notices, once approved, should be served without delay. If delays continue, I will require an explanation.
Sir Christopher does not seem to have delved into whether or not the de-crypted plaintext or the cryptographic keys were actually stored securely, ideally also using strong encryption or not, once they had been seized as evidence through the section 49 orders.
Unless and until the public is reassured about that, then there will be lots of non-cooperation from businesses which risk massive "collateral damage" to their core business systems, as a result of police investigations involving only part of their computer infrastructure, or a few employees or customers.
There is nothing specific about Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR), but there is a section on CCTV:
Closed Circuit TeleVision - CCTV
CCTV
5.22 My Chief Inspector has met the Interim CCTV Regulator and, as a member of the Independent Advisors Group, he will represent me in the development of the National CCTV Strategy.
How things have changed. Previously the Surveillance Commissioners took no interest in overt or covert CCTV spy cameras.
5.23 I am pleased by the proliferation of protocols between local authorities and police forces. In particular, I am satisfied that there is a wider acceptance of the need for authorisations to be shown to those responsible for using cameras covertly. But I am concerned at the number of inspections reporting the ability of some police forces to control, remotely, cameras owned, solely by or in partnership with, a local council. Sometimes control can be taken without the knowledge of the council CCTV Control Room or the guarantee that an appropriate authorisation exists. Equally, there is no guarantee that the person remotely operating the camera is appropriately qualified to conduct such an operation. Protocols should clarify the procedures to be followed when control is taken by others outside the CCTV Control Room and ensure that suitable safeguards are in place to prevent misuse.
i am being harassed by victimised by police and council for 7 years and have 100% not committed a crime. l work as manageress and have been working there for 8 years. i get followed to and from home every single day(survelance) the more l complain the more intimidation l get. and this has been going on from 2004 till to date 2010. the flush light on me, make sirens, l like in louth town in lincolnshire. l have been to the police station 13 time and the harassment only stops for 3 to 4 days and they intimidate me again and again. have been asking they if l am on survellance why when l have not done anything long and why i have not been asked anything and been told anything. and why for 7 years. my telephone number is {nnnnnnnnnn] thank you
Hi There,
I get snooped on regularly as part of a drugging/smear/psych-war campaign. I was wondering if there is a particular anti virus you would recommend to prevent regular intrusion of my privacy.
Thanks,
Donnie
Also, while I'm on it, can you recommend any particularly useful Firewalls or Antispyware software?
If you can reply openly on here that would be great(I don't know if this would be undesirable), as I my emails get deleted before I can see them from time to time....
Thanks again.
@ Donnie - do you have any evidence of such snooping ? Snooped on by whom exactly ?
What sort of "emails get deleted before I can see them from time to time" ? That sounds more like anti-email spam false positives/false negatives rather than anything malicious. If your email account really was being intercepted, the last thing a snooper would want, would be to alert you in any way (it is actually a criminal offence with a penalty of up to 5 years in prison to reveal that someone's email account is being legally intercepted in the UK - see the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 section 19 Offence for unathorised disclosures)
Anti-virus, firewall and anti-spyware software has its place, but it is unlikely to make much difference to your privacy.
Either you are engaged in unsafe internet behaviour e.g. visiting dodgy websites with an insecure version of a web browser, opening spam email attachments etc. or you are not, in which case the anti-virus software etc. is not really adding anything of value.
Facebook is a huge risk to your privacy, but you may have decided that the benefits outweigh the risks for you.
You need to make a proper risk assessment of the real threats against you.
See:
Digital Security and Privacy for Human Rights Defenders
http://www.frontlinedefenders.org/files/en/esecman.en_.pdf
and our own
Hints and Tips for Whistleblowers
Technical Hints and Tips for protecting the
anonymity of sources for Whistleblowers, Investigative Journalists, Campaign Activists and Political Bloggers etc.
http://ht4w.co.uk
Initially I believe it to have been local CID. But laterally (due to increased political interests/activity on my part), I believe the surveillance op was ceded over to domestic intelligence (While the police retain involvement).
I don't have evidence. I don't really have access to any databases or otherwise which could help me prove the use of certain vehicles or evidence the abuse of communications etc.
I could probably obtain evidence of some sort but it would require an 'illegal' effort. Most of the psych war is pretty lame, but I have made complaints about a couple of members of staff at work for their comments (which
were to me typical in intent of the stuff those carrying out the 'op' have come away with). One of these complaints resulted in the company taking on my Grievance as a Disciplinary and giving the guy a final written warning.
The Procurator Fiscal and his superiors knocked back my complaint against the police because of lack of evidence. When I complained to the IPT about CID & The SS, they refused to even hear my complaint. I submitted over 30 pages including the T1/T2 forms. They knocked it back, saying with a crappy little one page doc that it was rejected as they considered it "frivolous and vexatious". I went to see about getting legal aid but was advised it would be difficult to overturn the decision within a judicial review without any evidence. My earnings in the last little while have taken me just outside the band qualifying for representation in any case. And I can't really afford to pay for it myself.
I actually came accross your website looking for info to take to my local MP to complain about the IPT and their bias.
I am aware that Facebook affords no privacy really. It is more the intrusion and interference into my daily business.(allow me to vent slightly...) I've been followed for almost 11 years now by these clowns and their circus of bullshit. They've seen all there is to see but still cling on with unbelievable dedication to foolishness (and/or too much pride to admit error). They'll probably go to their graves still deluded by their nonsense.
I emailed the guy John Young who runs Cryptome a while back, and he seemed sure that their aren't really any Security programs available to the general public which can't be bypassed. Would you agree with this at all?
Thanks for those links. I will read them when I get the chance. Any feedback welcome. I hope what I've said elucidates you somewhat.
@ Donnie - full on 24/7 intenive surveillance operations can easily require up to 50 people, so they are expensive and only used for the most serious intelligence or serious criminal gang investigations.
Presumably none of your activities would justify that level of surveillance ?
Neither anti-surveillance nor counter-surveillance techniques (there is a difference) are actually illegal.
It should be possible for you to get some evidence that you are being followed etc., especially with the help of a couple of friends with digital cameras etc. positioned in hiding, to get photographic or video images of any actual pedestrians or vehicles tailing you.
See the techniques describes by the Communist / African National Conference activists / terrorists under the apartheid regime in South Africa in the 1980's
http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/history/ug/secretwork.html
You could also set up email accounts and web pages etc. or mobile phone voice or data or SMS text message calls, which are effectively "honey traps" for snoopers.
You can also do things like checking for BlueTooth device names in range of your mobile phone or laptop computer - these can often betray snoopers who are out of your direct visual sight.
If you take up a legal hobby like Geocaching
http://www.geocaching.com/
you will seem to be acting very much like a Russian or American spy, setting up and using Dead Drops etc. which should then be easy to check if you are really being followed and by whom.
In terms of computer security - it is very easy to make them completely secure, but also then completely useless.
You have to do an accurate risk assessment and then compromise accordingly, exactly like the Police and Intelligence agencies (and spies, terrorists and criminals) and repressed political activists do, all over the world.
.
Your telling me. I don’t think it is anywhere near 50 people but it’s certainly comfortably into double figures. It’s a disgraceful waste of tax money.
Yes that was one of my complaints against the operation to the IPT…... The offence(s) they are claiming (based on personal attacks I have observed from psych warfare) would not have been valid to justify surveillance as it would not result in 2 years or more in prison. Presumably they have tailored their allegations in order to get the necessary approval. But of course, as you know, these people are a law unto themselves and undercover op’s aren’t generally held accountable to the RIPA.
It’s obviously not usually as simple as someone walking along behind you, but if I was to take pictures of people who I am quite certain are involved in the surveillance…. Is this illegal? Also, is that sufficient as evidence? I mean presumably if a person or people pictured were subsequently tracked down they would have a suitable excuse/identity prepared....
The problem with this advice you are giving me here is that they will clearly be observing this and trying to plan my moves and guard against, so it’s difficult discussing this very subject here, though I am not entirely sure how to properly go about evidencing using the tools mentioned. With the geocaching, I would say that the political side of things that has attracted intel attention is extremely likely to involve me being suspected of being some sort of informer or spy; more likely just them doing their usual intrusions upon people who know/take an interest in the crimes of the state.
I will certainly read through the information you have given me. Thank you for providing this and taking the time to respond.
SORRY, that first bit where i said 'likely', should have read 'unlikely'
@ Donnie
Provided that you do not contravene the Sexual Offences Act 2003 sections 67 Voyeurism and 68 Voyeurism: interpretation (extremely unlikely) then taking photos of people in public places is not illegal.
Taking photos and then publishing details of current or former members of the Police or Intelligence Agencies or Military Forces (even disgraced former spies and traitors) is technically illegal, but nobody has been charged with the offence just yet and there is massive opposition to it from professional and amateur photographers and political activists etc.
They would have to admit that they were following you and that they working for one or more of those agencies, which is something which they would try to avoid.
Firstly get some photographic evidence that someone is actually following you.
Do not get too paranoid and start suspecting everyone and anyone of following you.
If your friends have witnessed them following you down dead ends and observed and ideally secretly photographed them examining things you have apparently left at a supposed Dead Letter Drop, then there is no possible innocent "cover story".
See the South African Communist Party / African National Congress article sections:
7. The Check Route
and
8. Check Route with Assistance and By Vehicle
Tracking down who they are is the next stage and is something which you may not have to do yourself - you might be able to get another rival state agency or the mainstream media, or an internet crowd source, to do it for you
You could try encrypted email communications with us here at Spy Blog - blog@spy.org.uk, using our PGP Public Encryption Key, or using Hushmail (see the http://ht4w.co.uk guide for details)
nsightful thoughts here. Are you certain this is the best way to look at it though? My experience is that we should pretty much live and let live because what one person thinks just -- another person simply doesn't. People are going to do what they want to do. In the end, they always do. The most we can yearn for is to highlight a few things here and there that hopefully, allows them to make just a little better informed decision. Otherwise, great post. You're definitely making me think! --Barry
very good \o/
good quality post thanks
You made some good points there. I researched this matter and found out that many people will agree with your blog. My kind regards, Odelia.
Some clubs probably do have the time for a that shapes a bad impression for a.