UK ISPs still in the dark on government’s push for a new Snooper’s Charter

When is a database not a database? Answers on a postcard to GCHQ, please.

Kelly Fiveash – Jan 6, 2016 11:08 am | 6

The UK’s internet service providers have called on the government to fill in the gaps about its plans to bring in a new Snooper’s Charter—the draft Investigatory Powers Bill—that would significantly ramp up surveillance of Brits’ online activity.

A lobby group—representing some of the country’s biggest ISPs—submitted evidence (PDF) to the Home Affairs joint committee on Wednesday morning, just hours before ex-NSA technical director, William E. Binney, faces a grilling from MPs and peers.

He will almost certainly give a highly critical take on Home Secretary Theresa May’s controversial draft Investigatory Powers Bill, which is the latest in a series of attempts from successive UK governments of all stripes to bring in a so-called Snooper’s Charter.

However, once again, the UK’s telcos have cautioned against provisions in the draft law by arguing that the government’s push for greater powers for spooks and police is “too wide-ranging.”

The Internet Service Providers’ Association, which represents the likes of BT, Sky, Virgin Media and many smaller UK ISPs, warned in its submission to Parliament that the draft Investigatory Powers Bill (IPB) had been difficult to scrutinise in-depth because it lacked key information. For example, it said clarity was needed on how telcos that comply with the proposed law could recover costs from the government:

We are concerned that some of the provisions in the Bill are too wide-ranging and that the impact of these powers, particularly in the context of fast a changing communications and technology environment (e.g. the rollout of the Internet of Things), is not fully understood.

During joint committee hearings on the IPB—which were rushed through, prior to the Christmas break—a number of ISPs flagged up concerns about the estimated costs.

The ISPA noted this in its written evidence on Wednesday, by claiming that “the true cost of implementing the obligations for a single large ISP would be in the high tens of millions.”

Unlike the UK government, the lobby group did not mince its words on the mysterious-sounding “Request Filter.”

While the Home Office remains keen to avoid any mention of the word “database” when discussing the IPB (such usage is considered political suicide, following New Labour’s disastrous push for what critics at the time dubbed a Database State, when it tried to bring in national ID cards), it’s refreshing to see the ISPA use the term quite freely.

It said that the “request filter effectively creates a single distributed database that is retained in the UK,” and such a tool would include powerful database queries to allow the security services and police to profile suspects.

However, it’s also worth noting that the mood music has shifted slightly: the ISPA agreed that—compared with the previous incarnation of the Snooper’s Charter—the IPB contains a “number of improvements” on potential abuse of such a system by public officials.

It welcomed the proposed creation of a new Investigatory Powers Commissioner to police the police and those in the espionage business, called on clarity around a number of clauses, such as Internet Connection Records and the Communications Data definition in the bill, and suggested that the proposed law needed to be “more tightly drafted” to ensure a robust policy framework.