Should Internet Companies Store Details Of Website Visits?

[AB Editor]

May calls for internet companies to store details of website visits:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/03/may-calls-for-internet-companies-to-store-details-of-website-visits

From the Guardian:

David Anderson QC, the terror legislation watchdog commissioned to report on the state of Britain’s surveillance laws in the aftermath of Snowden’s disclosures...

“Under this definition a web log would reveal that a user had visited eg google.com or bbc.co.uk but not the specific page,” said Anderson in his report, A Question of Trust. “It could also of course reveal ... that a user has visited a pornography site or a site for sufferers of a particular medical condition, though the Home Office tells me it is in practice very difficult to piece together a browsing history.”

So, should internet companies be forced to store and share your visiting history?

It is alleged there will be "strong controls" on the data. To me it seems like we're being asked to trust the government's word on this one!

[-SharonA-]

I don't agree with this as this violates privacy. It would be like the postman opening your mail before posting through the letterbox.

[hc4361]

This is exactly the same as the business post through your letterbox, Sharon. The postman doesn't know what the letter says but he knows who it is going to and who it is from - look at the back of the envelope, or even the front it it is from Sky or Virgin.

I'm in two minds about it - I can see the need for surveillance in these troubling times but I'm uneasy about breach of privacy

[jno]

well, it'd be more like GCHQ opening your mail, which they will do anyway if they feel like it.

I don't like it at all, partly on privacy principles, but partly also because officials are forever leaving their laptops on the train.

[Old_Geezer]

It should not be stored by default as it is an abuse to a citizen's right to privacy. Individual folk, whom the authorities have reason to suspect is committing criminal activity, should be able to be monitored but only with the safeguard of a judge's permission. Once obtained the ISPs can add them to the short list. I do not see how commercial companies come into this. Is it also to include illegal organisations and terrorist groups who will have to submit lists or is it only normal citizens one wishes to nose at ?

I believe I held earlier today that the judge's say so was included. Not been keeping a close eye on how this is going though.

[Old_Geezer]

HEARD

As I £"!^"$%&£^%&* well wrote !

[Gromit]

I am sure the ISPs have this data already since the police and Security Companies can request it now. The law makes it mandatory to keep the data and mandatory to hand ot over.

Since the ISPs know your history, I see nothing wrong with making it obliitary to retain the information for 12 months.
But there should be stringent safeguards put in place for accessing the data. The police should not be given carte blanche to randomly fish the data. They must have a genuine suspicion that a specific crime has occurred or may occur. I would be happy with requests having to be signed off by the Independent Police Commissioners.

[janbee]

I don't have a problem with it.

[anotheoldgit]

They will not be bothered with ordinary Googling and websites, it will be certain person's internet searches and visits to certain website that they will be focusing on.

[Noe-schitt]

I don't see a problem after all your data will be safe and will never be misused
They are looking out for us just like they do in China

[Retrochic]

They only want it Law so they can legitimately go get suspects browsing history. The State will have no interest in the law abiding joe public and how many times they access memberswives.com or embroidery 911. Its like carrying ID cards - only those who have something to hide would be affected.

[chrissa1]

I don't have a problem, with it.

[david small]

Sheeple. You can't see the thin end, and you can't see the wedge. Your naivety, and gullibility will be your own undoing.

[Old_Geezer]

"Its like carrying ID cards"

Well I can agree with that !

[Boto]

I don't have a problem with it. They would be very bored looking at my browsing history.

[Noe-schitt]

When they get back to wanting access to encrypted communication data no doubt you will no objections either

[Togo]

If it comes to pass I will activate Tor again.

[retrocop]

I have nothing to hide. I do nothing illegal or subversive to worry about.
I am more than happy to be obliged to carry an ID card.
I do worry about the AB Constabulary on many an occasion though. :-)

[ludwig]

I thought they did anyway, and also turned it over to the authorities when asked.

I suppose the difference is it's being written into law with a minimum retention period.

[Answerprancer]

Great responses from Noe-schitt. Seriously.