UK Tells ISPs They Must Retain Data... Except If It Costs Money

from the mixed-messages dept

For years, Europe has been trying to push data retention rules, that require ISPs to hang onto data much longer than it's needed for any business purpose. Such data retention has plenty of problems, from the likelihood of abuse to the chance of inadvertent disclosure to the simple fact that sifting through more data often makes it more difficult to find the data you actually need. However, the biggest problem is the cost involved with data retention. It's rather costly to retain all that data for many ISPs, and for years ISPs (especially smaller ones) fought to make sure that any data retention laws also included provisions that would make the government pay for retaining the data. While some politicians in the UK have tried to shrug off the cost issue as not a big deal, it looks like it may leave a loophole that makes data retention in the UK basically meaningless.

The Register is reporting on a meeting the UK government held with various ISPs that left many of the ISPs baffled. Basically, they were told that they needed to start retaining data to stay in compliance with the law, but that since the UK government couldn't pay for it, many of the ISPs could get away without actually retaining the data. In other words, it sounded as if they said that, yes, you need to retain the data, but since we don't want to pay for it, maybe you shouldn't actually retain the data (wink, wink, nod, nod). So they end up giving lip service to the public about telling ISPs to retain data, but then since they won't fund it, it won't actually happen.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Jake, Oct 14th, 2008 @ 11:09pm

    A better metaphor for the tone of politics in this country since about 1979 is hard to imagine.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 14th, 2008 @ 11:11pm

    im just wondering how many ppl it took to come up with this plan.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Liquid, Oct 15th, 2008 @ 4:35am

    Another retarded Government Moment! ! !

    Got to love the loopholes that governments put in place to get them selves out of doing something. Especially in this case Britsh Gov. "You (ISP's) now have to retain all data for your network past 7 years, BUT if it costs you money to do so then you don't have to"... This sees real inteligent.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    John Doe, Oct 15th, 2008 @ 5:11am

    Good, I don't think ISPs need to keep data for government purposes anyway. It is not the job of the business world to act as police.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Hoeppner, Oct 15th, 2008 @ 5:18am

    what'cha mean they're already starting to retain it so they can sell it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 15th, 2008 @ 6:31am

    Wasn't these one of those governments that were angry about Google retaining data on people because of privacy issues? Is it because a filthy fat American company was retaining the data and not a jam and scone eating cultured man retaining the data? I just don't understand!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Ppitstop, Oct 15th, 2008 @ 6:39am

    It makes you want to cry or scream

    I know I do

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Scott Lithgow, Oct 15th, 2008 @ 6:41am

    Control

    This current administration just wants to control everything whilst paying for and taking responsibility for absolutely nothing.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    RabC, Oct 15th, 2008 @ 6:43am

    Re:

    It IS because its a filthy freedom-fry eating Co rather than a Chip-eating co-operative of ethical and green members. Its also that when something happens they can turn round to the public and say "well, we told them to keep the data!". No blame on them. And its DA-TAH retention, not dayta retention, you unspeakable wretch..

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 15th, 2008 @ 7:23am

    Re: Another retarded Government Moment! ! !

    "You (ISP's) now have to retain all data for your network past 7 years, BUT if it costs you money to do so then you don't have to"

    I think it's more a case of "...BUT if it costs US money to do so..."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 15th, 2008 @ 7:24am

    Re: Control

    Er... Isn't that pretty much the definition of "Politics"?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    mike allen, Oct 15th, 2008 @ 9:02am

    one word

    ENCRYPTION

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Joseph Young, Oct 16th, 2008 @ 9:39am

    The Communications Data Bill and the Interception Modernisation Programme

    This makes perfect sense in the broader context. Directive 2006/24/EC, the data retention directive, is a result of proposals the UK government put forward to the European Union. The idea was to incorporate the resulting directive into wider-ranging UK legislation and then blame the whole lot on the nasty Europeans. Unfortunately, the timing did not go to plan. The Communications Data Bill is late and the resultant act will not be on the statue book before the deadline for implementing the data retention directive. To meet that deadline, the Retention (EC Directive) Regulations 2008 will be a near verbatim transcription of Directive 2006/24/EC into UK law. Associated with the Communications Data Bill we have the Interception Modernisation Programme. This is fast being decoupled from the bill to prevent it being scrutinised by parliament.

    Firstly, the government have a voluntary agreement with UK ISPs. Some information the ISPs already collect, such as web browsing, is not required by the data retention directive, although information is not usually retained for the minimum six months set by the directive. So, pressurising the ISPs at this stage would gain little and risk their goodwill.

    Secondly, at some point in the future, the government will be expecting ISPs to put systems into their networks to meet the requirements of the Communications Data Bill and the Interception Modernisation Programme. A system that can centrally log the existence of every communication any person within the UK makes is far beyond what is required for the data retention directive. Any money spent on meeting that directive will almost certainly be completely wasted. Attempting to capture all web browsing, all email including private messaging on web fora, all instant messaging, all on-line gaming including private servers, all the various protocols for transmitting voice and video, in fact any way two people can communicate over the Internet will require the most sophisticated deep packet inspection of every packet originating or terminating within the UK. Then, when the communication of specific people has been identified, the system will hoover up all future content of those communications. Not only is this far beyond the data retention directive, I believe that it is far beyond what even a country like China could or would even want to achieve.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This