Britain has passed what everyone calls the “snooper’s charter” otherwise known as the Investigatory Powers Bill.This new legislation establishes the legal framework authorizing the government to hack into devices, networks and services in bulk and to create vast databases of personal information on all UK citizens. This is a preliminary step for a movement to impose worldwide taxation on Brits.This is really to hunt money, not terrorism.
The “snooper’s charter” requires internet, phone and communication app companies to store records for 12 months and allow authorities to access them whenever they demand. That data will include anything you look at or search on the internet as well as all your telephone calls and text messages. Meanwhile, security agencies will be able to force companies to decrypt data avoiding the Apple confrontation in the USA. They are also imposing limitations on the use of end-to-end encryption.They want EVERYTHING you do. This has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with terrorism.This is the hunt for taxes coming to a head in 2017.
For the first time, security services will be able to hack into computers, networks, mobile devices, servers and more under the proposed plans. The practice is known as equipment interference and is set out in part 5, chapter 2, of the IP Bill.
This could include downloading data from a mobile phone that is stolen or left unattended, or software that tracks every keyboard letter pressed being installed on a laptop.
“More complex equipment interference operations may involve exploiting existing vulnerabilities in software in order to gain control of devices or networks to remotely extract material or monitor the user of the device,” a draft code of conduct says.
The power will be available to police forces and intelligence services. Warrants must be issued for the hacking to take place.
For those not living in the UK, but who have come to the attention of the security agencies, the potential to be hacked increases. Bulk equipment interference (chapter 3 of the IP Bill) allows for large scale hacks in “large operations”.
Data can be gathered from “a large number of devices in the specified location”. A draft code of practice says a foreign region (although it does not give a size) where terrorism is suspected could be targeted, for instance. As a result, it is likely the data of innocent people would be gathered.
Security and intelligence agencies must apply for a warrant from the Secretary of State and these groups are the only people who can complete bulk hacks.
To help oversee the new powers, the Home Office is introducing new roles to approve warrants and handle issues that arise from the new powers. The Investigatory Powers Commissioner (IPC) and judicial commissioners (part 8, chapter 1 of the IP Bill) will be appointed by Theresa May, or whoever the serving prime minister is at the time.
The IPC will be a senior judge and be supported by other high court judges. “The IPC will audit compliance and undertake investigations,” the government says.
“The Commissioner will report publicly and make recommendations on what he finds in the course of his work,” guidance on the original bill says (page 6). “He will also publish guidance when it is required on the proper use of investigatory powers.”
Under the IP Bill, security services and police forces will be able to access communications data when it is needed to help their investigations. This means internet history data (Internet Connection Records, in official speak) will have to be stored for 12 months.
Communications service providers, which include everything from internet companies and messenger services to postal services, will have to store meta data about the communications made through their services.
The who, what, when, and where will have to be stored. This will mean your internet service provider stores that you visited WIRED.co.uk to read this article, on this day, at this time and where from (i.e. a mobile device). This will be done for every website visited for a year.
Web records and communications data is detailed under chapter 3, part 3 of the law and warrants are required for the data to be accessed. A draft code of practice details more information on communications data.
Bulk data sets
As well as communications data being stored, intelligence agencies will also be able to obtain and use “bulk personal datasets”. These mass data sets mostly include a “majority of individuals” that aren’t suspected in any wrongdoing but have been swept-up in the data collection.
These (detailed under part 7 of the IP Bill and in a code of practice), as well as warrants for their creation and retention must be obtained.
“Typically these datasets are very large, and of a size which means they cannot be processed manually,” the draft code of practice describes the data sets as. These types of databases can be created from a variety of sources.
EXCLUSIVE: How the Governmental Services Corporation owns all computers
The only method by which the UK CROWN CORPORATION is allowed to HACK computers, phones, tablets, computer networks, etc is if they legally own the property. This is to say they are allowed to hack personal property because they own the CORPORATION that re-presents you (as a human) in their system and which owns the property.
They are trying to convert all private property into PERSON-AL property of the artificial person, owned by them. Any corporation and PERSON that is incorporated WITHIN their Governmental Services Corporation is OWNED by them and must abide by their rules.
Put another way, the UK Crown Corporation is creating a legal COPY/representation of all actual material Computer Hardware in the UK. These legal copies are what judges use to hack/access the devices. When permission is given to hack the legal copy, the hardware can then be hacked physically. The LEGAL COPY of the Computer Hardware is also physical OWNERSHIP. So it is not enough to actually physically possess something. One must have a negotiable instrument to represent it in order to retain RIGHTS. If there is no method to DECLARE the Computer property not legalizable due to prior legalization and/or as private property and/or any number of reasons, the code is inactionable as there is no loophole to keep computer property OUT of their fictional legalese system.
Just like MOTOR VEHICLES the LEGAL “CERTIFICATE OF TITLE” of the Computer Hardware is an insurance franchise. To be able to legalize the computer hardware, there MUST be a chunk of DEBT-MONEY somewhere that represents the physical hardware. Liens can be placed upon the debt, and the computer confiscated as surety for the debt-that-represents-the-hardware. The UK confiscated computer hardware all the time as parts of corporate policy enforcement before this legislation, this new legislation legalizes computer hardware as a matter of definitive and outright presumption.
Also keep in mind that the UK just unilaterally declared all computer hardware property of the UK. Would it be illegal to defend a UK network against a Courtesy Access®™ [my term] by the UK? Would it be illegal to defend a NON-UK network against a Courtesy Access®™?
The Solution is to move into INTERNATIONAL JURISDICTION. In essence, become your own governmental services corporation and copy what they do. Luckily, there are already international organizations doing exactly this, such as World Citizen at the World Government of World Citizens.
By creating a NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT that represents your material objects, you can claim superior pre-emptive title to that of the Governmental Services Corporation.
How would that look in action? Let’s use the instance of cannabis which is lawful and non-legal in all instances, illegal in some US STATE CORPORATIONS, requires a license with conditions in other US STATE CORPORATIONS, and is legal in other US STATE CORPORATIONS.
How could someone transfer cannabis from one legal state to another legal state through an illegal state? By creating a World Citizen (or other non-US-resident) Negotiable Instrument that represents the matter in totality, the matter is now in that “legal” jurisdiction. The matter cannot be legalized by a STATE by presumption because it has already been legalized. In order for the STATE to be able to confiscate the cannabis, they would have to exchange the negotiable instrument that represents the cannabis for value. The best solution is to affix the negotiable instrument to the actual cannabis containers as labels. Thus if the cannabis is “confiscated” then they only have 3 business days to honor the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT. If any policy enforcement agency goes into dishonor, they cannot use the cannabis in any charges or proceedings as they never abided by their oath to the Constitution, Amendment 5 requiring just compensation for public use of private property.
By labeling everything “important” you own with a negotiable instrument, this provides another layer of protection for private property rights such that the governmental services corporation won’t be able to steal it without first committing securities (negotiable instrument, bank note) violations.