You are being watched.

[Jack Layton]

Not by creepy Jeets, but cops who don't like your opinion.

Privacy At Risk: Government Buries Lawful Access Provisions in New Border Bill - Michael Geist

The government yesterday introduced the Strong Border Act (Bill C-2), legislation that was promoted as establishing new border measure provisions presumably designed to address U.S. concerns regarding the border. Yet buried toward the end of the bill are lawful access provisions that have...

www.michaelgeist.ca

No mainstream coverage.
First, the bill creates a new “information demand” for law enforcement that does not require court oversight. This is the government’s response to the Supreme Court decisions as it seeks to carve out warrantless access to information about an Internet subscriber. It states:

487.‍0121 (1) A peace officer or public officer may make a demand in Form 5.‍0011 to a person who provides services to the public requiring the person to provide, in the form, manner and time specified in the demand, the following information:
(a) whether the person provides or has provided services to any subscriber or client, or to any account or identifier, specified in the form;

(b) if the person provides or has provided services to that subscriber, client, account or identifier,
(i) whether the person possesses or controls any information, including transmission data, in relation to that subscriber, client, account or identifier,

(ii) in the case of services provided in Canada, the province and municipality in which they are or were provided, and

(iii) in the case of services provided outside Canada, the country and municipality in which they are or were provided;

(c) if the person provides services to that subscriber, client, account or identifier, the date on which the person began providing the services;

(d) if the person provided services to that subscriber, client, account or identifier but no longer does so, the period during which the person provided the services;

(e) the name or identifier, if known, of any other person who provides services to the public and who provides or has provided services to that subscriber, client, account or identifier and any other information, if known, referred to in any of paragraphs (b) to (d) in relation to that other person and that subscriber, client, account or identifier; and

(f) if the person is unable to provide any information referred to in paragraphs (a) to (e), a statement to that effect.


This does not involve disclosure of the data but rather information on whether the provider has relevant data. The standard for making such a request is only “reasonable grounds to suspect” that

(a) an offence has been or will be committed under this Act or any other Act of Parliament; and

(b) the information that is demanded will assist in the investigation of the offence.


In other words, this covers reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence under any law has been or will be committed. Not only does this go beyond the border, there are no limits to the kinds of offences that are covered given that any of Act of Parliament is included.

 

[Hirudinea]

Not by creepy Jeets, but cops who don't like your opinion.

Privacy At Risk: Government Buries Lawful Access Provisions in New Border Bill - Michael Geist

The government yesterday introduced the Strong Border Act (Bill C-2), legislation that was promoted as establishing new border measure provisions presumably designed to address U.S. concerns regarding the border. Yet buried toward the end of the bill are lawful access provisions that have...

www.michaelgeist.ca

No mainstream coverage.
First, the bill creates a new “information demand” for law enforcement that does not require court oversight. This is the government’s response to the Supreme Court decisions as it seeks to carve out warrantless access to information about an Internet subscriber. It states:


This does not involve disclosure of the data but rather information on whether the provider has relevant data. The standard for making such a request is only “reasonable grounds to suspect” that


In other words, this covers reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence under any law has been or will be committed. Not only does this go beyond the border, there are no limits to the kinds of offences that are covered given that any of Act of Parliament is included.

Jack Layton I thought the Supreme Court said writs of assistance were bad?

 

[ayn_rands_ghost]

Police these days seem to make their own laws. I am sure this will be challenged in court but will take years and the police responsible will never be held accountable...

 

[Squishybear]

Or they’ll just retire before anything can be done and then it’s too bad, so sad.

 

[hugh_madd]

Telcos/ISPs already spend a lot of time and effort dealing with every law enforcement request. They ought to be pushing back in the face of that wasted time increasing exponentially.

 

[Squishybear]

Hubby and I already frequently randomly say “hey guys, stop listening in for a second!” Or “hi government and police, hope you’re doing well!”

I also like to randomly wave at the sky and say “hi government, it’s sunbathing time, look away now!”

Cos honestly, maybe I’m just a crazy conspiracy theorist but the amount of online ads we get about something we talked about 5min ago is insane. No googling, nor do we have any Alexa’s or robot vacuums or talking fridges or anything. Just plain old internet, computers and cell phones. But somehow they adjust the online ads accordingly.

We were talking about boats and fishing once. Hubby goes online minutes later and every ad was about fishing and boats. Every single one.

 

[Shockadee]

Your devices are listening to you. Take control, run a custom OS on your phone, with no Google / Apple services. Get rid of Alexas and other voice activated devices. Run Linux on your PC if you are able.

GraphineOS on mobile is a helluva drug.

 

[Oderus]

That's not gonna shut me up.

 

[JeetsUnlimited]

If you're posting online with your actual home IP address you're a fucking imbecile. A special kind of stupid.

Use Tor browser, problem solved. Or even a VPN with a separate browser for shitposting is fine.

The police that show up on people's doorsteps for "hate" speech offenses deserve to get the rope BEFORE the politicians that made these laws. They are the ones that directly enable this kind of tyranny, just like the covid bullshit. I will have no mercy on them when/if such a time comes and canadian soi nu-males grow a set of balls. (not likely, I know I know)

In an unrelated topic, did you know the average family sedan has enough power to drag about 3 or 4 big burlap sacks of sand of average human weight behind the car when carefully tied to the trailer hitch or rear bumper? Sure, gas mileage is somewhat poor, but you only need to go a mile or two before the sacks break open and are no longer a threat to your freedom.