http://www.guardian.co.uk/internetnews/story/0,7369,589006,00.html

Police get sweeping access to net data

Blunkett will not limit scope of measure to
terrorist cases

Stuart Millar, technology correspondent
Wednesday November 7, 2001
The Guardian

Sweeping proposals to give law enforcement
agencies access to the communications records of
every UK telephone and internet user will not be
restricted to anti-terrorist investigations,
despite assurances to the contrary from the home
secretary.

The Guardian has established that the detailed
communications data to be retained as part of the
government's response to the September 11
attacks will be available to police investigating
minor crimes. It will also be available for tax
collection and public health and safety purposes.

Home Office officials involved in implementing
the proposals in a voluntary code of practice with
the providers have confirmed there are no plans
to limit access to cases involving national
security.

This directly contradicts what appeared to be an
assurance given by David Blunkett, the home
secretary, two weeks ago in an attempt to soothe
the fears of civil liberties campaigners about the
privacy implications of blanket data retention.

In his column in Tribune on October 26, Mr
Blunkett acknowledged that internet and phone
data retention raised serious concerns.

But he said that more information was needed than
was available under current law "strictly in the
case of a criminal investigation against suspected
terrorists.

"That is why we are working with companies on a
code of practice with the result they will keep
billing records for longer than at present, to
allow access in relation to anti-terrorist
activity".

According to the Foundation for Information
Policy Research, an independent internet think
tank, data involved would provide a "complete map
of an individual's life".

It is likely to include details of email addresses
they have communicated with, which internet
service providers they use, when they used them
and which sites they visited while online. Officials
now claim that Mr Blunkett did not actually mean
that the information would only be used for
anti-terrorist investigations.

Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act,
passed last year, law enforcement agencies can
obtain communications data without a court order
for a broad range of purposes. These include
national security, preventing or detecting crime
and disorder, protecting public health and safety
and collecting tax.

One official told the Guardian: "The data will be
available for the full range of purposes listed in
the act."

Mark Seddon, the editor of Tribune and a member
of Labour's national executive committee, said:
"He would have known that all the civil liberties
campaigners like Liberty would have read
Tribune and that piece would have done the
rounds."

Simon Hughes, the Liberal Democrat home affairs
spokesman, said: "We understand the argument
for data retention for specific purposes under
terror legislation for the period of an emergency.
There is a different argument, with much less
justification, for general powers from now, in
theory, until eternity."

The development is likely to cause consternation
among some internet and phone companies.

Steve Rawlinson, chief technical officer of
Claranet, which has about 500,000 customers in
the UK, said: "The request that came through after
the US attacks to collect certain types of data was
reasonable because it was being used for an
anti-terrorist investigation.

"What worries us is that under Ripa [the act], the
criteria for access are pretty broad, so the police
can demand the whole lot whenever they want on
their own authority."

Tomorrow, the Commons home affairs committee
will begin hearing evidence as it considers the
emergency anti-terror bill, which is expected to
be passed later this month.

Last night a Home Office spokeswoman denied that
Mr Blunkett had intended the Tribune article to
mean that the information would only be used
against suspected terrorists. She said: "The
article was by necessity an abridged version of
the proposals we are bringing forward."