Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Canada Privacy Security Your Rights Online

Canadian Government Seeking New Net Snooping Powers 77

An anonymous reader writes "A bill being considered by the Canadian federal parliament includes two clauses specifically to reduce the 'due process' imposed when the police need information from ISPs. Under the proposed bill, law enforcement officers will not require a warrant to acquire information about internet subscribers from Canadian ISPs ... Paul Ducklin has criticized the bill saying that it 'doesn't even seem to propose that the requests be based on any sort of specific identifier, such as a name or an email address ... This suggests, in the worst case, that an ISP might be compelled simply to hand over information about all subscribers. No warrant needed, and thus no proactive oversight by the judiciary.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Canadian Government Seeking New Net Snooping Powers

Comments Filter:
  • Disgusting. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    The US and Canadian governments illustrate more and more every day how the interests of big money outweigh the duty to the public.

    • by bonch ( 38532 ) *

      Slashdot on Google: "So what if they have all my personal info? We're living in the internet era. I'm not concerned that they can index my email or track my browsing habits."
      Slashdot on governments: "How dare law enforcement be able to track criminals without a warrant. What happened to the public's right to privacy?"

      • Re:Disgusting. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by cab15625 ( 710956 ) on Thursday August 18, 2011 @11:26PM (#37137916)
        You seem to be suggesting that there is some sort of double standard. So tell me, when was the last time that you heard of Google sending their armed law enforcement agents to a private residence to arrest someone? We hold corporations and governments to different standards because they have different powers and different duties. Part of the duties of a government are to protect the rights of citizens and individuals (often from corporations). This sort of legislation betrays the trust that we are supposed to be able to have for our government.
    • Re:Disgusting. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Shark ( 78448 ) on Thursday August 18, 2011 @07:14PM (#37136160)

      Actually, from requests I've had (I work from a small ISP), they already have something on the books for this and it doesn't require a warrant. The RCMP officer refered to section 7(3)(c.1)(ii) of the "Pursuant to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Document Act" (PIPEDA). Apparently it requires no warrant in cases where disclosure is required to enforce a law... That leaves an aftertaste of gigantic loophole in my mouth but I'm no lawyer.

      • by Syberz ( 1170343 )

        IANAL, but my understanding of PIPEDA is that personal information can be gathered without the individual's consent when this information is required for law enforcement. This is NOT the same as you (your company) handing that information over freely, i.e. the RCMP can snoop around and find that information on their own without having to tell the individual that they collected his info. Your company on the other hand, asked for the individual's consent before collecting and part of that consent covers the f

  • That's just great. What else are on the table?
    • by dryeo ( 100693 )

      Updated copyright laws including DMCA like provisions as written by America (Wikileaks leaked a document showing our glorious leader responding to the American ambassadors pressure to pass the law before the election as saying it would make them unelectable. This shows who they're representing).
      Tougher crime laws including 3 strike type laws and building more prisons even though the crime rate has been seriously dropping.
      Getting rid of most government scientists because they keep making business unfriendly

  • by Anonymous Coward

    At least State-side you have to call them a terr'ist first.

  • Canada seems to be picking up the US's bad habits lately....
    • Lately? The Canadian govt is always trying to catch up the the US govt's bad habits. Tis always been true, and is true regardless of which political party is winning on either side of the border.
    • by rikkards ( 98006 )

      And none of this was a surprise. The Tories were completely open about the Omnibus bill which this contains. You know we are under extreme assault by terrorists and pedophiles. And pretty much there is nothing anyone can do since they have a majority. Sure you can contact your MP and all they will do is tow the line about how it is keeping us safe, blah blah blah.

  • Wait, what? (Score:1, Informative)

    by Samalie ( 1016193 )

    You pulled a bill from a year ago, that has been effectively tabled by the fact that we just had an election? And where no current bill of the same authority is under consideration?

    There is no bill, hence no discussion anymore, hence NO FUCKING STORY. Way to factcheck.

    • Re:Wait, what? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by causality ( 777677 ) on Thursday August 18, 2011 @05:13PM (#37135102)

      You pulled a bill from a year ago, that has been effectively tabled by the fact that we just had an election? And where no current bill of the same authority is under consideration?

      There is no bill, hence no discussion anymore, hence NO FUCKING STORY. Way to factcheck.

      Yeah that is pretty lame.

      Still, it is definitely a problem that anyone holding any public office would even think of doing this.

      The legal definition of "treason" needs to be expanded to include "any elected official, appointed official, or employee or agent of either, who makes any effort to subvert, reduce, eliminate, or work around due process for any reason or no reason at all". For both the US and Canada. It's hard to think of more effective ways to permanently damage a nation.

    • Yeah, this is useless as it is a first reading under a different government. Although the Conservative Party of Canada now has a majority government, the official opposition is now the New Democratic Party, not the Liberal Party of Canada. The Liberals tried pushing similar legislation through themselves while the NDP have been more vocal about net neutrality and privacy than their middle-of-the-road pro-business predecessors. So, we'll see how this goes on second reading. However, it should be noted that
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        The NDP stand on the issue will be almost irrelevant now that the Conservatives have a majority. The government can ram through whatever they want after respecting the token amount of opposition comment that they have to tolerate in parliamentary procedure. The ONLY way that the NDP or any other opposition is going to have an influence is if the general public takes an interest in the issue and loudly voices an opinion on what is being said. Even if the public does take an interest, the Conservatives can

    • by Anonymous Coward

      You pulled a bill from a year ago, that has been effectively tabled by the fact that we just had an election? And where no current bill of the same authority is under consideration?

      There is no bill, hence no discussion anymore, hence NO FUCKING STORY. Way to factcheck.

      You mad bro. How much you get from haarpers goons to post this? Just because its first reading was a year ago doesn't mean it isn't currently under consideration, or can't be revived at a moment's notice and passed very quickly once the proper representatives have been paid off.

      • by topham ( 32406 )

        Yes, it is highly likely a new version will be tabled.

        But it is stupid to try and stir up shit over a version of the bill that is defunct. Call up your MP and mention this bill and they'll laugh at you. When the new bill is tabled and you can identify the sections you have issues with then your MP might actually listen to what you have to say. Most of them aren't even smart enough to correlate what is in the old bill with what may appear in a new bill. Assume they are all stupid and wait for the new bill to

  • This was from last year.

  • So for those who always play the "Baw, I'm moving to Canada" card... where to now?

    • There is no way this will get passed... come on over! We have excellent beer!

      • by rikkards ( 98006 )

        Umm... you understand what a majority government is right? If Harper says to pass it, it will get passed. It was one of their platforms for the election.

  • No.

    Information is information, violence is violence, theft is theft. Canada is fortunate to have one of the broadest freedom of speech policies in the world.

    Dangerous information:
    Bombs: Yea, good for preventing fascism.
    Yelling fire: No one takes the Internet that seriously.
    Child porn: This is an interesting one. Apparently viewing child porn has a high incidence of creating child molesters. This is based off a study conducted by the CIA and FBI to justify wire tapping, in the 80s. I'd really like to s
  • Harper should have had Jack Layton cancer !

  • Just have the chief of police, or whomever, come before Parliament and state, for the record...

    "I have a team of 100 officers, standing by to make phone calls to the ISPs of every single one of you, and will be requesting ALL information regarding YOUR accounts. Where you've been, who you've been chatting with, what sites you've been browsing. Because past behavior has given us MORE than enough reason to investigate you all."

    • by mirix ( 1649853 )

      Except the police are in bed with the ruling conservatives. That's generally how fascists operate.

  • 'You won't recognize Canada when I get through with it,' -Harper

    I'm also looking to the mandatory minimum sentences and other idiocy they'll be cooking up. I really wish we had PR.

  • The bill will be dropped fairly fast if all Canadians agree to it on one condition: real time uncensored logs of all Internet use (work and private) of all federal and provincial politicians, judges and anyone invovled in law enforcement or the court system. See how long the bill lasts.

  • As others have noted, this (anonymous) submission may be pointless. (I haven't verified that, though.)

    With that said, Canadians, please look to the future and learn about your options.

    There is a great article/tutorial on Surveillance Self Defense [] at the EFF. Although it is aimed primarily at US citizens, much of it also applies to you - and the technical tools described are equally effective in any country.

    I really want Canada to be a place of enlightened freedom, so I have someplace to go when the Corpora

  • While the bill from the article is from a year ago, and therefore the summary sucks, the basic premise of the story remains very much intact under the current Harper government. The real story is as follows and is only six months old, as opposed to a year, so its good for slashdot:

    "A bill [] will soon be passed into law by the Canadian government, which will require that ISPs disclose customer information such as name, phone number, email address, IP address, house address, and more, and furthermore requir
  • There is no such thing as due process in Canada. There never was. Authorities can decide on a whim what they will do to you.
    There is also no recourse, no accountability, no freedom from intrusion. The 'reasonable grounds' dictate for search and seizure are based on some drones best imaginings of you at the time.

    The Canadian government also collects information about the population on a regular basis ans stores it away in
    CPIC and among various vestigial databases.

    There are no real controls over how CPIC data

  • I have one word to describe the proponents of warrantless searches: Neo-Nazis. Well, its really 2 words. It is noteworthy that the Chinese Nazi dictatorship praises Britain and countries like Canada that adopt such measures, since it serves to legitimize China's regular policy of oppression of free speech and civil liberties. The Nazis in Iran are solidly behind such moves, as well. Good company to keep!
  • This was tried a few years ago under the auspices of "Save the children from kiddy porn"...

    It didn't fly then, and was defeated.

    Now that the Conservatives have a majority, and are making silly decisions in an effort to "look tough on crime"...

    I hope it doesn't pass, but if it ever will, now is the time.

You know, Callahan's is a peaceable bar, but if you ask that dog what his favorite formatter is, and he says "roff! roff!", well, I'll just have to...