Be careful what you post...

[ghanimah]

An EU Directive comes into force today, which will require all ISPs to retain information on email traffic, visits to web sites, telephone calls and texts for 12 months.

Police and security services will be able to access the information to combat crime and terrorism. (yeah right!)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7985339.stm

An example of democracy in action:

These powers were brought in by a statutory instrument and so were not debated by either house. The accepted view is that the Home Office now bypasses parliament by lobbying Europe directly in the knowledge that the measures they desire will go undebated and unscrutinised, then be smuggled into British law as a European directive.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/apr/06/internet-houseofcommons

[Colin Todd]

A shit law brought in via undemoctaric means.  Dosnt get much better does it?

I look forward to having my emails read by someone at SBC investagating if it is my dog that shat in the park 63 days ago.

[Samdy Gray]

I'm sure ISP's are going to love having to introduce all those extra resources to effectively packet sniff all of their clients. That's going to take a hell of a lot of processing power.

[Spencer_White]

Fuck off Jacqui Smith.

You are shit.

[BANGKOK RED]

So can I not say stuff about bombs and plutonium and rockets and stuff?

[Talk Talk]

So can I not say stuff about bombs and plutonium and rockets and stuff?

Yes you can. But not Islam, Muslim, suicide bombers, infidel, jihad, Allah, bomb, assassinate, president, Brown, Smith, Harman, Hoon, Osama, Obama, Sarkozy, Merkel, government, target, location, rocket, grenade, al-Qaeda, Pakistan, India, Afghanistan, UK, America, guns, jets, machine-gun, terrorists, MPs, pigs, troughs, France, Germany, Italy, nuclear, Korea, anarchy, socialism, nihilism, fundamentalism, fascism, racism, communism.

Take that, you fucking totalitarian cunts.

[Barry Scott]

So can I not say stuff about bombs and plutonium and rockets and stuff?

I think it should be recommended. If i had the time and inclination i would attach a dynamic signature to all mail containing words such as nuclear, bomb, terrorism, islam, kill, assassinate, murder, president, obama, bush, osama, blair, gordon brown...

Give em so many red herrings and false positives they won't know where to start. It'd be amazing to overwhelm the "service" and ruin their filtering, which looking at the way the government do anything will be half-arsed, expensive and partially inoperable anyway.

[Talk Talk]

I think it should be recommended. If i had the time and inclination i would attach a dynamic signature to all mail containing words such as nuclear, bomb, terrorism, islam, kill, assassinate, murder, president, obama, bush, osama, blair, gordon brown...

Go on, do it. Even in business emails. If you make it white text on a white background nobody will notice.

[Talk Talk]

Fuck off Jacqui Smith.

You are shit.

Oh and put the 15th June in your calendar/diary. cc all of your emails (preferably including spam) to the fat ugly troughing cuntbag.

http://www.ccjacquismith.co.uk/

[chalkies_shorts]

I think it should be recommended. If i had the time and inclination i would attach a dynamic signature to all mail containing words such as nuclear, bomb, terrorism, islam, kill, assassinate, murder, president, obama, bush, osama, blair, gordon brown...

Give em so many red herrings and false positives they won't know where to start. It'd be amazing to overwhelm the "service" and ruin their filtering, which looking at the way the government do anything will be half-arsed, expensive and partially inoperable anyway.

You're off to Guantamano Bay for a few years, matey. Does orange suit you?

[Barry Scott]

Go on, do it. Even in business emails. If you make it white text on a white background nobody will notice.

You could easily generate dynamic signatures, but it would likely need to be inserted into an html email by an iframe, which them leaves a footprint as obvious as it gets. To make it truly annoying it would need to be without footprints, which i suspect could be done easily by sending mail, as text, through php send mail or an old Perl formail. Even then though they could just ignore it easily enough, but i suspect someone would still have to trawl through them. Which would be funny.

Which remind me of the trick that the Team America blokes played on the censors. When they originally made it, they made the sex-scene 45 minutes long so the sensors had to watch through every second of it. They then cut 99% of it out.

Oh, http://thetownend.com/index.php/topic,32482.0.html

[SwindonTartanArmy]

Which remind me of the trick that the Team America blokes played on the censors. When they originally made it, they made the sex-scene 45 minutes long so the sensors had to watch through every second of it. They then cut 99% of it out.

[Gazza's Fat Mate]

I thought they only kept details of whom you send emails to and who you get emails from not the content of emails.

[suttonred]

I thought they only kept details of whom you send emails to and who you get emails from not the content of emails.

  That's the official line, but anyone who thinks that is the reality is misguided.

[Samdy Gray]

  That's the official line, but anyone who thinks that is the reality is misguided.

Exactly. In practice, it just won't work. They can't just choose to filter email headers, they'll effectively have to capture, reconstruct and read every packet of data you send/received.