High Court confirms the way UK banned GSM gateways was illegal UK comms regulator Ofcom can't be ordered to ignore its legal duties, the High Court has ruled, paving the way for GSM gateway operators to claim compensation after Home Office ministers and mandarins destroyed their businesses. VIP Communications Ltd won its judicial review against the Home Office last week while the country …
Do terrorists still use GSM? Social media is their communications of choice nowadays I thought.
A lot of the incidents we've seen have been lone nuts or a group who were in close proximity, I often think the whole concern over terrorists and comms has either been a red herring or a dog chew certain parties can't let go of.
If they've any sense, they'll stick to faxing notes in handwritten Arabic. Current turnaround time is weeks (it might be more in the US). With most plaintext turning out to be ads for flats. (Beyond that, GCHQ pretty much stops dead). An encoded message, written in Farsi, and handwritten in a shop window (or visible to a a webcam) is pretty much invulnerable.
It ain't the bad guys that are obsessed with Facebook, Twitter and the likes. Just your government.
Do terrorists still use GSM?
Much of the governments of the world think that terrorists have a belief about god (that includes atheists), and breathe oxygen. So, I guess yeah, they probably do still use GSM. The goverment's broad use of the word terrorism has made it difficult to catch the actual "wrong doers".
End to end encrypted wi-fi enabled voip and data apps provide perfect non-traceable comms. Cash-paid sims in throwaway mobiles are a secondary option. Terrorists or other subversives using GSM Gateways is not even on the radar.
Check the publicly available David Anderson QC security reports to the government in his independent reviews.
Perhaps they have been named. How the Home Office civil servants think they will get away with this or the manner in which Ofcom professes independence, when it refers such cases back to the Home Office, has been shown to be illegal and beyond any common or moral sense. Such "collusive" behaviour deserves proper investigation.
You can't take away commercial, civil, privacy or other rights just because they are inconvenient to state security organisations. They have to keep the law.
Also even where there is a "right to snoop" the agencies should need a specific court order against an individual, with due cause. No fishing expeditions or entrapment. It's a democracy, not a dictatorship or evil regime.
This post has been deleted by its author
Some people need to learn the principle of 3 dimensional political structuring (left/right, authoritarian/relaxed, regulated/lassaiz-faire). Add more dimensions to suit.
If you ever played D&D, thnk of the the concepts of the axis of law-neutral-chaos and good-neutral-evil and extend it a bit.
One-dimensional political thinking is a bit stringy.
"You can't take away commercial, civil, privacy or other rights just because they are inconvenient to state security organisations. They have to keep the law."
Of course....but you can make it difficult to operate commercially until the problem just goes away or becomes so small it can be easily monitored.
"No fishing expeditions or entrapment. It's a democracy, not a dictatorship or evil regime."
This is one of the reasons _WHY_ UK.gov wants out of the EU and its continued frustration of the government's attempts to go on such fishing expeditions and entrapment attempts.
Why do you think so many uk civil servants / politicians go to China on "fact finding missions"
Its to learn how to build an ever more intrusive surveillance apparatus....
Great Firewall of Britain ain't going to be too far away, porn age verification, makes a good feed in for the social credit system that will follow it - pornography viewer,SNP/Plaid Cymru supporter, Disabled, won anything legal against the govt, shone a light on anything the govt doesn't want anyone to know about all black marks and like the building trade, those involved will rapidly find themselves blacklisted and their life opportunities heavily restricted.
It seems it was the UK Government after all and the faceless civil servants hiding in the shadows. This is perhaps going to cost the Home Office or Ofcom an awful lot in terms of compensation, when in truth this matter should have been settled many years ago. Is Ofcom really independent or fit for purpose?
If a minister such as Mr. Wallace, or a top civil servant such as Mr. Rutnam, makes an egregious over-reaching blunder --- and boy, Tory ministers have made a lot of individual blunders in the last decade --- it would be grossly wrong to make them compensate the government, but I can't see why they shouldn't be ineligible to be a minister for ten years, or if a civil servant, not permitted to progress in the Service.
These are unsafe hands.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
As the current Head of the Civil Service and National Security Adviser, I wonder if Sir Mark Sedwill previously Home Office Permanent Secretary 2013-2017 and appointed Cabinet Secretary in 2018, is aware of what the Home Office and Ofcom were illegally doing?
What really stinks is that any compemsation comes from our taxes.. so less money for the NHS.. Police etc... maybe its rtime ministers bore some real responsibility for the actions of thier departments and underlings, How about the minister responsible gets a month of jail time for every £10,000 of compesation costs to the taxpayers?
They treat all benefit claimants as scroungers and fraudsters, well this would appear to be a fraudulent use of statute law, so in effect a Government or departmental fraud... and its beyond time that those who wield such power were made to take responsibility for the harm they cause
Always used to be that the NHS could pursue an employee' (or ex-employee's) pension for any monetary losses - and this would have been originally modeled on Civil Service terms.
That together with the removal of any honours and demotion, would ensure a deterrent effect.
How about some workfare that various civil servants have a hard on for (What you thought IDS was bright enough to come up with the idea alone?, that labour brought in assessments for ESA - same tune no matter whose in power)
Anyone who costs us the taxpayer money for dodgy dealings, works it off at JSA rates - however that just ups the stakes, hence why execution never eliminated murder
A clear out of the civil service is long overdue, how about we start with the DWP - split it up back into - ministry for work, ministry for social security, ministry for pensions, with no one who works there continuing on to break the authoritarian culture thats festered away in that malign monolith.......ministry of love is more attuned to their world view...
Quote: "Government officials have claimed they frustrate surveillance by spy agencies".
*
Yup.....no mention of exactly who is the target of "surveillance"....likely because EVERYONE in the UK is the target. STASI at work.....not only spying, but ruining lives while they are at it. Strange to note too that most of the recent outrages have been accomplished by individuals "already known to the security services".
*
So much for surveillance!
Jailtime costs the taxpayer money too... Just freeze assets or intercept income streams until there's sufficient recompense
8 years on BAIL??? Wow - just wow!
OfCom refused to support my case against Sky, when I had a transcript showing a Sky salesman keeping me on chat for 55min to secure a sale, the terms of which Sky subsequently did not honour. I took the case to OfCom after Sky admitted guilt on the phone, but refused to compensate. OfCom refused to rule against Sky because "they had no record of that phone call and it was MY responsibility to produce a transcript detailing the admission of guilt.."
OfCom are useless.. They're in the pockets of suitably sized organsations and powerful entities...
This post has been deleted by its author
1. Confiscation of all current and future assets and earnings bar a minimum wage and accomodation on a newly privatised to "social landlord" ex-council sink estate, with every lamp post carrying a poster showing their face and a description of their crimes.
2 - 42. Withdrawn on legal advice.
Gareth Corfield's 2017 article
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/09/26/gsm_gateways_banned_again_home_office/
contains this gem:
"the history of modern government in the UK is hardly littered with shining examples of openness and responsiveness."
Finely nuanced understatement there!
This post has been deleted by its author
"Update 25 April 2019: High Court judgment on Government direction to Ofcom
On 17 April 2019, the High Court issued a judgment in judicial review proceedings which found the Government’s direction of 25 September 2017 to be unlawful. We understand the Government are presently considering their response to the judgment.
We are currently liaising with the Home Office to understand how they wish to proceed given the national security concerns they have identified in relation to the authorisation of COMUGs. We will provide a further update on our next steps as soon as possible."
You can't make this stuff up.
The Times https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/home-office-at-war-after-staff-accuse-priti-patel-of-bullying-qhr7dw9cw
"Even if he is the wronged party, Sir Philip’s position is probably untenable, but unless she makes friends rather than enemies quickly Ms Patel’s days will be numbered too."
Daily Mail https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8022887/Home-Secretary-Priti-Patel-accused-bullying-creating-atmosphere-fear.html
About time Justice was seen to be done and the guilty punished properly.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2023
