No, I probably clicked the wrong "Reply" button, but there were two different posts involved and I'm not someone who will make two posts when one will do, which obviously didn't work out so well this time. The point about disposing of internet-enable devices was made by punter99, and you made the point about smart meters.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

Is this a reply to my post? I never mentioned getting rid of internet enabled devices.

However it is, as you say, clear as mud. An external disk drive is clearly not an internet enabled device, but via another device can be connected to the internet. A lot depends on how an individual SHPO is phrased and whether you are prepared to argue that in front of a judge!

First of all, the argument about disposing of internet-enabled devices isn't as clear as you might think. After all, if the police turn up and ask to inspect that device and you can't prove that you've got rid of it, they would probably assume that you're hiding it, which is a breach of your SHPO. So, if you do sell or donate a device, make sure you get a proper receipt.

Secondly, some utility companies will put in their terms and conditions that either you own the smart meter or it becomes your property after a certain period of time. It's worth checking, just to be sure.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

Smart meters I would say no as they are owned by the utility company and you have no access other than via a fixed device, but video doorbells yes...

However, I did go through a rather extensive list of absolutely everything in my flat that might even hint at being internet accessible. I gave them a list of all my bluetooth devices, dongles, video recorders, and anything with an Ethernet cable, as well as all wi-fi devices and broken equipment and TVs. Pointless, but it made me happy that they'd have to waste their time entering them all into the system. A minor "taking back control" win! 

Interesting. I wonder if smart meters have to be registered too, as they use the internet. Same for video doorbells. As for the console, most SHPOs do not contain restrictions on repairing or selling devices, but they do talk about deleting internet history. There was a loophole in the SHPO, when it comes to telling the PPU about selling devices too. You have to tell them when you acquire a device, but not when you get rid of one. If you sell a device to a shop and they delete the data on it, not you, then arguably that is not a breach of the SHPO.

When I came out of prison I found my console wouldn't turn on. I spoke to a repairer and they said it was either the power supply or the hard drive.

I spoke to PPU and they had no system that would allow me to get it repaired. The issue being of course that I _could_ have had (but didn't) something on the hard drive that I was trying to hide. I couldn't sell it if course, so just had to surrender it to them.

Pretty sure some copper got it repaired for fifty quid and helped himself.

They don't care that their rules are vague, self-contradictory, impossible and just occasionally, laughable; I had to register my new Thermostat because it's an "internet enabled device"...

Unfortunately, the butt of the joke is us.

I'm sure you're right, but I'm not sure their action are obvious. It's just as possible that because of their prejudices they were looking for any little thing that they could use to try to justify saying no. The threat of the SHPO might be a bluff to try to make sure there is no appeal or complaint. Bullies do that.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

What's happened here, is that they have made a decision based on incomplete information. The officer who refused the application to come off he SOR is more senior to the one who does the visits. They have to rely on the notes on the system, because they have never met the person whose application they are assessing.

They have obviously seen one note about the use of online forums and taken it out of context. They have probably assumed that this person spends every day on multiple online forums and therefore an SHPO is required so that the PPU can monitor the conversations that they imagine are taking place on these forums. But clearly the visiting officer is totally unconcerned about the forum. We know that, because not once in 15 years have they bothered to check the devices. 

The senior officer has exaggerated the risk and we know that they always apply for an SHPO nowadays, whether its needed or not. It's a way of covering themselves, if something does go wrong.

So you can't get off the SOR if you have an SHPO, but you also can't get off it if you don't have one. Sure, they can say that you haven't had the same level of supervision, but they've had all that time to consider applying for an SHPO but didn't do it. Why would they start now? After all, they've been doing risk assessments for all these years, so why would your risk level have increased to a level where they think they actually need one? Or are they just trying to bully you? Either way, in the criminal justice system, hope for the best but prepare for the worst.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

I am not sure where the data for Edge is stored, It will very likely be inaccessible as I know Microsoft tend to lock out access to its own software sometimes. I use Firefox and most the data is stored in a hidden folder called "apps"

Ill find out more about Edge and will post what I find

Thanks, yes you're right, it's only them mentioning an SHPO on my SOR refusal letter for the first time ever that makes me think they're planning an SHPO.

Would be interested to know for my own benefit where browsing history is stored so I know what to backup if/when it happens.
I use Windows 10 and Edge browser.

I really doubt a SHPO will be given to you, based on what I remember in your previous post where you shared what they had sent you. It never specifically stated a SHPO would be applied for (correct me if I am wrong), rather they using the fact you do not have a SHPO as justification to keep you on the SOR. Along side not complying with what they wanted you to do (polygraph).

If a SHPO was to be given, you can challenge it making your main argument that it has already been 15+ years... why now? what evidence is there of causing any form of harm to the public or escalation to contact offenses?

Anytime I needed to reinstall windows I just let my OM know, he comes and does his checks then gives me the go ahead to do what I need to do. Because I know where the data for my browsing history is stored, I tend to make back ups of that too just in case.

I would hope not.  What necessitated those factory resets were crashes that basically meant the computer died completely - wouldn't boot up, wouldn't start. 
Guessing plod wouldn't in the least be all that fussed about me having a dead computer/no internet access but so much of normal life involves having that access - eg my medical stuff is all done online with SystmOne, and banking would be a pain.
Not that these factory resets were a choice anyway.

Some PPU will delete the internet history themselves, after checking it, so you could ask them to do that. As for factory resets, presumably you would need to get the PPU to agree to it first, rather than just notifying them?

If you're worried about your security software, there are YouTubers I trust who recommend just using Windows' built-in security, which is far better than it used to be. I switched over and have had no problems in the last couple of years.

In terms of the software, I had a big crash last week and let PPU know I was thinking of having it fixed professionally, as all the advanced options available from the blue screen didn't work. I told PPU that I might be getting it fixed and that the software might be affected if there was a reset. I started the factory reset but abandoned it because I wasn't online and couldn't select the recommended option. It then took me to a different menu which offered repair and that fixed it. I restarted it to make sure the monitoring software was running, and it was. That might help you or others when it inevitably happens again.

I get the feeling that crashes are an inevitable part of using Windows. I get blue screens every few weeks, but the first restart is normally OK. Bigger problems are less common but I've been through the advanced options a couple of times this year so far. 

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

Bits of this are flagging questions I need to ask, and concerns I have, being that I seem to have an SHPO incoming.

1. There's mention above about "not deleting internet history."  My concern is that I use McAffee on my main windows10 laptop and periodically have to run its tracker-remover to stop it getting sluggish. (It's an Inspiron 3585 just over a year old so no slouch).  Guessing running its tracker remover - which also clears history - is going to be a problem.

2.  In the first couple of posts it was said about "not removing or deleting plod's software."  My concern is that this Inspiron has suffered two crashes in the first year of owning, which required a factory reset.
What the hell are we supposed to do in that instance?
I would like to hope the crashes were isolated, but my Lenovo Legion 5 gaming laptop (that only runs a flightsim) has also had one crash that necessitated a factory reset in the last year.

The wording is unlike anything I've seen previously. Maybe more recent SHPOs have been updated, to reflect modern technology? The fact that it mentions certain software by name, does remove any ambiguity though. One of the problems. is that some browsers come with things like VPN and Tor built in, whilst the SHPO only refers to 'additional' browser software which implies that if it is built in, then it's ok.

As for Kaspersky, that is primarily anti malware, so it doesn't come under any of the headings in the SHPO, I don't know if it has Tor built into it, but it's main function is not to access Tor, or to anonymise your ID, so it should be OK. After a quick look at their website, it would appear that you can have a VPN, as part of your Kaspersky, but only if you opt for the premium package. Since it's optional, and not standard, then you could just opt out of the VPN bit and keep the basic Kaspersky, without breaching the SHPO.
 

1, prohibited using any internet enabled device unless the device has the capacity to retain and display the history of internet use and notified ppu or its equivalent in the area that he resides that now he possesses the particular device

2 deleting internet user history

3 installing or using on any internet enabled device any operating system that removes all traces of the internet user history for, examples being “Tails” (The Amenesiac incognito live system) “Whonix”

4 deleting or interfering with any risk assessment software if it’s installed upon any internet enabled device

5 installing and or using any internet enabled device any additional browser software designed to give access to the dark web or designed to anonymise the identity of then user examples being TOR, Obot, Onion browser.

6 I’m using any home broadband router unless he makes it available for inspection at the request of his ppu officer.

7 installing an or using internet enabled device any application which includes as feature of that application the destruction of messages sent out received by the user examples being Snapchat and Wickr
( Even though I wasn’t convicted for contact offences 🤔)

8 installing or using on any internet enabled device evidence elimination software for example CCleaner, 9, installing or using on any internet enabled device any type of peer to peer file sharing software examples being Emule, shareza, frostwire, gigatribe, ares.

10 installing or using on any internet enabled device any type of VPN service or proxy service that has the ability to anonymise the internet protocol IP address of the user, examples being hidemyass, Ipvanish, ExpressVPN

12 communications via the internet with any child or young person who is believed to be under the age of 16 unless such contact is for lawful purpose and you have the Vincent in advanced of a parent or guardian of the child other than yourself who knows your criminal convictions

This order remain for 7 years 😩😩😩

You've just got a technically ignorant PPO. I'd ask them to check with someone who is qualified.

If you have monitoring software installed, it makes no difference whether you use VPN or any other security software. It captures keystrokes, and snapshots images and videos on the client side before anything gets encrypted and sent and when things are decrypted and saved. I had a VPN on my laptop throughout my SHPO period (mainly to watch the Women's Super League as the FA Player shows Sky and BT Sport matches in other countries.) and it was never an issue. 

And there is nothing in most SHPOs about not being able to access the dark web. True, it would raise suspicions but it's not illegal. It's what you do on it that might be. Facebook and the BBC have sites on it. I just found it easier not to.

As for anti-virus, unless you have a specialised requirement, switch on Windows Defender and have it auto update. It is perfectly fine for most users and free and there is no way they can object to a built-in operating system feature. That's not what a SHPO is there for.

It all comes down to how your SHPO is worded which allows them to interpret it given their limited knowledge. I still read articles of individuals breaching their SHPO's just for having CC Cleaner installed which 1, does not touch anything relating to internet history 2, does not offer (as far as I am aware) any VPN services 3, only removes driver related files and registry information. The simple truth is, the PPU do not want you to delete ANYTHING because they are clueless when it comes to technology. And anything that ultimately benefits you in terms of keeping yourself safe, they will see as a way of hiding something based on absolutely no evidence. If you are willing, could you list in full what your SHPO restrictions are so I can see how it is all worded?

As for your PPU, she told you "it could be a breach" which in my opinion means she is not 100% sure it is and would likely have to check with someone who knows more about it than herself. If it was indeed a breach, would she not have arrested you on the grounds of breaching the SHPO? I do not remember much about Kaspeky, I mostly use Malwarebytes for security but I would not be surprised if most of the security software out there now offer some sort of deal with VPNs. My PPU has never once mentioned or had concerns with me having Malwarebytes despite having it there visible on my desktop. I do not see anything relating to VPN on it so perhaps you could switch over to that just to keep your PPU happy. As for her claims of you potentially accessing the dark web, even if you were using a VPN you still need certain software in order to access it in the first place, if you do not have that software installed to begin with. Then how can she accuse you of something you have not yet done? As usual with police mentality, guilty until proven innocent.
You stated "you have the software on here anyway" which I assume you mean they already have monitoring software installed correct? If that is the case then everything you do will be checked regardless of whether you use a VPN or not. If your SHPO does state not to use VPN's then of course do follow it.

You have to remember, Police are so far behind the times with technology and will always make individuals believe they are right and you are wrong.