By Was - 16 Sep 24 1:14 PM
+xBrowser history is not the same thing as internet access. Because many apps don't use the browser, it means all your internet use is not recorded in the browser. Although when the SHPOs were originally conceived, almost everything did go through the browser, which is why the wording is misleading. The tech has evolved, but the law has not.
Whilst true the sense that not everything goes through a "browser", everything is logged (and a lot that looks like it doesn't go though a browser invariably does - Chrome CEF is an example). Your ISP is also required by law to keep logs of everyone's internet activity. They have to keep it for 12 months.
In any case, I'd be astonished if anyone is allowed to keep a device that hasn't been audited as "safe" (e.g. IoT devices) or doesn't have monitoring software installed by the PPU on it, so it's a bit moot.
|
By punter99 - 17 Sep 24 10:26 AM
+x+xBrowser history is not the same thing as internet access. Because many apps don't use the browser, it means all your internet use is not recorded in the browser. Although when the SHPOs were originally conceived, almost everything did go through the browser, which is why the wording is misleading. The tech has evolved, but the law has not. Whilst true the sense that not everything goes through a "browser", everything is logged (and a lot that looks like it doesn't go though a browser invariably does - Chrome CEF is an example). Your ISP is also required by law to keep logs of everyone's internet activity. They have to keep it for 12 months. In any case, I'd be astonished if anyone is allowed to keep a device that hasn't been audited as "safe" (e.g. IoT devices) or doesn't have monitoring software installed by the PPU on it, so it's a bit moot.
Not sure that's right. Monitoring software is optional, even if the SHPO says you have to agree to it being installed, doesn't mean the PPU will choose to install it. Most PPU only check the browser history, they don't ask the isp for logs, and even if they did, the logs only record what websites you visited, don't they?
|
By xDanx - 17 Sep 24 1:08 PM
+x+x+xBrowser history is not the same thing as internet access. Because many apps don't use the browser, it means all your internet use is not recorded in the browser. Although when the SHPOs were originally conceived, almost everything did go through the browser, which is why the wording is misleading. The tech has evolved, but the law has not. Whilst true the sense that not everything goes through a "browser", everything is logged (and a lot that looks like it doesn't go though a browser invariably does - Chrome CEF is an example). Your ISP is also required by law to keep logs of everyone's internet activity. They have to keep it for 12 months. In any case, I'd be astonished if anyone is allowed to keep a device that hasn't been audited as "safe" (e.g. IoT devices) or doesn't have monitoring software installed by the PPU on it, so it's a bit moot. Not sure that's right. Monitoring software is optional, even if the SHPO says you have to agree to it being installed, doesn't mean the PPU will choose to install it. Most PPU only check the browser history, they don't ask the isp for logs, and even if they did, the logs only record what websites you visited, don't they?
ISP's will log the websites you visit, but will not log what you are viewing (far as I know anyway)
|
By Was - 17 Sep 24 3:08 PM
+x[quote]ISP's will log the websites you visit, but will not log what you are viewing (far as I know anyway)
True, but it would be sufficient to prove that a bent copper had logged in using your details and did dodgy things to frame you, which seems to be the worry here.
As for monitoring software. I agree, it is not mandatory. It's at their choice and they may chose not to.
I did get a Windows Phone mobile just to see if they had software for it (they didn't). I also took in a replacement iPhone to the station and they didn't put anything on it. However, I never deleted a single thing for 5 years so I was compliant with my SHPO.
|
By punter99 - 18 Sep 24 10:42 AM
+x+x[quote]ISP's will log the websites you visit, but will not log what you are viewing (far as I know anyway)
True, but it would be sufficient to prove that a bent copper had logged in using your details and did dodgy things to frame you, which seems to be the worry here. As for monitoring software. I agree, it is not mandatory. It's at their choice and they may chose not to. I did get a Windows Phone mobile just to see if they had software for it (they didn't). I also took in a replacement iPhone to the station and they didn't put anything on it. However, I never deleted a single thing for 5 years so I was compliant with my SHPO.
I don't think they can put monitoring software on iphones. But I don't think they need to anyway, because these phones already spy on you. I read a very interesting article about how iphones scan every image you upload and put a marker on your phone if the image is considered dodgy. The marker doesn't trigger a report to the police, unless there are a certain number of images though. This is to cover you for accidental uploading apparently.
But there is a threshold number of images and once you hit the threshold, it triggers the phone to release all of the accumulated markers to the authorities.
|
By Grey Area - 19 Sep 24 8:48 AM
My licence is far more restrictive than my SHPO. Where the latter says I can't access the internet unless I maintain a record of at least 30 days, the former says I must maintain "an entire usage history".
I did challenge this as it's very restrictive and in effect has an extra financial penalty (eventually the phone will be full requiring me to buy a new one) but I've only ten weeks to go now and then I should be able to clear up some space.
Probation have been ridiculously inflexible about this; they said I couldn't even edit a document, but would have to keep a copy of the original and put changes in that...but as soon as I make a copy and change it... well logically you can see that's an infinite loop.
When challenged my probation officer says these are "standard phrases"...but I haven't seen anyone else subjected to this "entire usage history" requirement.
|
By Grey Area - 19 Sep 24 9:02 AM
+x+x[quote]ISP's will log the websites you visit, but will not log what you are viewing (far as I know anyway)
True, but it would be sufficient to prove that a bent copper had logged in using your details and did dodgy things to frame you, which seems to be the worry here. As for monitoring software. I agree, it is not mandatory. It's at their choice and they may chose not to. I did get a Windows Phone mobile just to see if they had software for it (they didn't). I also took in a replacement iPhone to the station and they didn't put anything on it. However, I never deleted a single thing for 5 years so I was compliant with my SHPO.
It's not about dodgy things, it's about asking an offender to sign up to rules that they cannot follow. Whilst yes, the actions that break the rules would require a "bent" copper, and that sounds like the typical paranoid fantasy, it is not correct to say a bent copper does not exist. Most services that require a password are very clear that sharing said password is a breach of the EULA, and whilst there will be clauses to allow the operator to comply with law enforcement, I doubt there are any that say it's okay for the user to share a password with them.
It's just too open to abuse and too hard to control once your password is in a third party's hands. You give your password to your PPU. They give it to three mates down the pub and ask them to log into your Facebook account (or whatever) on a burner phone and post a comment. It doesn't even have to be anything illegal they post ..because on next visit they ask you to show your record for device "x" and of course you don't have it. Yes of course an investigation you hope will reveal the truth; enjoy your 6 to 12 months languishing on remand while the police, effectively investigate themselves.
Someone posted "do you really need Facebook that much?". No, which is why I closed it.
|
By AB2014 - 19 Sep 24 9:04 AM
+xMy licence is far more restrictive than my SHPO. Where the latter says I can't access the internet unless I maintain a record of at least 30 days, the former says I must maintain "an entire usage history". I did challenge this as it's very restrictive and in effect has an extra financial penalty (eventually the phone will be full requiring me to buy a new one) but I've only ten weeks to go now and then I should be able to clear up some space. Probation have been ridiculously inflexible about this; they said I couldn't even edit a document, but would have to keep a copy of the original and put changes in that...but as soon as I make a copy and change it... well logically you can see that's an infinite loop. When challenged my probation officer says these are "standard phrases"...but I haven't seen anyone else subjected to this "entire usage history" requirement.
They aren't "standard phrases", though. You can read the standard phrases in their policy framework document here. Those old favourites "necessary" and "proportionate" also put in an appearance.
|
By Grey Area - 19 Sep 24 9:05 AM
Someone mentioned they use WhatsApp. I've been specifically told I can't use that because it doesn't keep a lot.
So much further these "standard phrases" my probation officer keeps insisting she uses..
|
By punter99 - 19 Sep 24 10:06 AM
The entire usage history is just a variation on the phrases 'internet history' and 'history of internet use', both of which predate the emergence of things like Whatsapp. It's because of the problem with stand alone apps which bypass the browser history. They haven't come up with a way to describe that yet, so they are improvising.
I had an interesting conversation with the PPU about emails. They decided that if the spam filter deletes an email then that's ok, but I delete the same email, then its not ok. Every PPU and probation officer makes up their own rules. I was told by probation that I couldn't go into a pub, if it had a children's play area, even though I have no contact restrictions, or restrictions on where I can go, in my SHPO. It's all a consequence of them using vague words like 'contact' and 'history', that are not defined anywhere in the law.
|
By Grey Area - 19 Sep 24 11:01 PM
I agree entirely about the vagueness. Again it's deliberate as it allows them to react however they want in any given situation.
I find they vary from very reasonable to completely draconic and in many circumstances it makes achieving the broader goals that they SAY they want you to work towards absolutely impossible. How is one supposed to re-engage with society if one just avoid children entirely?
My probation officer has even reinterpreted the written condition that I'm not allowed unsupervised contact with children under 18 to the extent that I'm not allowed to meet children so used to know, even though I've disclosed to their parents and they are aware of that they would have to be present. She says if I spend any time with them as a family, she'll recall me.
I'd fight it, but I know it would just mean more unfavourable headlines, win or lose, and if that was just me, I'd risk it; but it potentially affects the children too.
Comes to something when the offender is more concerned with children's wellbeing than the service that is supposed to protect them...
|
By Was - 20 Sep 24 11:40 AM
+xSomeone mentioned they use WhatsApp. I've been specifically told I can't use that because it doesn't keep a lot. So much further these "standard phrases" my probation officer keeps insisting she uses..
I said I used WhatApp when I was on the SOR. The only requirement was that I didn't delete any messages which I don't anyway.
From what you have previously posted, you appear to have a far more restrictive set of rules than I did, so it's probably not right to compare my experience with yours.
|
By JASB - 20 Sep 24 12:23 PM
+x+xBrowser history is not the same thing as internet access. Because many apps don't use the browser, it means all your internet use is not recorded in the browser. Although when the SHPOs were originally conceived, almost everything did go through the browser, which is why the wording is misleading. The tech has evolved, but the law has not. Whilst true the sense that not everything goes through a "browser", everything is logged (and a lot that looks like it doesn't go though a browser invariably does - Chrome CEF is an example). Your ISP is also required by law to keep logs of everyone's internet activity. They have to keep it for 12 months. In any case, I'd be astonished if anyone is allowed to keep a device that hasn't been audited as "safe" (e.g. IoT devices) or doesn't have monitoring software installed by the PPU on it, so it's a bit moot.
Sorry for the slow reply but though I agree to them inspecting my mobile and laptop, I have stressed nothing would be allowed to be installed as there is no "order" allowing them to. I asked why they look seeing I have no "internet" offence, but the reply was local policy so I live with it. I use software to clear history etc as a habit from my security days plus to maintain the devices. They live with that
|
By Mo22 - 28 May 22 6:23 PM
Hi guys. Are you allowed to use Facebook while on a shpo? Also do you have to give the ppu your passwords for like emails etc.
|
|