Police want travel card data to track suspicious rail passengers. How much is our privacy under threat?

[deltic]

Will you be happy to let the police look routinely at your bank transactions without a warrant, and without suspicion of any unlawful events? I wouldn't.

That's already done by the banks to identify unusual transactions both to protect you from fraud and to identify it. Proper data analysis just searches for patterns, it doesn't look randomly at individuals' activities.

 

[Davester50]

That's already done by the banks to identify unusual transactions both to protect you from fraud and to identify it. Proper data analysis just searches for patterns, it doesn't look randomly at individuals' activities.

I asked about the Police. Not the Bank.

 

[Busaholic]

The CNC aren't really of much concern unless you go knocking around nuclear power stations.
along

The personnel recruited by the CNC and made police constables are of grave concern, given the relatively modest size of the force, and when they then apply to move to the Met. Not only was the murderer/rapist Wayne Cousens a PC there but others who transferred and are now on trial for various offences in London: they were members of a social media group who had communications with Cousens in the period leading up to his arrest and eventual conviction. ''One bad apple'' eh?

 

[DarloRich]

While I find that uncomfortable too, you must appreciate there is quite a difference between actively running a file on a specific person, which will have been triggered by something specific happening of interest, and running data-mining on an entire database and having an algorithm extract from that a collection of people with 'unusual' behaviours.

But surely the later is simply a way of enlightening the former? Is this not just another source of police intelligence? How is it different from me telling the police that the bloke at number 57 (Mr Mike WM) comes and goes at funny hours and has some shady looking blokes round.

That "tip" alone isn't going to get a visit from the police. However if there is other intelligence to support that accusation then they might pop round or they may investigate in a more direct or invasive manner.

Returning to the travel details database: Travel information ALONE isn't going to have you hauled in for the thumb screws.

Firstly some of us are not remotely casual about many of these things at all, and we're already deeply uncomfortable at how far down this path we have gone.

I agree. However, MOST people don't care.

But secondly the fact we're already a long way down this path isn't itself a reason to object to moves to move us further down it.

I don't disagree, however I am a realist and try to be pragmatic. This isn't, in my view, a big step down the slippery slope when Facebook knows everything about me, even if i don't tell them it.

PS Don't get me started on those Alexa things!

And thirdly there is a big difference between what Tesco or a social media platform know about us, and what sparks the interests of the *police* about us. Tesco knowing I buy lots of cans of Coke every week isn't really a massive issue at this point [1] because what can they realistically do with that information? But coming to the attention of the police can be life-destroying as the police, by definition, have all manner of powers they can use against you.

I would counter by saying commercial entities are much more willing to trade the data you, voluntarily, give them. They are much more willing to use that data to influence you and keep you spending. I don't know which rules govern the trading of my data by commercial entities. I reckon i could find out which rules govern the police quite quickly and then work out how to seek redress. Honestly, I am more worried by commercial collection and use of my data than the police looking at a database of my travel history!

The police do have powers they can use against you that are draconian but they can only use them IF you are under suspicion of a crime and if we are talking about the really serious powers a really serious crime. How are those powers going to be deployed for spending too long on the tube?

I would agree with you entirely if the police were suggesting arresting people merely for spending too long on the tube but they aren't.

 

[deltic]

I asked about the Police. Not the Bank.

The bank will pass on information to the police, HMRC and other agencies as appropriate

 

[Davester50]

The bank will pass on information to the police, HMRC and other agencies as appropriate

Only when the bank finds reason to do so. They don't give Carte Blanche access to the authorities for no good reason.

 

[TwoYellas]

As it's not anomalous to find Police Officers gathered at fast food outlets this policy will not affect them at all.

 

[AlbertBeale]

The personnel recruited by the CNC and made police constables are of grave concern, given the relatively modest size of the force, and when they then apply to move to the Met. Not only was the murderer/rapist Wayne Cousens a PC there but others who transferred and are now on trial for various offences in London: they were members of a social media group who had communications with Cousens in the period leading up to his arrest and eventual conviction. ''One bad apple'' eh?

And NB the CNC are routinely armed.

 

[XAM2175]

Would someone share the link to the northern poster discussion thread, please?

This is the original discussion:

National Rail & British Transport Police campaign regarding sexual harassment on the Railway

I was on a train yesterday and was rather perplexed to see a notice on the display screen from National Rail and British Transport Police encouraging passengers to report people staring at them! I find it ridiculous. Staring doesn't harm anyone and also there could be endless reasons why someone...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[ComUtoR]

My trackable taps today :

Tap out London Bridge
Tap in London Bridge 10mins later
Tap in London Bridge. 5hr later

I took two trains and none of my taps reflect the journey or time spent on the network.

My trackable taps yesterday were none but I was on the network for most of the day.

The data input isn't always reliable and doesn't reflect real word usage. I can go months on the network and never tap in or out.

 

[AlbertBeale]

My trackable taps today :

Tap out London Bridge
Tap in London Bridge 10mins later
Tap in London Bridge. 5hr later

I took two trains and none of my taps reflect the journey or time spent on the network.

My trackable taps yesterday were none but I was on the network for most of the day.

The data input isn't always reliable and doesn't reflect real word usage. I can go months on the network and never tap in or out.

Do remember that contactless cards can be read by appropriate equipment if you're just nearby - they don't need tapping on anything for their/your presence to be logged. And I don't just mean the way you can be charged by waving a card without tapping, I mean that the tech exists for people just passively carrying a card without any obvious use of it to have their whereabouts (or at least their card's whereabouts) recorded by whoever controls such scanning equipment. It might be mostly a theoretical matter, but...

 

[MikeWM]

But surely the later is simply a way of enlightening the former? Is this not just another source of police intelligence? How is it different from me telling the police that the bloke at number 57 (Mr Mike WM) comes and goes at funny hours and has some shady looking blokes round.

Fortunately I don't live at a #57 else I'd be concerned

But this is more like the police having a record of when *everyone* comes and goes, and who is visiting their home, and running some algorithm on that to throw up things they think are suspicious. Note not necessarily *actually* suspicious - people have already torn apart the examples the police officer in the original post said would be considered suspicious.

I agree. However, MOST people don't care.

I think most people haven't really thought through the implications. If they did, I think more people would be concerned.

I don't disagree, however I am a realist and try to be pragmatic. This isn't, in my view, a big step down the slippery slope when Facebook knows everything about me, even if i don't tell them it.

You can opt out of using Facebook entirely though (I do). Yes, other people may tag you in photos and stuff, so that's not a perfect solution, but it is mostly possible.

Of course it is possible to opt out of this potential 'travelcard' data collection too, by paying for a paper ticket with cash. But, in my opinion not entirely coincidentally, that is getting harder and harder to do.

I agree with being pragmatic, for what it's worth. For example, I don't exactly try to hide my identity on here - there's probably not a lot of MikeWM's living in Ely, more likely than not I'm the only one. But I see what appears to be an ever clearer direction of travel here, and I really don't like what I think the destination will be.

PS Don't get me started on those Alexa things!

You may guess I don't have anything like that The only things connected to the internet in my house are my computer and my iPad etc. My 'smart' TV has never been connected, for example.

I would counter by saying commercial entities are much more willing to trade the data you, voluntarily, give them. They are much more willing to use that data to influence you and keep you spending. I don't know which rules govern the trading of my data by commercial entities. I reckon i could find out which rules govern the police quite quickly and then work out how to seek redress. Honestly, I am more worried by commercial collection and use of my data than the police looking at a database of my travel history!

To some degree you're correct, but the key word there is voluntarily. Usually - admittedly not always - there are ways around doing so, even if eg. they mean you don't get a discount on something.

Things that are going to be reported to, and tracked by, the state, are rather more troubling in my view. They tend to be things you can't avoid, and can be used in significantly more draconian ways than companies can manage - eg. freezing your bank accounts (see the Canadian truckers protest). Imagine if that were done every time you ran afoul of an algorithm saying you were 'suspicious' and how much trouble it would involve to get fixed (and the issues it would cause you in the meantime - especially if cash isn't an option anymore).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do remember that contactless cards can be read by appropriate equipment if you're just nearby - they don't need tapping on anything for their/your presence to be logged. And I don't just mean the way you can be charged by waving a card without tapping, I mean that the tech exists for people just passively carrying a card without any obvious use of it to have their whereabouts (or at least their card's whereabouts) recorded by whoever controls such scanning equipment. It might be mostly a theoretical matter, but...

Those who wear tin-foil hats can actually purchase mesh lined "Faraday cage" wallets that prevent this.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Those who wear tin-foil hats can actually purchase mesh lined "Faraday cage" wallets that prevent this.

I don't think it's sensible to equate people concerned about increasing surveillance and lack of privacy with the"tin-foil hat" brigade .... as I understand that particular demographic, their concern (paranoia?) isn't specifically related to privacy!

 

[MikeWM]

My understanding is that chips on contactless cards can only be read very very closely indeed (else trying to use contactless would just be a chaotic mess).

Conversely, the chips in passports can apparently be read from some non-trivial distance away. I do have a cover for my passport that supposedly blocks that.

 

[AlbertBeale]

My understanding is that chips on contactless cards can only be read very very closely indeed (else trying to use contactless would just be a chaotic mess).

Conversely, the chips in passports can apparently be read from some non-trivial distance away. I do have a cover for my passport that supposedly blocks that.

As I understand it, how far away a contactless chip can be recognised depends on the power and sensitivity of the interrogating equipment; normal chip readers for payment purposes do indeed generally require the card to be within a few inches. But that doesn't mean that other equipment can't note the chip's presence from further away.

 

[joebassman]

This is the original discussion:

National Rail & British Transport Police campaign regarding sexual harassment on the Railway

I was on a train yesterday and was rather perplexed to see a notice on the display screen from National Rail and British Transport Police encouraging passengers to report people staring at them! I find it ridiculous. Staring doesn't harm anyone and also there could be endless reasons why someone...

www.railforums.co.uk

Thanks. An interesting thread I thought and I can see valid arguments from both sides.

What I don't understand is how is this policy of allowing the police to monitor oyster cards going to stop any criminal behaviour or deter it? Now that they've advertised it, surly anyone who is planning to undertake in behaviour of a criminal nature will just by-pass it by buying a paper ticket?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I agree with being pragmatic, for what it's worth. For example, I don't exactly try to hide my identity on here - there's probably not a lot of MikeWM's living in Ely, more likely than not I'm the only one. But I see what appears to be an ever clearer direction of travel here, and I really don't like what I think the destination will be.

You'd be surprised how often duplicate names come up. My real name isn't something I'd think was particularly common like John Smith, but at several doctor's surgeries I've been registered at there have been other patients with the same first and last name. In one case they also had the same date of birth!

 

[ComUtoR]

Do remember that contactless cards can be read by appropriate equipment if you're just nearby - they don't need tapping on anything for their/your presence to be logged.

My post was to highlight the deficiencies in the data. The reasons why I do or don't tap in aren't because of security or privacy. I walked through open gates, the taps today show an exit/entry that would potentially look suspicious and tapping in twice to the same station with no exit tap is because I walked through open barriers. The data itself is pretty worthless if it doesn't reflect reality.

I saw many many people just flash a ticket so wouldn't be included in the data and others in similar positions (like me) are an anomaly because we are staff so our taps etc are a bit all over the place.

There are other things that make the data even more meaningless but that's not really shareable but it's something the Police know but others seem to be less aware of.

Personally I think this is an overreach and a power grab using fear to gain access to data.

I lean towards the "I have nothing to hide" brigade but I have serious concerns because I just don't trust the Police.

Fyi I do have an RFID blocker in my wallet but that's because it was given to me by one of my more paranoid friends.

 

[AlterEgo]

You'd be surprised how often duplicate names come up. My real name isn't something I'd think was particularly common like John Smith, but at several doctor's surgeries I've been registered at there have been other patients with the same first and last name. In one case they also had the same date of birth!

I was once almost denied car hire because someone had the same first name, surname and date of birth AND had rented a car from them before and not returned it properly! It took a call to the DVLA to tell the difference.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I was once almost denied car hire because someone had the same first name, surname and date of birth AND had rented a car from them before and not returned it properly! It took a call to the DVLA to tell the difference.

I have a friend in that position with a very common name who is a Scout leader, every time his DBS check is renewed he has to go to a Police station for fingerprinting to prove he isn't the other person who unfortunately has a criminal record which would disqualify him from the role.

 

[GB]

I have a friend in that position with a very common name who is a Scout leader, every time his DBS check is renewed he has to go to a Police station for fingerprinting to prove he isn't the other person who unfortunately has a criminal record which would disqualify him from the role.

Would have thought National Insurance number would stop the need for that.

 

[Busaholic]

My post was to highlight the deficiencies in the data. The reasons why I do or don't tap in aren't because of security or privacy. I walked through open gates, the taps today show an exit/entry that would potentially look suspicious and tapping in twice to the same station with no exit tap is because I walked through open barriers. The data itself is pretty worthless if it doesn't reflect reality.

I saw many many people just flash a ticket so wouldn't be included in the data and others in similar positions (like me) are an anomaly because we are staff so our taps etc are a bit all over the place.

There are other things that make the data even more meaningless but that's not really shareable but it's something the Police know but others seem to be less aware of.

Personally I think this is an overreach and a power grab using fear to gain access to data.

I lean towards the "I have nothing to hide" brigade but I have serious concerns because I just don't trust the Police.

Fyi I do have an RFID blocker in my wallet but that's because it was given to me by one of my more paranoid friends.

Anyone remember a man called Imiela who lived in Appledore, Kent? He had a job on the railway which involved him in working all over the Home Counties, and carried out a series of rapes and serious sexual assaults over a prolonged period on victims as young as ten. He received seven life terms in 2004 and died in prison in 2019. His occupation meant he wasn't subject to a lot of the checks others are subject to

Joseph DeAngelo was a police officer in California who has been found guilty of thirteen murders, as well as numerous rapes and burglaries, committed over many years all over the state, as he transferred from one district to another. In many cases, he was one of the police officers responding and so was able to dispose of potential incriminating evidence. He'd been retired many years before he was finally caught, never admitting to his crimes. A look at some YouTube videos will show an evil psychopath who thought he'd get away with it. Unfortunately, there have been many policemen in the USA, France and Italy who turned out to be mass murderers too, often over a long period as they were adept at concealing and manipulating.

I'd say to BTP - look at your those in your ranks first, the 'vetting' process being so inadequate, before you start calling others' travel patterns 'suspicious', what ever that means. Suspicious to whom?!

 

[joebassman]

Anyone remember a man called Imiela who lived in Appledore, Kent? He had a job on the railway which involved him in working all over the Home Counties, and carried out a series of rapes and serious sexual assaults over a prolonged period on victims as young as ten. He received seven life terms in 2004 and died in prison in 2019. His occupation meant he wasn't subject to a lot of the checks others are subject to

Joseph DeAngelo was a police officer in California who has been found guilty of thirteen murders, as well as numerous rapes and burglaries, committed over many years all over the state, as he transferred from one district to another. In many cases, he was one of the police officers responding and so was able to dispose of potential incriminating evidence. He'd been retired many years before he was finally caught, never admitting to his crimes. A look at some YouTube videos will show an evil psychopath who thought he'd get away with it. Unfortunately, there have been many policemen in the USA, France and Italy who turned out to be mass murderers too, often over a long period as they were adept at concealing and manipulating.

I'd say to BTP - look at your those in your ranks first, the 'vetting' process being so inadequate, before you start calling others' travel patterns 'suspicious', what ever that means. Suspicious to whom?!

I guess the issue is with any checks, as with what they said to me with the DBS check when I volunteered in a school. They are no guarentee that someone is not a risk or hasn't done something that would bar them. It may just mean that they have never been caught or come to the attention of the police before. A check can only tell you so much.

 

[Runningaround]

Anyone remember a man called Imiela who lived in Appledore, Kent? He had a job on the railway which involved him in working all over the Home Counties, and carried out a series of rapes and serious sexual assaults over a prolonged period on victims as young as ten. He received seven life terms in 2004 and died in prison in 2019. His occupation meant he wasn't subject to a lot of the checks others are subject to

Joseph DeAngelo was a police officer in California who has been found guilty of thirteen murders, as well as numerous rapes and burglaries, committed over many years all over the state, as he transferred from one district to another. In many cases, he was one of the police officers responding and so was able to dispose of potential incriminating evidence. He'd been retired many years before he was finally caught, never admitting to his crimes. A look at some YouTube videos will show an evil psychopath who thought he'd get away with it. Unfortunately, there have been many policemen in the USA, France and Italy who turned out to be mass murderers too, often over a long period as they were adept at concealing and manipulating.

I'd say to BTP - look at your those in your ranks first, the 'vetting' process being so inadequate, before you start calling others' travel patterns 'suspicious', what ever that means. Suspicious to whom?!

Just think if they'd been able to track their movements they might have seen a pattern, where one person happened to be there when the offence happened and caught him before another victim.

 

[Runningaround]

Would have thought National Insurance number would stop the need for that.

Twenty years since the Soham murders, his ''on file history'' might have been flagged up before he became a School Caretaker and become a familiar face to his victims.
I doubt a NI card would have flagged up any worries.