Talk:Classified information in the United Kingdom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] DV Clearance

There are six surveillance commissioners and they only regulate one aspect of surveillance, they have reported increased requests from non police organizations; over 1000 requests a day for covert access from over 600 public bodies. The police made roughly 20,0000 surveillance requests in the period 2005-2006.

Other organisations including local authorities and quasi government organizations had nearly 125000 surveillance requests authorised in the year ending 31.03.2007.

There is also an interception commissioner,a chief commissioner a security services commissioner. (SIS(SIS II) have powers not available to the police, who have powers not available to local authorities).

Which head of power makes which request to a commissioner is not reported. The commissioners meet three times a year. There is no judicial scrutiny whatsoever of their activities.

The Rt. Hon. Sir Peter Gibson currently holds the position of Intelligence Services Commissioner. He reviews the issue by the relevant Secretary of State of warrants and authorisations for operations by the Agencies and Ministry of Defence (MOD) which fall under his oversight, namely warrants issued under the Intelligence Services Act 1994 and warrants and authorisations for surveillance and agents under RIPA.

The Commissioners are able to visit the Agencies and relevant departments to discuss any case they wish to examine in more detail. They must, by law, be given access to whatever documents and information they need and at the end of each reporting year they submit reports to the Prime Minister. These reports are subsequently laid before Parliament and published.

"Guidelines" are derived from the codes of practice and regulations eg.

SI 2002 No. 1298 – The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Prescription of Offices, Ranks and Positions) (Amendment) Order 2002 SI 2002 No. 1693 – The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Interception of Communications: Code of Practice) Order 2002 SI 2002 No. 1931 – The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Maintenance of Interception Capability) Order 2002 SI 2002 No. 1932; The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Covert Human Intelligence Sources: Code of Practice) Order 2002 SI 2002 No. 1933; The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Covert Surveillance: Code of Practice) Order 2002

The whole security issue is a quagmire caused by the lack of communication between agencies or for example the wrong type of forms being used for requests by ill informed officials.

This whole "Classified information in the United Kingdom" article needs attention, the regulations are published but there will be problems sourcing verifiable references for various sections. Most of the needed references will be classified or will contain only limited information.

Even http://www.privacyinternational.org have problems sourcing.

Opinions ? Omeganumber 10:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] More codewords

See here for some more codewords.--Rambutan (talk) 08:46, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Page not found I'm afraid
ALR 13:22, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
It just worked for me - I clicked on the link.--Rambutan (talk) 15:28, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
All I'm getting is an xml parsing error in firefox. Just tried it in MS Explorer and it is an xml document but it's not rendering, I'm getting the raw xml for a document about the stores coding system. It does include some out of date material about descriptors (UK Eyes Alpha and Bravo were withdrawn about 5 years ago).
ALR 15:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, yes, all I'm getting is the raw XML code, but one can still glean information from it, for example the list of descriptors. I'm not actually sure when the various systems were withdrawn, so you could add that into the page, maybe.--Rambutan (talk) 15:54, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I am thinking over some significant changes to the article, the problem I have is that my source is the Manual of Protective Security, which is itself classified as a whole, although the various descriptions etc aren't. That is providing some challenges because whilst it is authoritative with respect to the system it is not verifiable from WPs perspective.ALR 16:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Source ?

Hmm... who publishes the Manual?--Rambutan (talk) 17:47, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Cabinet OfficeALR 20:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd put the material on, and if anyone challenges the MOPS' verifiability, then take it from there. There's no point worrying yet.--Rambutan (talk) 18:34, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Just changed the page to state is has 4 levels of protective marking. Unclassified is not a protective marking (it is the absence of a protective marking), and PROTECT isn't a marking. http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section14/chapter_i.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.54.140 (talk) 17:33, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CTC?

This reads as though all local government officers need to be vetted. The CTC is just for the security services or something? I've never seen any of this in my local government work, it could be that I've always been to far down the food chain.. Secretlondon 04:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

CTC (Counter Terrorist Check) is the other way, it is below SC. It is used for people like airport workers. They have no need to see classified documents but do have access to terrorist targets like aircraft worth millions of pounds. Andrew Swallow 21:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
  • This might be useful. KTC (talk) 02:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)