Canadians again - something a little more substantive Politicians worldwide are discovering the internet - what a great tool  for fascism, once you got the laws in place to solve that whole  'anonymity' thing. Also I notice this story shows the truth - the  Canadian government is really located in Washington, DC, Ottawa is just  a branch office. Come to think of it, the last story I posted about  Canada featured the head of its military, 'speaking to us from military  HQ  in Palm Beach, Florida.' Owen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- . *Will Canada's ISPs become spies?* By Declan McCullagh  Staff Writer, CNET News.com August 27, 2002, 12:56 PM PT http://news.com.com/2100-1023-955595.html  *WASHINGTON--The Canadian government is considering a proposal that  would force Internet providers to rewire their networks for easy  surveillance by police and spy agencies.* A discussion draft   released Sunday also contemplates creating a national database of every  Canadian with an Internet account, a plan that could sharply curtail the  right to be anonymous online. The Canadian government, including the Department of Justice   and Industry Canada  , wrote the 21-page blueprint as a near-final step  in a process that seeks to give law enforcement agents more authority to  conduct electronic surveillance. A proposed law based on the discussion  draft is expected to be introduced in Parliament late this year or in  early 2003. Arguing that more and more communications take place in electronic form,  Canadian officials say such laws are necessary to fight terrorism and  combat even run-of-the-mill crimes. They also claim that by enacting  these proposals, Canada will be following its obligations under the  Council of Europe's cybercrime treaty  , which the country is in the  process of considering. If the discussion draft were to become law, it would outlaw the  possession of computer viruses, authorize police to order Internet  providers to retain logs of all Web browsing for up to six months, and  permit police to obtain a search warrant allowing them to find "hidden  electronic and digital devices" that a suspect might be concealing. In  most circumstances, a court order would be required for government  agents to conduct Internet monitoring. Canada and the United States are nonvoting members of the Council of  Europe, and representatives from both countries' police agencies have  endorsed the controversial cybercrime treaty  , which has  drawn protests from human rights activists and civil liberties groups.  Of nearly 50 participating nations, only Albania has formally adopted  ,  or ratified, the treaty. Michael Geist , a professor at the  University of Ottawa who specializes in e-commerce law, says that the  justification for adopting such sweeping changes to Canadian law seems  weak. "It seems to me that the main justification they've given for all the  changes is that we want to ratify the cybercrime treaty and we need to  make changes," Geist said. "To me that's not a particularly convincing  argument. If there are new powers needed for law enforcement authority,  make that case." Geist added that "there's nothing in the document that indicates (new  powers) are needed. I don't know that there have been a significant  number of cases where police have run into problems." Probably the most sweeping change the legal blueprint contemplates is  compelling Internet providers and telephone companies to reconfigure  their networks to facilitate government eavesdropping and data-retention  orders. The United States has a similar requirement, called the  Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act  , but it  applies only to pre-Internet telecommunications companies. "It is proposed that all service providers (wireless, wireline and  Internet) be required to ensure that their systems have the technical  capability to provide lawful access to law enforcement and national  security agencies," according to the proposal. Companies would be  responsible for paying the costs of buying new equipment. Sarah Andrews, an analyst at the Electronic Privacy Information Center   (EPIC) who specializes in international law, says  the proposal goes beyond what the cybercrime treaty specifies. "Their  proposal for intercept capability talks about all service providers, not  just Internet providers," Andrews said. "The cybercrime treaty deals  only with computer data." EPIC opposes    the cybercrime treaty, saying it grants too much power to police and  does not adequately respect privacy rights. Another section of the proposal says the Canadian Association of Chiefs  of Police recommends "the establishment of a national database" with  personal information about all Canadian Internet users. "The  implementation of such a database would presuppose that service  providers are compelled to provide accurate and current information,"  the draft says. Gus Hosein, a visiting fellow at the London School of Economics and an  activist with Privacy International, calls the database "a dumb idea." "Immediately you have to wonder if you're allowed to use anonymous  mobile phones or whether you're allowed to connect to the Internet  anonymously," Hosein said. A representative for George Radwanski  , Canada's privacy commissioner, said  the office is reviewing the blueprint and does not "have any comments on  the paper as it stands." Comments on the proposal can be sent to la-al@justice.gc.ca   no later than Nov. 15.