Report of the Interception of Communications Commissioner - March 2015
material and related communications data to the incorrect interception agency. In all
cases the mistake was identified by the receiving agency immediately (as their technical
systems were not expecting that particular product) and the material and data received
erroneously was deleted.
Failure to cancel interception.
6.95 25% of the errors were caused by a failure to cancel interception. These were in the
main caused by staff in the interception agency or CSP failing to effect the cancellation
properly on technical systems. Because the interception is effected technically at
both ends (i.e. at the CSP and at the interception agency), if the CSP fails in its duty
no significant intrusion generally results as the material is stopped from entering the
interception agency or is immediately discovered by system administrators and deleted.
Incorrect communications address intercepted.
6.96 17% of the errors were caused as a result of the incorrect communications address
being intercepted. The majority of these errors are human in nature. In some instances the
interception agency applied for the warrant in good faith on information received from
a third party, but the information turned out to be wrong due to a transposition or other
mistake in the reporting. In these cases the Secretary of State gave proper consideration
to all of the relevant facts in the interception application and lawfully authorised the
warrant – but the telephone number or communications address intercepted did not in
the end relate to the individual of interest. In 2013 I directed that these errors should be
reported to my office where product had been obtained as, even though the warrant was
authorised in accordance with the law, the conduct resulted in an unintentional invasion
of privacy. In other cases there was an inadvertent transposition of the communications
address by the interception agency when applying for the warrant or by the CSP when
effecting the interception. In the majority of cases the staff conducting the interception
detected these errors promptly and the interception was immediately suspended and
then cancelled. In all cases the erroneous material and data was deleted.
6.97 In all cases the interception agencies and CSPs provided my office with full reports
of the errors, the necessary investigations were carried out to ensure that the measures
put in place to prevent recurrence were sufficiently robust, and that any erroneously
acquired material or data was destroyed. Technical system errors are challenging and
remain a cause for concern. Technical system errors have been particularly prevalent in
the communications data area of our oversight which is of concern. This is discussed in
Section 7 of this report.
www.iocco-uk.info
41