friends in London would be transmitted via a local exchange and would
not be subject to any form of bulk interception. But modern internet
communications rely on servers and service providers across the world.
The same communication sent by instant messaging service or internet
telephone call (such as Skype or WhatsApp) would now be transmitted
through several countries en route (e.g. via a server in California) and be
subject to bulk interception, even though it is purely internal and local.
Until relatively recently, placing an international telephone call was an
expensive and unusual thing. Now, almost every communication will be
transmitted
internationally
and
be
subject
to
bulk
interception.
Technological change has meant that far more material falls within the
net than ever before. Increases in technical capacity mean that this vast
volume of information can be automatically analysed and processed.
37.
A single warrant under s8(4) has no upper limit in terms of the number of
communications that may be intercepted and, therefore, the number of
persons whose privacy may be affected. The Government admits, and the
IPT has confirmed, that a single
warrant may encompass the
communications of all the residents of an entire city in the UK with the
residents of another country.12 That is now a conservative scenario. A
single warrant may encompass – in principle – all the communications of
all the residents of the UK with all the residents of any other country.
Indeed, it may encompass all the communications of all the residents of
the UK with all the residents of all other countries. Further, the s 8(4)
Regime permits purely domestic communications travelling over the same
communications cables, where they cannot be differentiated from the
external communications, to be intercepted, extracted, stored and
analysed.
12
British-Irish Rights Watch et al v Security Service et al, IPT/01/77, 9 Dec. 2004, para 9.
20