Data protection - Personal data

[zzm9980]

I heard from a very reliable source not long ago, that the MOM can trace anyone in Singapore to a distance of 15sqm by cell phone and ezlink details. Makes sense, they have the ability to scan rfid cards from lamp posts and cell phones triangulation is very simple. also facial recognition on cctv is now a well established technology, and with today's quality of cameras, it would probably be pretty accurate.

Now this is where I'll personally call "paranoid" SIM card transactions aren't recorded with enough accuracy IMO for the cell tracking, and ezlink cards can be paid for and topped up with cash. And then not everyone will have one..

The proliferation of police cameras all over is making me a bit apprehensive though, such as the HDB lifts.

Of all government agencies, MOM? I mean ISD, SPF or one of the Intelligence Units in the SAF, but MOM?

Not the SIM cards themselves, but the phones can be remotely pinged and the location triangulated. If google maps can give me, my location accurate down to 3m. I'm sure the relevant agency can figure out which pocket your phone is in.

So it's well known MOM/ICA/IRAS all share their data in realtime. IRAS confirmed as much for me even yesterday on the phone. But this is mostly just to know when a specific person is or isn't inside Singapore.

[zzm9980]

Still seems more to me like OP's concerned that some P.I is on his tail rather than government surveillance.

Most likely, yes. I brought up the government angle though because those privacy laws I linked to have a huge exception for government agencies, which is not the norm in Western countries. Martin (being from Wales) may not have realized that, and just wanted to point it out in case he (or future people finding this topic via search) were under misconceptions they had privacy from government here. I'll also agree most of those people who think they need/want privacy from government probably are criminals or just silly.

[Tanuki]

Well all phone calls in the country were monitored for 'red-flag' comms/words, and that was 20 years ago now.

What do you think the situation might be these days?

My company had a guy not too long ago who tried to argue with SingTel about a rather steep cell phone call from here to another country. The ST response was to play back the tape of the call and ask him if he'd made that call or not. He was red-faced and paid up.

[martincymru]

Nobody (person, govt or otherwise) is on my tail either directly or indirectly. I am just concerned about the proliferation of data being controlled centrally by a political party who may then tweak policies to gain/maintain votes rather than acting in the best interest(s) of the weak/vulnerable/poor in society who form the majority.

[JR8]

I'll also agree most of those people who think they need/want privacy from government probably are criminals or just silly.

And this from an American !?

The risk is where a benign government becomes a tyranny.

Country 'X' is neutral, liberal, democratic, and prosperous. all is well, and people are at liberty to air and 'vote their' opinions as they wish.

Then a fascist regime invades, and impounds all state records and data, singling out one demographic for extermination.

That was Norway in 1940, but imagine the possible ramifications today, considering all the personal data that governments hold on their citizens.

[martincymru]

I'll also agree most of those people who think they need/want privacy from government probably are criminals or just silly.

And this from an American !? :o

The risk is where a benign government becomes a tyranny.

Country 'X' is neutral, liberal, democratic, and prosperous. all is well, and people are at liberty to air and 'vote their' opinions as they wish.

Then a fascist regime invades, and impounds all state records and data, singling out one demographic for extermination.

That was Norway in 1940, but imagine the possible ramifications today, considering all the personal data that governments hold on their citizens.

Precisely JR8, my point entirely. One entity amassing/controlling all personal data is dangerous.

[zzm9980]

I'll also agree most of those people who think they need/want privacy from government probably are criminals or just silly.

And this from an American !?

The risk is where a benign government becomes a tyranny.

Country 'X' is neutral, liberal, democratic, and prosperous. all is well, and people are at liberty to air and 'vote their' opinions as they wish.

Then a fascist regime invades, and impounds all state records and data, singling out one demographic for extermination.

That was Norway in 1940, but imagine the possible ramifications today, considering all the personal data that governments hold on their citizens.

Precisely JR8, my point entirely. One entity amassing/controlling all personal data is dangerous.

You're both right, and my opinion is thusly changed. I was only evaluating it through a modern lens, not a historic perspective.

JR8, I will steal that blurb for when I open my privacy-related business

[PNGMK]

All our family records were destroyed in 1939 in an effort by my great parents to save us from extermination. What really saved us was that the Czech govt for some reason didn't have on it's records my great aunts Jewish ethnicity recorded and she wasn't rounded up along with her 'tainted' relatives (and the Czechs really got into this I might add).

In 1942 or so Grandad stole a train to escape to the invading Allies and went as west as far as Bad Abling where the gauge changed.

That's what happens in bad times. It can and will happen again.

Todays NSA is tomorrow's NAZI if we are not careful. Edward Snowden should be awarded every peace prize in existence and given a passport back to a truly free country, which is not the USA.

[sundaymorningstaple]

Just what he needs. A passport to nowhere.

[Thrandos]

I'll also agree most of those people who think they need/want privacy from government probably are criminals or just silly.

And this from an American !?

The risk is where a benign government becomes a tyranny.

Country 'X' is neutral, liberal, democratic, and prosperous. all is well, and people are at liberty to air and 'vote their' opinions as they wish.

Then a fascist regime invades, and impounds all state records and data, singling out one demographic for extermination.

That was Norway in 1940, but imagine the possible ramifications today, considering all the personal data that governments hold on their citizens.

Precisely JR8, my point entirely. One entity amassing/controlling all personal data is dangerous.

That is a very compelling point...
When you put it in that context, then yup, we have a lot to worry about.

Which leads to the question, in which country(ies) would we be hypothetically be free from such surveillance? From what I know, definitely not the US or the UK. I think we can expect that most governments do keep plenty of personal data on their citizens and most would readily have access to truckloads more personal details if they should ever turn tyrannical and feel the urge to use said information maliciously.

Unless you lived off the grid like John Connor or Jack Reacher, I don't think there's many places in this day and age we could hide.

[Tanuki]

Which leads to the question, in which country(ies) would we be hypothetically be free from such surveillance? From what I know, definitely not the US or the UK. I think we can expect that most governments do keep plenty of personal data on their citizens and most would readily have access to truckloads more personal details if they should ever turn tyrannical and feel the urge to use said information maliciously.

Unless you lived off the grid like John Connor or Jack Reacher, I don't think there's many places in this day and age we could hide.

As the saying goes, just because you're not paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you...

In the meantime, I really don't feel like worrying about all this, so I'll continue to eat, drink and be merry. There's always something that "could" happen but I'd rather just try to enjoy life rather than spending my free time trying to block all the possible bad things.

[JR8]

Which leads to the question, in which country(ies) would we be hypothetically be free from such surveillance? From what I know, definitely not the US or the UK. I think we can expect that most governments do keep plenty of personal data on their citizens and most would readily have access to truckloads more personal details if they should ever turn tyrannical and feel the urge to use said information maliciously.

I don't know, I doubt anywhere that might be popularly considered civilised. Although in the latter they do seem to have protections like requiring a Court Order to tap communications, and so on. A moot point in case of war etc of course.

Wouldn't it be ironic if you were freest from state intrusion only in those countries too poor or shambolic to implement it on a centralised state-wide basis (they being the Banana Republics with a track record as long as your arm, for carrying on such manual state-wide monitoring in previous times).

It's not a thing that bothers me 'back home' as we at least notionally have freedom of speech. The idea of the state wishing to hang anyone out to dry, via it's own state owned media, for a throw-away comment on Facebook doesn't figure back home.



Unless you lived off the grid like John Connor or Jack Reacher, I don't think there's many places in this day and age we could hide.[/quote]

[PNGMK]

The only free countries I know where people live off the grid are places like PNG and some of the African countries I now have to travel to. The real risk of violence in those places outweighs any advantage of 'data privacy'.

[JR8]

Sort of my point. The state having a microscope up you ar$e seems to go hand in hand with advancement and democracy - like it or not.

But perhaps most states can be at least, er, not trusted, but hoped not to wish to crush the people with their own data.