David BicknellInternet service providers have attacked the Government over its
assumption that they will go along with interception proposals in
the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (RIP) Bill.
In a strongly worded letter to e-envoy Alex Allan, Nicholas
Lansmann of the Internet Serviced Providers Association (ISPA) and
Keith Mitchell of the London Internet Exchange (Linx) warned that
the Government was jeopardising the UK's e-commerce effort.
The ISPs were responding to a letter from Allan to the UKcrypto
newsgroup in which the envoy suggested that most ISPs were
"reasonably confident that their businesses will not be adversely
affected by the proposals in the Bill".
In their letter to Allan, the ISPs hit back. "Informal
discussions with the Home Office have led us to believe that it
might be under the misconception that ISPs are content with RIP.
This is not the case," it said.
Lansmann and Mitchell added, "When we consulted the ISPA and
Linx members, their statements have been uniformly negative, and
nearly all Internet traffic in the UK is carried by Linx and ISPA
members."
The letter, which was copied to Home Office minister Charles
Clarke, continued, "During our discussions with the Home Office, no
government representative, nor the text of the Bill, has given any
commitments to ISPs that they will not have to bear the entire cost
of interception."
ISPs believe that they will be incurring costs not only in
operating interceptions from day to day, but also in maintaining
interception equipment, purchasing capital equipment and, worst of
all, having to provide human resources to build and deploy the
equipment.
The ISPs also said there would be an "opportunity cost" in
having to use skilled staff - of which there is a significant
shortfall - to provide interception capability rather than
furthering their core business.
Lansmann and Mitchell warned that the fears voiced by ISPs
"would not be fully assuaged until a great deal more detail emerges
about what the requirements for interception will be".