ISP Data retention - O dear

[#1]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/16/isp_data_retention_directive/
Sigh
Has Gordon Brainless not been advised by his techies that it takes around 15 minutes to circumvent this?
The only people who will suffer from this are 'innocent' people. Criminals will simply use encryption, anonymous proxies, Tor-like services and hosted services.
For example, I have a server hosted in .NL which I can set up to route all of my traffic through.  Create a secure tunnel to that server and bingo, I've just circumvented all of their stupid little data retention laws.
I can also use a hosted Email solution which would circumvent Plsunet intercepting my mail and being able to see who I've been mailing.
Serious criminals will do this.  Your average innocent man-in-the-street won't.
/grumble
B.

[#2]

Quote

I can also use a hosted Email solution which would circumvent Plsunet intercepting my mail and being able to see who I've been mailing.

Is that the case? No records at PN at all? They really are muppets then since about 99% of UK email must go through 3rd party servers, either hosted or via Gmail et al.

[#3]

My order for a hosted server in Switzerland is in... 
Anyone want to go 50/50 ? 

[#4]

As this is only incorporating an EC directive into UK law any how will it affect sites hosted in other EC countries like the Netherlands

[#5]

As I understand it, ISP's are going to be bound to store this information.  Hosting providers are not ISPs.
If I was a commercial entity (and for the purposes of renting a server in .NL I am) then I have no obligation to record any of *my* mail servers actions 'on behalf' of my clients.  Similarly, the Government in the UK or NL can 'depart in short sharp jerky motions' if they want to trace any traffic entering or leaving my server with my assistance.
This directive only hurts the privacy of retail consumers who do not know how to circumvent this. The real criminals will simply bypass these logs and continue to get away with their criminal activites.
Pah
B.

[#6]

I confess, I hadn't given much thought to how it would actually work. Even by the low standards of Government IT legislation this is especially pointless, possibly even surpassing John Reid's "pedophiles have to register their email addresses". Makes you wonder what the qualifications are to be an IT advisor to the PM.

[#7]

Quote from: Barry

As I understand it, ISP's are going to be bound to store this information.  Hosting providers are not ISPs.

What's the betting the next change they make is to 'clarify' the definition of a Internet Service Provider.
ISP in the traditional sense is known, but they could make it mean a whole host of things, even down to making the it responsibility of people like web designers, if they perform an upload for a customers. I mean, they did provide some form of Internet based service.
Why do our government like to throw stuff at the whirly thing?

[#8]

Worse, what's the betting they didn't actually know what the definition of an ISP was in the first place, assuming it included anyone who provided hosting/mail etc.
I've met a number of MPs and government ministers over the years, and sadly 5 or ten minutes of their company is enough to answer your last question Phil, although there are a very few honourable exceptions.