The end of 17070 and serious consequences

I just read a very concerning article on BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgknm8xrgpo

TL;DR BT crossed wires and so a criminal investigation led to wrong address causing a lot of issues for innocent parties.

Police

The decision is the police did nothing wrong.

I would argue police acting solely on IP address information is negligent of the police. So I disagree with the finding. There are a lot of reasons an IP may not identify a person - not least of which is "bill payer" is not "user", and also deliberately or accidentally open WiFI, and tor proxy, and hacked routers, and so on and so on. And, of course, crossed lines happen, so IP is never definitive. They should have more evidence before taking such drastic action, in my opinion. It is almost akin to reading the "return address" on an envelope and assuming it is genuine and raiding someone as a result.

The simplest test they could have done, if going as far as visiting the property, is checking the IP address on their Internet access matches the evidence.

Update: just to be clear, we (AAISP) have a policy in response to any request from police (or anyone else) under the Investigatory Powers Act, which we would expect to almost always just be a request to identify bill payer/address, to respond (as required) but to always include a very clear statement that you absolutely cannot rely on an IP or calling number as indicating the bill payer, or even someone at the address, instigated the traffic/calls. We would aim to try to educate police in the reply. We could perhaps even get some for numbers/IPs that are not ours, and would reply accordingly. To say we have had no requests would be implausible, but ironically the legal issues means we cannot say if we have had requests or not, which is, itself, somewhat crazy.

Crossed lines

But let's consider how crossed lines happen - it is simple, and literally crossed lines where one pair of wires is on wrong port on the DP.

So why was a crossed line not identified?

17070

BT engineer calling 17070

It used to be pretty easy to tell a line is crossed, pick up the phone and call 17070 and it reads your number. Also calls cost, and a wrong itemised bill arriving is a clue that your line is not being used by you.

However with broadband and fixed costs, and so on, it is very easy for two lines to have working broadband on the same ISP, that works based on circuit and needs no login (or router auto configures based on circuit when first connected). And with dynamic or CGNAT you cannot tell you have the wrong IP even.

So customers cannot tell, but this is actually a bigger issue for BT.

The telephone side is gone, and now it is broadband only.

We had a case at the pub with two lines and one was jumped wrong, and BT had no means to tell which line was which now there is no dial tone on the line. As an ISP on site (rare) I was able to confirm which physical line went off when unplugged. But BT need to be able to identify a line - how are they not screaming at management about this now?

So what instead?

So what BT need is a way to identify lines now. And actually it is not as hard as it sounds.

The way broadband works is using PPPoE over DSL. The same is true for FTTP now (PPPoE Ethernet on ONT).

PPPoE has a handy identifier which is sent before any sort of login. Without knowing the ISP or login details a hand held test device for DSL or FTTP working could show the ID it sees.

These IDs are not very exciting at present - my DSL here has acc-aln2.ag

But it could not be hard to make that a circuit ID, or a complete port ID of some sort that the BT engineer can identify. I mean it would be ideal if the full circuit ID in BT, but even just cab27-port43 it would help the BT engineer a lot and avoid crossed lines and a range of other errors.

BT could even expect other ISPs that use BT wiring to have a similar scheme, why not?

It seems to me this should be a standard for such services, and BT engineers test kit should be able to show it. This are only going to get worse as more and more phone lines are phased out.

So I wonder if BT will consider this?

Losing all respect

I am just astounded by the way the UK police are behaving right now.

TL;DR: Massive over reaction and police state style action way above what the law provides and with no regard for public health, for weeks now. Then massive under action on a public gathering with no regard for public health last night. They seem to have no clue. How can any of us have any respect for them?

Update: it is worth saying that I don't assume this is all police, but with the power the police have over us we need to hold them to the highest standards. It is clear that a lot of the police do not understand the rules, or the simplest concern of this being public health legislation, as I have heard numerous reports from friends who have been stopped and questioned unnecessarily when doing nothing wrong, each occasion creating risk of spreading the virus.

In the last few days we have had :-

Police surrounding a journalist after telling some women she cannot sit down for a moment whilst exercising, and telling him that he is killing people, even they are "in his face" with no PPE. They really are trying to be the plague spreaders here, aren't they?

The other week journalist @MikeSegalov got hassled and shouted at by the police for filming an incident in a park. Here's the footage. Not a good look for the police – breaking social distancing rules by surrounding him and wrongly shouting at a journalist to go home. pic.twitter.com/BKXSXbE6Gm

— Great Editor (@simonchilds13) April 16, 2020

Also, we have new guidelines by NPCC and College of police on why you can leave your home - but the rules have not changed. The only difference is these guidelines are perhaps easier to read and are more widely publicised (here) - apparently several police twitter accounts saying they are unenforceable even though the rules HAVE NOT CHANGED! We can only assume they are cross that the rules are not what they would like them to be and only just realised, weeks after they came in to force. (it is a separate debate as to whether the rules are adequate or not, and not one for the police to decide).

And then you have this, a public gathering on Westminster bridge yesterday and the police don't appear to be dispersing the gathering or enforcing the rules but actually participating!

The scene from Westminster bridge #ClapForCarers pic.twitter.com/JpzM0YBjgH

— Damir Rafi (@d_rafi1) April 16, 2020

Ever crazier, the police themselves posted about this gathering as if it was a good thing!!!

Thank you to the real heroes.

Thank you London. #ClapForKeyWorkers #ClapForCarers

London is together. pic.twitter.com/ksqHZjkTxV

— Metropolitan Police | #StayHomeSaveLives (@metpoliceuk) April 16, 2020

I have sent a freedom of information requests (here and here), and we'll see what they say.

Update: as of 11am on 22nd April the law changed to cover "being outside" not just "leaving". Here.

NHS ID not good enough to prove "Essential travel"

Worrying times indeed - that police have reportedly stopped NHS staff (here) and would not accept their NHS ID card as good enough evidence for "essential travel".

There are people saying that it should be good enough to show "essential travel", and others saying that it is crazy the police don't think NHS staff are doing "essential work" or are "key workers". I agree that it is wrong, but these comments show people don't understand the rules at all (and clearly, neither do the police). There is no need to prove you are on "essential travel" as there is no law against "travel". Similarly there is no law saying only "essential work" can be done, or only "key workers" can work.

But first, again, please stay at home if you can - be sensible.

So let's look at the logic here a bit. There are a couple of key rules - one on public gatherings (not relevant) and one on leaving the place where you live.

Update: The college of police have released more guidance (here).

Update: as of 11am on 22nd April the law changed to cover "being outside" not just "leaving". Here.

No "stop and account" power.

The first problem is that the police (see this report) have no "stop and account" power anyway.

"The helpful National Police Chief’s Council and College of Policing Guidance makes clear that there is no power to “stop and account”. Therefore, the police should not be intercepting people who they do not suspect to be causing health risks by their behaviour in violation of Regulation 6 or 7."

They also say road checks on every vehicle are disproportionate.

So why were they stopping someone anyway? Note the "causing health risks" part - this is public health law, not public order law, so they don't just have to suspect you left where you live without reasonable excuse, they have to think you are causing a public health risk by doing so. It is hard to see how anyone in a car driving on a road is "causing a health risk" at all. Yes, they could be doing something stupid, and there are laws on public gatherings, but just driving in a card, especially if alone, clear is not in itself a public health risk.

Plague spreaders?

Obviously, the police should also not, themselves, be causing a health risk - yet stopping and questioning people does just that as they become "plague spreaders" as they are in contact with so many people, and are doing it deliberately! Stopping NHS staff is even worse as they too are high risk not just of having the virus (spreading to police) but also of spreading it to those vulnerable (in hospital).

Where are you going?

We don't know what was actually asked when they stopped this NHS worker. I would not be surprised if they asked where someone is going - accounts from friends who have been stopped suggest this is the case. I have heard reports of someone stopped when going to tend to their horse and having to make an hour long round trip back home to get proof that they have a horse and where it is stabled, and so on. This is crazy!

Actually the only relevant question to ask is "For what reason did you leave where you live?"

But even that is a bit of a useless question. Nothing you are doing now has to relate to why you left where you live. Whilst you don't even have to say why, you can say any of the reasons listed (here) and there is really no way a police officer, or anyone else, can really prove beyond reasonable doubt whether that was or was not your "reason" when you actually left where you live. It is hard to even justify simply suspecting someone of leaving for some other reason as they can leave for one reason and be doing something else now - so current actions do not have to relate to the "reason". Yes, the law is a tad daft if so unenforceable - but most people try follow the law which makes it a useful law even so.

Where do you work?

One presumes the NHS staff member said they were going to work, i.e. they left where they live as they need to travel for work for the NHS. So what is the next question, perhaps "where do you work?".

Actually the only relevant question to ask is "Could you do that work at home?"

But even that is a bit of a useless question. If you say "no", the police officer cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt that is not the case, can he/she? Even if your work is done solely on a computer that does not mean you have a computer, or your computer is or can be set up to allow that work. Even if set up to work from home, if your Internet link breaks or computer breaks or any other reason, you may not be currently able to do that work from home.

Thankfully, with a lot of work from our ops team, my work has set up so that all but one person is working from home, and doing a great job, but that is not the case for many companies, and almost impossible to prove that someone can work from home.

Essential work?

Some people have suggested it is crazy that the police did not consider NHS work essential, but again, there is no question of what the work is - everyone is allowed to work, and allowed to leave where they live if they need to travel for work if they cannot do it from home.

A gardener, or florist, or bricklayer, can all work and can leave where they live to travel for work if they cannot do that work at home. What ID would police expect to see for such workers to somehow justify their "essential travel"?

Essential travel?

Even the news article talks of proving it was essential travel, and that NHS ID was not good enough to prove that. But again travel is not limited to "essential travel". It is not even limited to "travel for work" - just that one of the reasonable excuses for leaving home is that you need to travel for work. There are many other reasons to leave home that could involve travelling including to go some where to exercise, or to go shopping. But these are not actually the only reasons allowed for "travel" as travel itself is not in any way restricted or banned! Essential travel is not a "thing".

Proving innocence!

There is a big issue, in my view, with people somehow expected to prove their innocence, and even be able to do that on the spot or face a fine - or be turned back, or escorted home.

Why does it matter?

• Police should enforce just the law, and not "policy" - the fact that government guidelines go beyond the law and that police are trying to enforce "guidelines" and not just the law is bad - it is the very concept of a "police state", but importantly it undermines trust and respect in the police. We should trust and respect the police, especially at a time like this. But in return they need to actually follow the rules and the law.
• Stopping NHS workers getting to work is just plain stupid, not legal, and very much not in the interests of public health.
• Police can be spreading the virus far more than the people they are stopping and talking to. That undermines the whole public health objectives and means more people will die.

That said, obviously, it is sensible to only leave home if you have to, and only to travel where you have to, and wash your hands. But the police have no place demanding people justify their travel at all - it is all about the reason for leaving where you live, not where you are going or even why you are going somewhere, nor how far you are going.

But once again, please stay home and only go out if you really need - and wash you hands!