In some instances, the interceptor does not even require a warrant when he believes that there is consent. Clause 4 deals with external interceptions under mutual assistance agreements, for which no warrant is required. United Kingdom subjects are entitled to protection from overweening power and state interference. The amendments would ensure that interceptors do not act recklessly and would provide a counterbalance to the wide powers contained in the Bill. The clause also affects internet users and internet service providers.
Internet users believe that they own the internet system and that they have great freedom.
I think that their confidence in the internet is currently justified. However, if interception is to be widely practised and sometimes undertaken recklessly, it will undermine confidence in the internet. It will also damage the interests of internet service providers, who share an interest in ensuring that interception is well targeted and incapable of being used in a broad and reckless way. Friend makes an important point. The purpose of encryption is to add confidence to e-commerce and to internet use.