Proposal to amend the Black Sea Act

[Андрей Захаров]

This is not an excuse ... This is reality ... But, in principle, there is no desire to discuss more .... Yes, and time too .... Moreover, the word is not clear- "Priyanto" ... It looks like Italian, but I do not know: lol:

 

[Kuznecov.Igorj]

Apparently they didn’t teach you to apologize, but it's a pity. You really do not expect me to draft a law, since I don’t need it, and you are lazy to create something sensible, except to look for obstacles that you have succeeded in.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Well, okay ... Lazy is so lazy ... And in this case I don’t see any reason for quarrels ... This is just the opinion of each of the participants in this dialogue .... And that’s .... In the course of the discussion, already on the case , for those who wish to take part in finalizing the current legislation governing the activities of a private detective in Russia, a possible topic (in order for private detectives to gain access to certain databases and receive answers to their requests from public authorities) - there are no significant changes to the Law on the Activities of a Private Detective, and to the Law on State Secrets and other regulations governing the admission of a certain circle of persons to information of limited access (on the issue of organizing a third form of admission for private detectives). This will allow, without making significant changes to the Law on BH and OD (as part of the permitted method of obtaining information-inquiry) significantly expand the powers of a private detective .... However, this also causes one problem is the problem of disclosing the information already received by a private detective to a customer who does not have any access to certain information .... If there is a desire, let's discuss ....

 

[Андрей Захаров]

To understand what is at stake (in the form of admission) (for those who have never encountered access clearance issues), I suggest that you familiarize yourself with a brief excerpt from the Internet on privacy levels ...
There are five levels of secrecy and three forms of access to information. The level of secrecy depends on the degree of danger of the disclosed information and the responsibility that the disclosure may incur. It is not necessary at all that a person who somehow tells state secrets to unauthorized persons can be brought to justice. Much depends on:
- the actual level of information security;
- the time that has passed since the receipt of classified information;
- the position in society that a person occupies and his services to him (it happens sometimes);
- many other factors that are considered in each case separately.

Not all information is secret, this is obvious. And access to it rarely requires permission. Documents containing at least some secret information or state secrets are marked with the following marks, called vultures:

- Secretly. They mark documents to which access by unauthorized persons is undesirable. The information in them contains the lowest level of secrecy. It is not necessary at all that this information is classified as a military or operational-search secret. Secret documents may well contain commercial or industrial secrets. For example, information from hospital cards is classified.
- Top secret. The disclosure of any information contained in these documents is subject to criminal articles.
- Of particular importance. Such a stamp marks letters, photos and videos, computer files and other information, the disclosure of which may affect state security, the country's defense.

Of course, everything is much wider, but within the framework of one article, all the consequences that may follow the non-storage of secret documents are impossible.

There are two more forms of admission of information. This is "unclassified" and chipboard ("for official use"). The first one is distributed, received, stored, propagated by any person. Chipboard documents are everyday information circulating among state, law enforcement agencies. Its disclosure is not so dangerous if it included secret knowledge, but it could still entail some negative consequences.

Any citizen or non-citizen of any country, all media have no form of admission at all. The third, lowest form are many military, employees of law enforcement agencies, government agencies, research institutes, etc. People who have it can be admitted to secret and chipboard information. The second form permits access to the same plus, especially in secret. And finally, the first form of access to information of special importance. She has a very small circle of persons.

But who can determine which information is secret, which is of particular importance, and which can be distributed everywhere and by everyone? Today, when there is no censorship, secret documents are often made public. Fortunately, all the same, the knowledge constituting a state secret is accessible only to authorized persons. Moreover, this information itself varies from era to era. For example, in Soviet times, a lot that related to the life of the party nomenclature, their income, lifestyle, were secret. But not today. And then, and today it will determine which documents are secret and which cannot only special commissions led by a very small number of authorized persons. Among them are the President, the Chairman of the Government, the Prosecutor General, the heads of regions, the heads of some ministries and departments, such as the Ministry of Internal Affairs or Rosatom. Some documents may no longer be secret in a very short time. For example, take the military ultimatum. While it is being developed, discussed, compiled, formed by the powers that be of one country, while it is read and digested by the elite of another, it is a document of special importance. But he was digested, horrified by the impossible requirements, and now, the ultimatum ceases to be secret, every person in the country knows about the imminent beginning of the war.

The disclosure or other dissemination of classified information is not necessarily threatening, but it certainly affects the security of the state. Therefore, traitors are not respected in the country against which they committed a crime, against the rest, even those to whom he transmitted classified information. Such people can only be respected by liberal human rights defenders and ignorant people who do not take the burden of the crime. I must say that the direct possession of classified information and permission to such possession is by no means equivalent.

Here in general terms .....

 

[Детективное агентство Тула]

direct possession of secret information and permission to such possession is by no means equivalent.

In our village, they also usually share the factual awareness and the form of admission.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Of course, Konstantin Mikhailovich)))) I agree .... However, one of the solutions for "receiving official answers to requests for BH and access to the database" is just getting clearance .... And there can probably be no other way, in principle. ... However, this path is most likely "dead end" .... Due to the fact that the state is unlikely to "allow" the BH to use the information received on admission for commercial purposes (given that BH is a person providing paid services to an uncertain to a circle of persons ... In this case, the sense of protecting the "secret" (according to the third form of admission) information by the state is generally lost) .... And consequently, the admission to certain information of the black hole specified in the Laws is unlikely to be allowed .... Something like that, probably .... From this, the conclusion is that no one will officially admit the BH to the databases of interest to us all .... Although maybe I am mistaken ... But I think that no .... Those who wish can read the Law on state secrets and instructions for clearance in the application .... So, for general development I am....

 

[Детективное агентство Тула]

Why?
Maybe I think.
Data on the criminal record (adm. Punishments) of an individual, information on his Sim-cards, reg. vehicle data etc. etc. - most likely refer to the personal secret of a citizen, which is also protected by the state, and not to information constituting a state secret.
It seems to me that having issued a private detective’s license, he should automatically receive access to such information (citizen’s personal secret).
However, having received such data, no one will prevent BH from sharing it with his customer. The laws of capitalism (profit from the activities of detective IP) has not been canceled.
HOW TO OBSERVE THE PRIVACY OF PERSONAL SECRET AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION I DO NOT KNOW.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

I don’t quite agree Konstantin Mikhailovich .... It’s probably not what information we get about a particular citizen, but the question is from what sources we get it .... Indeed, practically all “closed” state databases are formed by the same state information resources to which, in principle, a limited number of persons should have access .... Indeed, information on a particular citizen in principle is not secret (the same criminal records, vehicles, etc.). information can be obtained without using any databases (however, you know, this is troublesome .... Previously, they worked without any computerized databases, etc. Of the available ones, only a manual IC file cabinet, a manual file cabinet AB, GAI and, in principle, everything. .. Everything else is with legs, legs .... conversations, etc.) However, the information resources generated by the state are used by it (the state) for certain purposes (subject to certain conditions for the protection of this information), including for the same horde (res pc) .... And this is, roughly speaking, "secret")))) ... Hence my conclusions ....

 

[Детективное агентство Тула]

However, the information resources generated by the state are used by it (the state) for certain purposes (subject to certain conditions for the protection of this information), including for the same ARD (resource) ....

This is an example of OFFICIAL SECRET, but not information constituting a state secret ...

Sanctions for the disclosure of personal data, commercial, medical, banking, notarial or official secrets are not comparable with sanctions for the disclosure of information constituting a state secret. That is what is most important for the average person.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

I agree Konstantin Mikhailovich. We were convinced .... Having studied this topic more thoroughly, we can come to the conclusion that virtually all the information that we need in our activities belongs to the category of "official secret" .... Although, on the other parties, having issued a black hole admission to a state secret, it is easier to gain access to the same official secret ... But this is also a moot point .... Based on this, in principle, it may be right, it’s not worthwhile to “fence the garden” with tolerances ... And the question of access to the so-called "official secrets" is, in principle, resolved by issuing a departmental normative act, in our case, an act of the same Ministry of Internal Affairs .... If there is a certain reference to this in the same Law on M&A ... However , I think, it is unlikely that any authority (especially the Ministry of Internal Affairs) will agree with the need for such changes expanding the powers of the Black Sea .... But there are still a lot of questions about other "secrets" .... The same tax secret, etc. ... One thing is for sure, the question requires thorough study, "docking "a multitude of regulations (both laws and by-laws) ....