[AusNOG] Wifi Security and Interception

[Mark Smith]

On Wed, 9 Jun 2010 12:17:56 +1000
"Bevan Slattery" <Bevan.Slattery at staff.pipenetworks.com> wrote:

> Chris,
> 
> > So my question is, what was Google's intent in listening?  
> 
> I highly doubt it.  If they did nothing with the data (and didn't
> actually mean to obtain the data) then this will all boil down to being
> simply a great opportunity for the wider community to understand the
> importance of encryption on access points and a good opportunity for the
> industry to understand where they stand with interception of Wifi.
> Google coming forward and assisting regulators was the right move to
> kill this issue so we can all move on.
> 
> > This is actually getting closer to what I perceive to be the 
> > real issue.
> 
> I think the real issue here is that people on this list think it's "fair
> game" to intercept and record a communication (ie. payload) if the last
> part of the path happens to be over an unencrypted Wifi network.

Bevan, I think if you're going to make that accusation you should be
naming those people so they can defend themselves.

You seem to be assuming that because some people don't agree with the
amount of vigilance you're showing on this matter that they support the
completely opposite view.

>  There
> are reasons why the TIA is why it is.  And that is it's BAD (and
> possibly illegal) to INTERCEPT (and record) a COMMUNICATION (not talking
> about ethernet/Wifi/L2 but a communication under the TIA) regardless of
> bearer if you are NOT the INTENDED RECIPIENT. Period.
> 

If you're going to make that assertion, then I think you're
overlooking both lawful intercept, and carrier staff being allowed to
capture network traffic for network performance / troubleshooting
reasons.

> Cheers
> 
> [b]
> 
> PS:  If anyone has dealt with the AFP the following statements in IT
> News would indicate no action will be taken.
> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/214403,google-australia-prepares-for-two-f
> ront-investigation.aspx
> 
> "The AFP can confirm that it has received a referral from the
> Attorney-General's Department," he said.  "The referral relates to
> possible breaches to the Telecommunications Interception Act ... This
> matter is being assessed against the Case Categorisation and
> Prioritisation Model (CCPM)."
> 
> Having dealt with the AFP on other telco issues, this is usually code
> speak for "We are too busy chasing terrorists and paedophiles".
> 
>  
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog