[AusNOG] "All your router devices are belong to us"

[Bevan Slattery]

I understand where you are coming from Geoff wrt to communication
interception, I was referring to bubble-wrap end-user agreements at the
application layer where the application obliterates personal privacy,
wades straight through personal protections afforded by law regardless of
what the carrier does and uses your bandwidth to do it no less.

There must be consumer protection on privacy that is enshrined and cannot
be overridden by the bubble-wrap agreement without more clear and
articulate series of questions asking the hard questions they don't want
to ask.  Furthermore, users should be provided with a monthly
communication of what data and to who it has been provided.  Only then
will users realise what is going on.

Same goes for carriers/ISP's.

Cheers

[b]

On 1/07/12 9:34 AM, "Geoff Huston" <gih903 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>On 30/06/2012, at 9:29 PM, Bevan Slattery wrote:
>
>>
>> No - Society hasn't yet woken from the sleep walk into privacy
>> obliteration through the use of bubble-wrapped user agreements providing
>> corporations with all the rights, including washing away consumer
>> protection laws in the name of progress.  I am saying this is a bad
>>thing.
>>
>
>
>I agree this is a bad thing. Seriously bad.
>
>However, I believe the law as it relates to carriers such as Telstra is
>perfectly clear. This is not sanctioned by the provisions of the
>Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act as far as I
>understand the situation.
>
>But having said that, I suspect that the change of leadership at Telstra
>and their acquiescence with the provisions of the NBN arrangements has
>given the company a certain level of  "mate" status with the current
>incumbents in political power in Canberra, which in turn may well have
>created the impression that the company enjoys a certain amount of
>immunity from federal prosecution over such mundane matters as a breach
>of federal laws relating to individual users' expectations and rights
>to privacy of communication. (!)
>
>Right now it appears to me that, sadly, no federal agency is willing to
>initiate a prosecution of Telstra and those employees and agents of the
>carrier who initiated this  web stalking program, under the terms of
>Section 7 of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act, despite
>what appears to be a clear recounting of events that indicate that such
>a breach of the provisions of this Act has taken place here.
>
>So where does ISOC stand on this? Narelle?
>
>EFA?
>
>Anybody?
>
>Why does it appear that Telstra is allowed to flaunt our privacy laws with
>such arrogant impunity?
>
>Regards,
>
>  Geoff Huston
>
>(I wrote some some further personal opinions at
>http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2012-07/allyourpackets.html
>if anyone is interested in this.)
>
>[And yes, I am a former employee of Telstra, and yes, at the time I
>joined them I had
>to sign a document indicating that I was fully aware of the provisions of
>the Telecommunications
>Act and I was fully aware of my own personal liability were I to breach
>those provisions
>in the course of my employment.]
>



The information contained in this email and any attachments may be confidential. This email and any attachments are also subject to copyright. No part of them may be reproduced, adapted or transmitted without the written permission of the copyright owner. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, interference with, disclosure or copying of this information is unauthorised and prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately advise the sender by return email and delete the message from your system. All email communications to and from NEXTDC Limited are recorded for the purposes of archival and storage.