[AusNOG] Joint Committee on Intelligence & Security Report out

[Narelle]

Unfortunately these proposals seem to endure from government to
government.... it all originates with a range of agencies.

You can't just blame this minister.

S313 also has its origins in cutting off the phone lines of SP bookmakers.

[I'll refrain from making any jokes about a certain prominent sadly
licensed bookmaker!]

Cheers

Narelle
 On Jun 24, 2013 1:55 PM, "Paul Wallace" <paul.wallace at mtgi.com.au> wrote:

> I remember when everyone though it scary that Apple was apparently
> collecting private data …****
>
> .. after all they might get up to profound evility such as trying to sell
> you something via push marketing!****
>
> ** **
>
> But it turns out the truly evil party is the ‘Gubber …****
>
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/19/fbi-terror-emergencies-phone-calls
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> When I was a kid the Labour Party was populated by activists who used to
> rail against the Conservatist Government’s various attempts to censor
> Australian Society. Today it seems all those party have been driven from
> the ALP. … and now we’re seeing a new breed (such as Minster Conroy) (not
> to mention the similar phenomenon occurring in the USA) appearing who
> defend the degradation of the doctrine of the ‘separation or powers’ (which
> is what occurred when Mr Conroy defended the ASIC’s continuing desire to
> force ISPs to disable websites in the absence of being required to gain a
> Court Order) . Ask any lawyer (I did) & they’ll say that the Court should
> always be the final Arbiter of whether or not private data should be
> available to an Authority, not the Authority itself****
>
> ** **
>
> -Paul****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] *On Behalf Of *Mark
> Newton
> *Sent:* Monday, June 24, 2013 1:27 PM
> *To:* Narelle
> *Cc:* ausnog at ausnog.net
> *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] Joint Committee on Intelligence & Security Report
> out****
>
> ** **
>
> Hot potato, yeah yeah yeah.****
>
> ** **
>
>   - mark****
>
> ** **
>
> On Jun 24, 2013, at 11:11 AM, Narelle <narellec at gmail.com> wrote:****
>
>
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *Narelle Clark, President ISOC-AU* <president at isoc-au.org.au>
> Date: Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 11:09 AM
> Subject: Joint Committee on Intelligence & Security Report out
>
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> See:
>
> http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=pjcis/nsl2012/report.htm
>
>
> GEN: Parliamentary committee dodges data retention decision ****
>
> JAMES HUTCHINSON****
>
> A long-awaited decision on whether the federal government should implement
> a mandatory data retention regime has been sidelined by a parliamentary
> committee tasked to look at the contentious matter.****
>
>  ****
>
> The joint intelligence and security committee, which was tasked by former
> Attorney-general Nicola Roxon in May last year to consider security reform,
> said that whether a regime should be put in place was “ultimately a
> decision for government”.****
>
>  ****
>
> The regime was one of 44 proposals put forward by the Attorney-General’s
> Department and security agencies last year as the committee looked at
> whether to reform national security legislation.****
>
>  ****
>
> If put in place, it would force telecommunications companies like Telstra
> to hold metadata like phone call records and IP addresses on Australians
> for up to two years.****
>
>  ****
>
> Federal, state and local government agencies accessed metadata more than
> 300,000 times during the last financial year, but agencies have argued that
> this type of information is increasingly unavailable.****
>
>  ****
>
> The proposal attracted the ire of civil liberties groups and the Greens,
> which argued that the warrantless system infringed on the privacy of
> Australian citizens.****
>
>  ****
>
> Though the committee did not make a decision on the matter, it urged the
> government to publish draft legislation on the proposal that would ensure
> that security agencies are unable to access the actual content of
> communications without a warrant.****
>
>  ****
>
> It also said any legislation should ban agency access to internet browsing
> data like website addresses, and that the government should reimburse
> telecommunications companies for the cost of establishing such a system; a
> key sticking point for companies like iiNet.****
>
>  ****
>
> More to come****
>
>  ****
>
> from:****
>
>
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/parliamentary_committee_dodges_data_FuIjuqFrH5NvYp7Rv77xpK
> ****
>
> ** **
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Narelle Clark
> President
> Internet Society of Australia
> ph: 0412 297 043
> int ph: +61 412 297 043
> president at isoc-au.org.au
> www.isoc-au.org.au
> The Internet is for Everyone!
>
>
>
> ****
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Narelle
> narellec at gmail.com ****
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog****
>
> ** **
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20130624/abca42d7/attachment.html>