[AusNOG] No Data Retention for ISPs - for now

[Christopher Mclean]

Mark,

You are not wrong in your assessment of how angry people get when they think you have stolen their personal space. I used to work for a telephone recording company and was attacked a number of times and called some juicy names at exhibitions around the world just for selling the things.  One woman threw a cup full of water at me in Sydney. I wonder if the recorded calls can be tossed aside as metadata as well. I guess the time date stamp and caller id could be.

Best regards,
Chris McLean
Senior Sales Engineer
Ausoptic International
0431733557

________________________________
From: AusNOG [ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] on behalf of Mark Newton [newton at atdot.dotat.org]
Sent: Monday, 14 July 2014 3:19 PM
To: Matt Palmer
Cc: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] No Data Retention for ISPs - for now


On Jul 14, 2014, at 1:34 PM, Matt Palmer <mpalmer at hezmatt.org<mailto:mpalmer at hezmatt.org>> wrote:

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 09:01:23AM +1000, Skeeve Stevens wrote:
The stupid thing is, they are only proposing a record of the communication,
not the communication itself - as another example used, it is keeping a
copy of the letters envelope, but not what is inside... how useless in
proving anything.

On the contrary, metadata analysis can discover all *sorts* of interesting
things.

“Metadata” is a made-up word used by the law enforcement and intelligence services who want
you to be okay with them hoovering up every detail of your life.

They’ve created a fiction that ordinary people who are monstrously offended at the prospect of
warrantless access to data representing their phone call audio streams are perfectly okay with
warrantless access to literally every other bit of data about their personal lives, movements, friends
and family, finances, everything.

I don’t know anyone who actually thinks like that.

It’s not “metadata”. It’s just data.  You’re buying into AGD’s world view by even using the word.
So if you want to have a fight about whether or not it should be mandatorily retained, you probably
should have a good hard think about the way you talk about it, and the frames of reference
you’re invoking as a consequence of the language you use.  Even when, as in this case, you
think you’re actually making a point against it.

  - mark


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20140714/d87bf3ee/attachment-0001.html>