[AusNOG] Metadata retention... it's now (almost) a thing

[Paul Wilkins]

They've been at this over 4 years now, and what we have by way of draft is
still so disappointing. There appears to be no distinction between packet
switched networks and PSTN, and maybe some of the drafters are oblivious of
the distinction. The goals seem mixed, and perhaps deliberately. I'm fully
supportive of the authorities' pursuit of the crazies, creeps, and
criminals, but supporting the security/police functions of the state should
not be combined, as appears to be the intent, with efforts to crack down on
copyright theft. Quite apart from the privacy ramifications, the imposition
on service providers is onerous and unnecessarily so.

The bill if broadly read goes so far as to require that every packet of a
DDOS be logged and retained for 2 years, and gives the  Communications
Access Coordinator power to impose fines if this condition is not complied
with. Sadly ridiculous, but that's the upshot of the draft.

Where there is one poorly framed bill, there ought to be 4, or at least
separate sections for packet switched networks vs PSTN, and for
security/policing vs copyright enforcement.

One of the unforeseen consequences of this legislation will be that it will
redirect huge quantities of traffic to encrypted channels, making the work
of security/police agences more difficult. Ironic. Likewise huge amounts of
traffic will be redirected to UDP, and that really is a nightmare for
service providers.

Paul Wilkins


On 31 October 2014 14:18, David Beveridge <dave at bevhost.com> wrote:

> So I'm off to write my payment gateway webpage which asks for
> 1. Name of Person Seeking Information
> 2. Drop down box with list of organisations in Section 110A
> 3. Endpoint ID (eg IP address)
> 4. Timestamp
> 5. Visa/MasterCard/Paypal processing fee
>
> One the above has been supplied and funds received, Will contact the
> organisation by looking up the contact details on their public web site,
> ask for the contact person listed in (1) and supply requested data
>
> I wonder if I'll need a bulk submission box?  Could be a nice little
> revenue earner.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Narelle <narellec at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes, I admit, I am reassured by the cut and paste below.
>>
>>
>> N
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Noel Butler <noel.butler at ausics.net>
>> wrote:
>> > On 31/10/2014 10:21, Mark Newton wrote:
>> >
>> > On Oct 31, 2014, at 9:32 AM, Noel Butler <noel.butler at ausics.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> ------8<------------------
>> >
>> >
>> > 110A Meaning of criminal law-enforcement agency 14
>> > (1) Each of the following is a criminal law-enforcement agency: 15
>> > (a) the Australian Federal Police; 16
>> > (b) a Police Force of a State; 17
>> > (c) the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity; 18
>> > (d) the ACC; 19
>> > (e) the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service; 20
>> > (f) the Crime Commission; 21
>> > (g) the Independent Commission Against Corruption; 22
>> > (h) the Police Integrity Commission; 23
>> > (i) the IBAC; 24
>> > (j) the Crime and Corruption Commission of Queensland; 25
>> > (k) the Corruption and Crime Commission; 26
>> > (l) the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption; 27
>> > (m) subject to subsection (7), an authority or body for which a
>> declaration
>> > under subsection (3) is in force.
>> >
>> >
>> ----8<--------------------------
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20141031/7531bb63/attachment.html>