[AusNOG] Welcome to Metadata Retention

[Shaun McGuane]

Hi Gents,

A quick question on this one.


1.       What is the definition of service provider?

Is this only a requirement for licensed carriers or does it extend through the little guys
in hosting at the end of the food chain?

Regards
Shaun

From: AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Paul Wilkins
Sent: Friday, 27 February 2015 5:59 PM
To: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Welcome to Metadata Retention

There's 2 recommendations that go to requirements for storage of metadata, which are very much a work in progress:
Recommendation 10
The Committee recommends that the Explanatory Memorandum to the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Bill 2014 clarify the requirements for service providers with regard to the retention, de-identification or destruction of data once the two year retention period has expired
Recommendation 37
The Committee recommends that the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Bill 2014 be amended to require service providers to encrypt telecommunications data that has been retained for the purposes of the mandatory data retention regime.
To give effect to this recommendation, the Committee recommends that the Data Retention Implementation Working Group develop an appropriate standard of encryption to be incorporated into regulations, and that the Communications Access Co-ordinator be required to consider a provider’s compliance with this standard as part of the Data Retention Implementation Plan process.
Further, the Communications Access Co-ordinator should be given the
power to authorise other robust security measures in limited circumstances in which technical difficulties prevent encryption from being implemented in existing systems used by service providers.


On 27 February 2015 at 16:46, Paul Julian <paul at oxygennetworks.com.au<mailto:paul at oxygennetworks.com.au>> wrote:
It has to be encrypted as part of the legislation Kris

Regards
Paul

From: AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net>] On Behalf Of Kristoffer Sheather @ CloudCentral
Sent: Friday, 27 February 2015 4:44 PM
To: Phillip Grasso
Cc: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>

Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Welcome to Metadata Retention

Don't bother encrypting it, they probably either have the keys (or compel you to provide them) and/or can break the encryption.


Regards,
Kristoffer Sheather

________________________________
From: "Phillip Grasso" <phillip.grasso at gmail.com<mailto:phillip.grasso at gmail.com>>
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 4:42 PM
To: kris at cloudcentral.com.au<mailto:kris at cloudcentral.com.au>
Cc: "Peter Lawler" <ausnog at bleeter.id.au<mailto:ausnog at bleeter.id.au>>, "ausnog at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>" <ausnog at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>>
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Welcome to Metadata Retention

did they specify what kind of storage conditions it needs to be stored under?

If not do it cheap as possible to keep costs to customers as long as possible; that sounds like jbod or a raid0 array[encrypted of course]

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Kristoffer Sheather @ CloudCentral <kristoffer.sheather at cloudcentral.com.au<mailto:kristoffer.sheather at cloudcentral.com.au>> wrote:
That's exactly what they should do, isn't the government supposed to be all about "transparency" :) ?

Regards,
Kristoffer Sheather

________________________________
From: "Phillip Grasso" <phillip.grasso at gmail.com<mailto:phillip.grasso at gmail.com>>
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 4:38 PM
To: "Peter Lawler" <ausnog at bleeter.id.au<mailto:ausnog at bleeter.id.au>>
Cc: "ausnog at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>" <ausnog at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>>
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Welcome to Metadata Retention

who's gonna pay for this? any increase in compliance costs normally end up costing the customer.

Wouldn't it be funny if most of the ISP's put on their bill notices:

Mandatory Government Metadata surcharge tax^H^H^H: ~+$2

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Peter Lawler <ausnog at bleeter.id.au<mailto:ausnog at bleeter.id.au>> wrote:
On 27/02/15 13:21, Matt Perkins wrote:
>
> I have one prediction the roll out of this is going to be the biggest
> debacle since pink bats.

Loathed to mention it as it's arguably OT, but there's a piece doing the
rounds at the moment about the cost of the eHealth record stuff and how
underutilised it has been by the general population.

As such, I think you're missing the relevant debacle comparator.

Pete.

_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog



Message protected by MailGuard: e-mail anti-virus, anti-spam and content filtering.
http://www.mailguard.com.au/mg

Report this message as spam<https://console.mailguard.com.au/ras/1LuTwZsyWm/eN94K2dhlDZkeB5IQAug8/0.206>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20150227/7bf5fbf0/attachment.html>