[AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS
Matt Perkins
matt at spectrum.com.au
Thu Nov 15 10:45:54 EST 2018
Given that Dutton was straight on the band wagon within hours of the
events in Melbourne last week. Im sure this will be railroaded through
and any opposition will be called out as "weak national security
policy". I think the chances of this not going though as first read
now is gone from slim to none.
Matt.
On 15/11/18 10:41 am, Nathan Brookfield wrote:
> Could they possibly give less notice.... Unbelievable!
>
> Nathan Brookfield
> Chief Executive Officer
>
> Simtronic Technologies Pty Ltd
> http://www.simtronic.com.au
>
> On 15 Nov 2018, at 10:40, Paul Wilkins <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com
> <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Media Release: Issue date: 14 November 2018
>
> *Second public hearing on the Encryption Bill*
>
> The second public hearing on the Telecommunication and Other
> Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018 will be held
> on *Friday, 16 November 2018* in Sydney. The Committee will hear from
> academics, statutory oversight agencies, and industry peak bodies.
> Details of the public hearing:
> *9:00 am – 3.15pm
> SMC Conference & Function Centre, 66 Goulburn St, Sydney (Carrington
> Room)*
>
> The hearing will be live streamed (audio only) at www.aph.gov.au/live
> <http://www.aph.gov.au/live>.
>
> The full program of the hearing is available at
> https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Intelligence_and_Security/TelcoAmendmentBill2018/Public_Hearings
>
> Additional hearings will be held in *Canberra on 27 and 30 November*.
> Further information on the inquiry can be obtained from the
> Committee’s website.
>
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 11:36, Paul Wilkins <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com
> <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Communications Alliance submission
> <https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=789049aa-edfc-48e2-a79c-0dd1c28f95b8&subId=662644>**makes
> the**point both s313 and s280 (1)(b) of the Telecommunications Act
> 1997 are current extensively used to access metadata.
>
> It follows that under the new bill, about a dozen LEAs will
> similarly be able to rely on s313 and s280(1)(b) to get
> warrantless metadata access.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Paul Wilkins
>
>
> On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 at 13:09, Paul Wilkins
> <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Coexistence with Data Retention Regime (Under
> Telecommunications Act)
>
>
> Passage of this Bill will set the stage for mass surveillance,
> where carriers are already subject to data retention, but the
> Minister may further declare any service provider subject to
> the metadata regime.
>
>
> 187A Service providers must keep certain information and documents
>
> (3A) The Minister may, by legislative instrument, declare a
> service to be a service to which this Part applies.
>
>
> Such declaration has a statutory limitation of 40 sitting days
> of Parliament, however nothing in the Act prevents such a
> declaration being rolled over by the Minister, maintaining a
> metadata regime in perpetuity for any service they should
> designate. All this would lie within the provisioned scope of
> the Minister's powers without any further legislation.
>
> Access to such metadata does not necessarily require a
> warrant. Access under the Telecommunications Act can be
> rendered by the service provider as voluntary assistance.
>
>
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 11:50, Paul Wilkins
> <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Rob,
> Check your inbox/spam folder 29/10.
>
> Kind regards
> Paul Wilkins
>
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 08:33, Robert Hudson
> <hudrob at gmail.com <mailto:hudrob at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Odd. I signed up to track the enquiry, but have had
> no notifications at all that additional hearings had
> been scheduled.
>
> There's an another additional day according to the
> committee website - 27th November.
>
> Where did you see if information that they're asking
> for supplementary submissions?
>
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 12:28, Paul Wilkins
> <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com
> <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> *UN's Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy*
> has weighed in on the PJCIS review with
> incandescent criticism:
>
> https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=8012483f-e421-41a7-8bd4-1e8eb5eb39eb&subId=661745
>
> In my considered view, the Assistance and Access
> Bill is an example of a poorly conceived national
> security measure that is equally as likely to
> endanger security as not; it is technologically
> questionnable if it can achieve its aims and avoid
> introducing vulnerabilities to the cybersecurity
> of all devices irrespective of whether they are
> mobiles, tablets, watches, cars, etc., and it
> unduly undermines human rights including the right
> to privacy. It is out of step with international
> rulings raising the related issue of how the
> Australian Government would enforce this law on
> transnational technology companies.
>
> I can't but think that if the Minister for Home
> Affairs to be doing well to attract the ire of
> the United Nations and his timing couldn't be
> better, just as the Government has lost control of
> the House. I'm hopeful the Australian media will
> pick up on the interest of the UN in the Bill,
> fingers crossed.
>
> Furthermore, the PJCIS, after announcing two
> additional hearings 16/30 Nov, are also asking for
> *supplementary submissions, to be received no
> later than 26 November.*
>
> Kind regards
> Paul Wilkins
>
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 at 13:07, Paul Wilkins
> <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com
> <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> We're at a critical juncture where the
> Minister for Home Affairs may get his way and
> steam roll this Bill through Parliament (how
> this could play out in both Houses would be
> interesting, as they'll need either Labor or
> one of the independents in the Lower House).
> Or the Bill gets substantially modified or
> sent back to the Dep't Home Affairs to start over.
>
> What's of deep concern is that the Minister
> represents to the House consultation has been
> extensive, and that modifications of the Bill
> represent a consensus view. Yet industry has
> been vocal in opposition to the Bill, and have
> criticised the level of consultation and the
> Government's preparedness to receive advice:
>
> While DIGI appreciates the challenges facing
> law enforcement, we continue to have concerns
> with the Bill, which, contrary to its stated
> objective, we believe may undermine public
> safety by making it easier for bad actors to
> commit crimes against individuals,
> organisations or communities. We also remain
> concerned at the lack of independent oversight
> of Notices and the absence of checks and
> balances with this legislation, which we
> discuss in more detail in this submission.
> Submission to PJCIS - DIGI (includes Google,
> Amazon, Facebook...)(78)
>
>
> We urge the government to seriously consider
> the comments submitted by industry and civil
> society and consider changes that would
> protect the security and privacy of Apple’s
> users and all Australians.
> Submission to PJCIS - Apple (53)
>
> Given the complexity of the Bill, the
> sensitivity of the subject matter, and the
> limited consultation period, the summary above
> is not an exhaustive list of BSA's concerns
> and recommendations in respect of the Bill.
> There are other aspects of the Bill that
> require further consideration in order to find
> the right balance between the legitimate
> rights, needs, and responsibilities of the
> Australian Government, citizens, providers of
> critical infrastructure, third party stewards
> of data, and innovators.
>
> As such, we respectfully encourage the
> Australian Government to engage in further
> dialogue with industry to consider the broader
> issues at play and the implications (and
> possible unintended consequences of the Bill).
> Submission to PJCIS - BSA (Cisco, IBM et al.)(48)
>
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2018 at 16:48, Paul Wilkins
> <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com
> <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I'm determined the Minister for Home
> Affairs doesn't get to drop a deeply
> flawed Bill on a supine and compliant
> Parliament, and have taken measures, to
> whit, written 22 MPs in positions where
> they can influence policy, and provided
> links to submissions which point out the
> Bill as proposed is neither proportionate
> nor necessary:
>
> Law Council of Australia:
> https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=859d9cda-0f99-4bef-994f-edc6006c87bf&subId=661321
>
> Joint Councils for Civil Liberties:
> https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=6a26c1ce-15f3-4229-9b45-dd4ad7cfb8f2&subId=661197
>
> Australian Human Rights Commission:
> https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=a7b9ff25-7c09-41e9-b97a-56dae1ac0e94&subId=661055
>
> PJCHR,starts @ p24:
> https://www.aph.gov.au/~/media/Committees/Senate/committee/humanrights_ctte/reports/2018/Report%2011/c01.pdf?la=en
>
>
> Kind regards
>
> Paul Wilkins
>
>
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2018 at 16:20, Paul Wilkins
> <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com
> <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> *New PJCIS Public Hearings*
> *
> *
> *16 Nov 2018:* Sydney, NSW
> *30 Nov 2018:* Canberra, ACT
>
> https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Intelligence_and_Security/TelcoAmendmentBill2018
>
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2018 at 13:23, Paul
> Wilkins <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com
> <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Has anyone yet had the opportunity
> to think through the use of force
> provisions? Does use of force
> extend beyond physical forced
> entry, to say, hacking?
>
> Kind regards
> Paul Wilkins
>
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 18:03, Paul
> Wilkins <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com
> <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Compare:
>
> CHAIR: So the big companies
> like Facebook, Amazon,
> Twitter, over-the-top
> messaging services like Signal
> and WhatsApp?
> Mr Hansford: A range of
> different industry companies.
> CHAIR: *A good percentage of
> those?*
> Mr Hansford: *A reasonable
> percentage, I'd say.*
> (Public) FRIDAY, 19 OCTOBER 2018
>
> "The government has consulted
> *extensively* with industry
> and the public on these
> measuresand has made
> amendments to reflect the
> feedback in the legislation
> now before the parliament."
> Minister for Home Affairs -
> Speech to Parliament 20 Sept 2018
>
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 16:01,
> Paul Wilkins
> <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com
> <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> DIGI's submission (Amazon,
> Facebook, Google, Oath,
> and Twitter) has just
> appeared:
>
> https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=d48c3c35-221d-4544-a7d7-109a82c72dc1&subId=661549
>
> On August 14, 2018, the
> Government released for
> Public Exposure a draft of
> the Telecommunications and
> Other Legislation
> Amendment (Assistance and
> Access) Bill 2018 (the
> “Bill”) together with an
> Exposure Document, to
> which DIGI made a
> submission (attached). A
> revised Bill was
> introduced to Parliament
> ten days following the
> close of submissions, with
> only minor amendments that
> fail to address its
> potential impacts on
> public safety,
> cybersecurity, privacy and
> human rights, raising
> concern among industry,
> consumer and civil society
> groups.
>
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at
> 11:30, Paul Wilkins
> <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com
> <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> The PJCHR express
> extensive concerns
> with the bill.
>
> https://www.aph.gov.au/~/media/Committees/Senate/committee/humanrights_ctte/reports/2018/Report%2011/c01.pdf?la=en
>
> The following
> demonstrates a posture
> where they will likely
> oppose the bill
> without further
> safeguards:
>
> 1.109 Another relevant
> factor in assessing
> whether a measure is
> proportionate is
> whether there is the
> possibility of
> oversight and the
> availability of
> review. The power to
> give a technical
> assistance notice or
> request, or technical
> capability notice, is
> not exercised by a
> judge, nor does a
> judge supervise its
> application. Section
> 317ZFA provides a
> discretionary power to
> a court, in relation
> to proceedings before
> it, to make such
> orders as the court
> considers appropriate
> in relation to the
> disclosure,
> protection, storage,
> handling or
> destruction of
> technical assistance
> information, if the
> court is satisfied
> that it is in the
> public interest. The
> bill does not
> otherwise provide for
> court involvement in
> the process of giving
> a technical assistance
> notice or request, or
> technical capability
> notice. The bill
> additionally seeks to
> amend the
> Administrative
> Decisions (Judicial
> Review) Act 1977 (ADJR
> Act) to exclude
> decisions under Part
> 15 of the
> Telecommunications Act
> (which would include
> a decision to issue a
> technical assistance
> notice or request, or
> technical capability
> notice) from judicial
> review under the ADJR
> Act. 47 In these
> circumstances, further
> information from the
> minister as the
> adequacy of the
> safeguards in terms of
> oversight and review
> would assist in
> determining the
> proportionality of the
> measures.
>
> Kind regards
> Paul Wilkins
>
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at
> 15:12, Paul Wilkins
> <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com
> <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> 21 October AEC had
> received 6890
> postal votes out
> of 12,788 issued.
> Today, received
> postal votes is
> 7,789. Sharma is
> trailing by 1,552.
> So I'm calling it
> a Phelps' win and
> we will have
> minority government.
>
> Phelps will win by
> at least 500 votes
> so no recount.
>
> Kind regards
> Paul Wilkins
>
> On Mon, 22 Oct
> 2018 at 18:19,
> Paul Wilkins
> <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com
> <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Transcript of
> public hearing
> 19th October:
>
> https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22committees%2Fcommjnt%2F2a1771c8-f314-43f2-b9b0-cd09ad8123ae%2F0000%22
>
> On Mon, 22 Oct
> 2018 at 16:46,
> Christian
> Heinrich
> <christian.heinrich at cmlh.id.au
> <mailto:christian.heinrich at cmlh.id.au>>
> wrote:
>
> Paul,
>
> On Mon,
> Oct 22,
> 2018 at
> 2:12 PM
> Paul
> Wilkins
> <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com
> <mailto:paulwilkins369 at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> > Except
> that where
> subject to
> an order
> under 317j
> to conceal
> the
> existence
> of a
> TCN/TAN
> forms part
> of the terms.
>
> For
> PCI-DSS
> Requirement
> 4 Telstra
> [as an
> example I
> don't
> recommend]
> have
> mandated
> that their
> customer
> is
> responsible
> for both the
> infrastructure
> and
> software
> [as a
> service]
> within
> https://www.telstra.com.au/content/dam/tcom/personal/consumer-advice/pdf/business-a-full/cloud-h.pdf
> and are
> therefore
> unable to
> assist
> with the
> implementation
> of the
> TCN/TAN.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Christian
> Heinrich
>
> http://cmlh.id.au/contact
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
--
/* Matt Perkins
Direct 1300 137 379 Spectrum Networks Ptd. Ltd.
Office 1300 133 299 matt at spectrum.com.au
Level 6, 350 George Street Sydney 2000
Spectrum Networks is a member of the Communications Alliance & TIO
*/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20181115/b1d4d7f1/attachment.html>
More information about the AusNOG
mailing list