[AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS

Robert Hudson hudrob at gmail.com
Thu Nov 15 17:28:03 EST 2018 

I do wonder what the logic is behind who they are speaking to as well...

On Thu, 15 Nov. 2018, 10:42 am Nathan Brookfield <
Nathan.Brookfield at simtronic.com.au 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> 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.
>
> 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>
> 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>
>> 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>
>>> 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> 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>
>>>>> 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>
>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>> 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> 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> 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> 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> 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> 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> 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> 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> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paul,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 2:12 PM Paul Wilkins <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20181115/be656692/attachment.html>

More information about the AusNOG mailing list