• Catch issues early, fix them fast – Free trial


    [ad] With GFI Cloud you can easily manage and secure your remote workforce – wherever they are, from wherever you are! The simple IT management platform includes patch management, antivirus, web protection, monitoring and remote control. Get the benefit of endpoint protection with the ease of central management. Start a free trial now.


  • Great articles on other sites
  • RSS Great articles on other sites


  • Internet, News, Security - Written by on Wednesday, June 12, 2013 17:02 - 10 Comments

    Attorney-General rejects metadata warrants:
    ‘Law enforcement would grind to a halt’

    mark-dreyfus

    news Australia’s Federal Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus has made the extraordinary declaration that Australian law enforcement in Australia “would grind to a halt” if police officers and other law enforcement agents were forced to apply for a warrant every time they wanted to access Australians’ telecommunications data.

    Last week Budget Estimates hearing sessions conducted in Canberra heard that the Australian Federal Police had made 43,362 internal requests for so-called ‘metadata’ (data pertaining to the numbers, email addresses time, length and date involved in phone calls or emails, but not the content) over the past financial year. No warrant is required for these requests.

    The revelations, combined with historical data tracking law enforcement and other Federal Government agency use of metadata without warrants and the revelations over the past week that the US-based National Security Agency has gained backdoor access into the data servers of major technology companies such as Apple, Google and Microsoft, has spurred calls by Australian political groups for a ban on warrantless interception of Australian telecommunications data.

    For example, the Australian Greens this week noted that it would next week introduce legislation to strengthen regulation of data collection on Australians, returning “normal warrant procedures” to law enforcement agencies accessing peoples’ private data.
     
    “This is the first step to winding back the kind of surveillance overreach revealed by the PRISM whistleblower,” Greens communications spokesperson and Senator Scott Ludlam said in a statement. “Law enforcement agencies – not including ASIO – made 293,501 requests for telecommunications data in 2011-12, without a warrant or any judicial oversight. Under the Telecommunications Interception and Access Act, that’s entirely legal.”
     
    “Vast amounts of private data are being accessed – including the precise location of everyone who carries a smartphone – without any recourse to the courts.  A law enforcement agency simply fills out a very basic form. My bill will return to the system where they will need a warrant.”

    Similarly, the Wikileaks Party headed by Julian Assange issued a media release this week stating that if elected to the Senate, the party’s representatives would move to amend the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act so that all requests for access to data are subject to a warrant regime.

    “In other words, security and police agencies will have to seek a warrant from a judicial officer- a full time member of the [Administrative Appeals Tribunal], a federal circuit judge or a federal court judge- before embarking on a data collection exercise,” the party said. “Further we would also seek to amend this Act so that there is a twice yearly tabling of information about the number of warrants applied for, the number of applications granted and the nature of those requests.”

    However, speaking on the ABC’s 7:30 program last night, Federal Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus rejected the calls for warrants on telecommunications data to be re-introduced. “To require a warrant for every time, and it’s in the thousands, the mini thousands, of times that a law enforcement agency accesses this non contact telecommunications data would mean I think that law enforcement in Australia would grind to a halt,” Dreyfus said.

    The Greens, the Wikileaks Party, the Pirate Party Australia, Electronic Frontiers Australia and many other organisations concerned with privacy and digital rights have signalled they are outraged by the NSA’s data collection activities, which may have given Australian agencies access to the data, and will be mirrored locally if the Federal Government’s plans to enact a data retention regime in Australia go ahead.

    “Australians are also entitled to know if our security and police agencies are swapping or sharing data about Australians with overseas agencies.  Again ASIO in particular should be compelled by law to table yearly a report on data sharing with overseas agencies,” the Wikileaks Party said this week. “Agencies like ASIO and the Federal Police must not be allowed to be superior to the community and the Wikileaks Party core principles of transparency and accountability mean that all Australians should have the right to know what these powerful agencies are doing.”

    “As the NSA PRISM revelations show us it also telcos and companies such as Google that are cooperating with security agencies in invasions of privacy of customers. The WLP believes the Telecommunications Act should be amended to compel all providers of information to security and police agencies to file an annual notice containing information about the number of requests they received for data access and how much data has been provided in the previous 12 months. This notice would include information about data handed over to foreign agencies as well as domestic agencies.”

    Ludlam said the globe was currently seeing “unprecedented surveillance overreach by the United States Government, and new revelations that this information is being covertly shared with the British authorities”.

    “The Australian Government now needs to disclose the extent to which it has been given access to the PRISM system to spy on Australians, and the usual bland assurances about national security will no longer wash. When I introduce the Bill, I will be asking the government to answer questions about who knew about the PRISM program, how much data is shared, and whether the Australian Privacy Principles are meaningless for citizens and Parliamentarians.”

    This week Australia’s Foreign Minister Bob Carr said that he “wouldn’t think” Australians had anything to be concerned about in relation to the NSA Internet spy scandal which engulfed the United States last week, despite the fact that the issue appears to exclusively relate to NSA access to foreigners’ data on US cloud computing servers.
     
    And on 7:30, Dreyfus echoed Carr’s confidence. “We’ve got a very complex legal regime here in Australia and we expect there to be a respecting of Australian’s privacy by all other countries,” the Attorney-General said. “There is a clear, firm safeguards regime here in Australia and no Australian agency has used other than in accordance with the existing legal regime in Australia, no Australian agency has had access to information on Australians.”

    opinion/analysis
    Frankly I do not believe either Dreyfus or Carr have any idea even what Australia’s own intelligence agencies are doing or what data they have access to from the NSA in this area, let along what the NSA itself has stored on Australians. The pair’s bland insistence that Australians have nothing to fear is easily seen through as the shallow assurances of politicians out of their depth in a field which they have little knowledge of.

    What could it possibly cost Carr to have inquired, as Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull already has, of the United States Government, what data it is keeping on Australians? What could it possibly cost Dreyfus to commit to investigating what data Australia’s law enforcement agencies have access to from the US? Nothing, in either case.

    I continually find it impossible to understand why it’s only minority political groups such as the Greens, Wikileaks and the Pirate Party, which demonstrate a strong interest in protecting the privacy rights of Australians and protecting the over-reach of the growing surveillance state. One suspects that ministers like Dreyfus and Carr have long been going through a process of acclimatisation at the hands of law enforcement agencies and public servants — a process of socialisation which leads to them being unable to objectively differentiate real, government-sponsored threats to Australians’ privacy and security from normal law enforcement activities.

    You want telecommunications data on someone? Get a warrant. When did that simple concept become so hard for law enforcement agencies and politicians to understand and accept? Probably, I suspect, when those same authorities realised how easy it appeared to conduct more and more policing activities from the comfort and safety of their office — and not out in the field.

    Image credit: Office of Mark Dreyfus

    submit to reddit

    10 Comments

    You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

    1. Senectus
      Posted 12/06/2013 at 5:47 pm | Permalink |

      +1
      I dont get how we’re allowing this to go ahead.
      Maybe its the consumerization of big data.

      Encrypt everything. and don’t use cloud services for anything you don’t want read.

    2. Craig H
      Posted 12/06/2013 at 7:26 pm | Permalink |

      Thousands of requests today, but if judicial oversight is granted this might dwindle to only hundreds or even tens of legal requests.. the only thing it will slow down is that random harvesting of private data.. if the data is actually needed then a warrant will be granted. This is really just a case of damning society to enable discovery.. sorry the rest of us have to work in our jobs, you can too.

    3. Tel
      Posted 12/06/2013 at 7:46 pm | Permalink |

      If police officers and government officials find it too tedious to obey the law, imagine how everyone else must feel about it.

    4. BrownieBoy
      Posted 12/06/2013 at 8:59 pm | Permalink |

      Government looks after the cops. The cops look after government.

      Same old, same old.

    5. jasmcd
      Posted 12/06/2013 at 10:24 pm | Permalink |

      At least with a warrant system, there is some form of trail some oversight into the number, purpose and circumstances relating to each request. I don’t know if that information is accurately being kept at this stage. Their is also state owned number plate tracking cameras in operation on highways, does this extend to the location of where purchases were made? It surely is a black hole as to exactly how far privacy has been eroded. It cant be good if even the illusion of privacy is failing.

      • jasmcd
        Posted 12/06/2013 at 10:34 pm | Permalink |

        *There…. hangs head shamefully.

    6. Rory
      Posted 13/06/2013 at 11:50 am | Permalink |

      Do we know how long it takes for a warrent to get processed?

    7. CMOTDibbler
      Posted 13/06/2013 at 12:54 pm | Permalink |

      “I continually find it impossible to understand why it’s only minority political groups such as the Greens, Wikileaks and the Pirate Party, which demonstrate a strong interest in protecting the privacy rights of Australians and protecting the over-reach of the growing surveillance state.”

      … and Malcolm Turnbull in this instance. Dunno if his party agrees with what he’s doing though.

    8. Tinman_au
      Posted 13/06/2013 at 2:19 pm | Permalink |

      Australia’s Federal Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus has made the extraordinary declaration that Australian law enforcement in Australia “would grind to a halt” if police officers and other law enforcement agents were forced to apply for a warrant every time they wanted to access Australians’ telecommunications data.

      Perhaps if they limited the requests from “wanted” to “needed”….

    9. Jarrod874
      Posted 14/06/2013 at 8:47 am | Permalink |

      Law enforcement “would grind to a halt” if the government didn’t say things like not saying if we don’t spy on you law enforcement “will grind to a halt”




    Get our 'Best of the Week' newsletter on Fridays

    Just the most important stories, one email a week.

    Email address:


  • Most Popular Content

  • Enterprise IT stories

    • Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp facepalm2

      If you have even a skin deep awareness of the structure of Australia’s superannuation industry, you’ll be aware that much of the underlying infrastructure used by many of the nation’s major funds — AustralianSuper, CBus, HESTA and more — is provided by a centralised group, Superpartners. One of the group’s main projects in recent years has been to dramatically update and modernise its IT platform — its version of a core banking platform overhaul. Unfortunately, as was revealed in November, the $250 million project has not precisely been going well, and the Financial Review last week reported that Superpartners is actually close to turfing it altogether and going back to the drawing board.

    • Qld’s Grant joins analyst firm IBRS peter-grant

      This week it emerged that Peter Grant, the two-time former Queensland Whole of Government CIO (pictured), has joined well-regarded analyst firm Intelligent Business Research Services (IBRS). We’ve long had a high regard for IBRS, and so it’s fantastic to see such an experienced executive join its ranks.

    • Westpac dumps desk phones for Samsung Android mobiles samsung-galaxy-ace-3

      The era of troublesome desk phones tied to physical locations is gradually coming to an end in many workplaces, with mobile phones becoming increasingly popular as organisations’ main method of voice telecommunications. But some groups are more advanced than others when it comes to adoption of the trend. One of those is Westpac.

    • Ministers’ cloud approval lasted just a year reverse

      Remember how twelve months ago, the Federal Government released a new cloud computing security and privacy directive which required departments and agencies to explicitly acquire the approval of the Attorney-General and the relevant portfolio minister before government data containing private information could be stored in offshore facilities? Remember how the policy was strongly criticised by Microsoft, Government CIOs and Delimiter? Well, it looks like the policy is about to be reversed.

    • WA Govt can’t fund school IT upgrades oops key

      In news from The Department of Disturbing Facts, iTNews revealed late last week that Western Australia’s Department of Education has run out of money halfway through the deployment of new fundamental IT infrastructure to the state’s schools.

    • Turnbull outlines Govt ICT vision turnbull-5

      Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has published an extensive article arguing that the Federal Government needed to do a better job of connecting with Australians via digital channels and that public sector IT projects needn’t cost the huge amounts that some have in the past.

    • NZ Govt pushes hard into cloud zealand

      New Zealand’s national Government announced a whole of government contract this morning for what it terms ‘Office Productivity as a Service’ services. This includes email and calendaring services, as well as file-sharing, mobility, instant messaging and collaboration services. The contract complements two existing contracts — Desktop as a Service and Enterprise Content Management as a Service.

    • CommBank reveals Harte’s replacement whiteing

      The Commonwealth Bank of Australia has promoted an internal executive who joined the bank in September after a lengthy career at petroleum giant VP and IT services group Accenture to replace its outgoing chief information officer Michael Harte, who announced in early May that he would leave the bank.

    • Jeff Smith quits Suncorp for IBM jeffsmith4

      Second-tier Australian bank and financial services group Suncorp today announced that its long-serving top technology executive Jeff Smith would leave to take up a senior role with IBM in the United States, in an announcement which marks the end of an era for the nation’s banking IT sector.

    • Small business missing the mobile, social, cloud revolution iphone-stock

      Most companies that live and breathe the online revolution are not tech startups, but smart smaller firms that use online tools to run their core business better: to cut costs, reach customers and suppliers, innovate and get more control. Many others, however, are falling behind, according to a new Grattan Institute discussion paper.

  • Blog, Enterprise IT - Jul 5, 2014 13:53 - 0 Comments

    Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp

    More In Enterprise IT


    Blog, Telecommunications - Jul 5, 2014 12:12 - 0 Comments

    What should the ACCC’s role be in guiding infrastructure spending?

    More In Telecommunications


    Analysis, Industry, Internet - Jun 23, 2014 10:33 - 0 Comments

    ‘Google Schmoogle’ – how Yellow Pages got it so wrong

    More In Industry


    Blog, Digital Rights - Jun 30, 2014 22:24 - 0 Comments

    Will Netflix launch in Australia, or not?

    More In Digital Rights