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 < [email protected] 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> > 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 <[email protected]> >> 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 <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Rob, >>>> Check your inbox/spam folder 29/10. >>>> >>>> Kind regards >>>> Paul Wilkins >>>> >>>> On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 08:33, Robert Hudson <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >>>>> 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 <[email protected]> >>>>>> 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 <[email protected]> >>>>>>> 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 < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> 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 < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> 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 < >>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> 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 < >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> 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 < >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> 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 < >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> 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 < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> 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 < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paul, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 2:12 PM Paul Wilkins < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> 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 >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ > AusNOG mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog > _______________________________________________ > AusNOG mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog >
_______________________________________________ AusNOG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
