A new hearing <http://www.aph.gov.au/sitecore/content/Home/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Intelligence_and_Security/TelcoAmendmentBill2018/Public_Hearings> has been added: *04 Dec 2018*
On Thu, 15 Nov 2018 at 17:35, Paul Wilkins <[email protected]> wrote: > Consequently, should this Bill pass, first cab off the rank will be > initial TANs requesting metadata: > > > - tracking convoys of (possibly illegal) motorcycle enthusiast groups > - tracking the weekend night movements of dance enthusiast groups > > > with followup TCNs to automate the process. Unfortunately, once you let > the geni out of the bottle, and allow for police to track people’s > movements, and correlate these to social groups and behaviours, there’s no > telling where it may wind up. It’s certainly a consequence of the > legislation that would amaze the great majority of Australian citizens if > the Government were to consider this reasonable or proportionate. > > On Thu, 15 Nov 2018 at 17:28, Robert Hudson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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
