NSW Police Force submission #39 <https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=75170998-0442-4a5d-823e-3ed3898e44a1&subId=670049>
On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 10:51, Paul Wilkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > Home affairs unlawfully accessed stored metadata, ombudsman reveals > <https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/sep/11/home-affairs-unlawfully-accessed-stored-metadata-ombudsman-reveals> > > > The home affairs department ordered companies to preserve metadata and > used warrants to access it “without proper authority” and twice > unlawfully accessed stored communications, according to an ombudsman’s > report. > > In a sequel to the report revealing 116 illegal metadata searches by the > ACT police > <https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jul/23/police-made-illegal-metadata-searches-and-obtained-invalid-warrants-targeting-journalists>, > later admitted to number more than 3,000 > <https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jul/26/act-police-admit-unlawfully-accessed-metadata-more-than-3000-times>, > the Commonwealth Ombudsman has declared that unlawful access by government > agencies has “reduced significantly” since 2016-17. > > But despite improved compliance, the ombudsman still found a litany of > errors between 1 July 2017 and 30 June 2018 such as 31 instances of > agencies receiving data outside the parameters of the authority, including > 26 at the home affairs department. > > In 2015 law enforcement agencies gained the power to access individuals’ > metadata – information about a communication which does not include its > content – when investigating certain offences, subject to oversight from > the ombudsman. > > In its latest report, tabled in parliament on Tuesday, the ombudsman > concluded that agencies were “generally exercising their powers … > appropriately” but highlighted lapses including:... > > On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 at 15:53, Paul Wilkins <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I found this rather cryptic observation in the submission >> <https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=0076905f-bd1c-4536-8ff3-a90dd3ac6b18&subId=668584> >> from the Inspector General of Intelligence and Security. It points out >> where metadata retained under the Data Retention regime, may be accessed >> without a warrant, where the data in question is not content. Such would >> obviously be the case where LEAs sought access to metadata datastreams >> using a TCN as the enabling authorisation. After due consideration of a >> number of other PJCIS submissions, I'm yet more confident than where I >> first laid out the case to PJCIS back last November, that a combination of >> s280/s313 or s177 and TCN would be sufficient for LEAs to gain access to >> metadata datastreams without warrant or any judicial or parliamentary >> oversite. >> >> It should also be noted that although the obligations in the >> Telecommunications Act 1997 prevent carriers and carriage service providers >> from disclosing telecommunications data without a warrant or authorisation >> in place, these obligations do not prevent agencies from accessing that >> data using other means. Any access by an agency to telecommunications data >> that does not require disclosure by a carrier or carriage service provider >> would therefore not require a warrant or authorisation, unless it also >> involved accessing content or unauthorised access to a computer. >> >> >> >> *Access to telecommunications data outside Chapter 4 of the TIA ActThe >> Committee may wish to discuss with relevant agencies the extent, if any, to >> which telecommunications data is accessed outside the framework provided by >> Chapter 4 of the TIA Act.* >> >> The Australian Information Commissioner's submission >> <https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=8e675437-b875-4863-87cc-71b721280d8f&subId=668240> >> could >> also be regarded as making the case that s280/s313 substantiate warrantless >> access to metadata. >> >> The OAIC recommends that the Committee consider implementing an >> enforceable restriction on the agencies that are permitted to access >> telecommunications data, noting this was a safeguard that provided privacy >> protections in the absence of more formal mechanisms such as a >> warrant-based access regime. As the law currently stands, there appears to >> be mechanisms for accessing telecommunications data outside of the TIA Act >> that, while permitted, have the practical impact of reducing the >> effectiveness of safeguards in the TIA Act. >> >> Kind regards >> >> Paul Wilkins >> >> On Sat, 27 Jul 2019 at 14:56, Paul Wilkins <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Report in the Guardian today of judicial and governance experts >>> increasingly concerned Australia is stifling journalism and State >>> accountability playing the security trump card. >>> >>> National security being used to stifle public interest journalism, >>> former judges warn >>> <https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jul/27/national-security-being-used-to-stifle-public-interest-journalism-former-judges-warn> >>> >>> As regards the consequences of this, Data Retention means that >>> conventional avenues for whistleblowers to contact national media are >>> severely curtailed, where the Feds can apply for journalist warrants, as >>> they have recently, to go after the ABC et al. And as has been pointed out, >>> no warrant is required to access data retention of non journalist sources >>> suspected of leaking, which gives police an end around the journalist >>> warrant process anyway. >>> >>> Now from a jurisprudential prism within the Australian jurisdiction, >>> this looks like a simple conflict of security versus accountability, but >>> not so. Because of the reach of the internet beyond Australia's >>> jurisdiction, the Data Retention regime creates a situation where >>> whistleblowers have options. They can either leak their concerns to an >>> Australian media organisation, and run the gambit of being exposed, or, >>> they may prefer to leak to organisations outside the Australian >>> jurisdiction, to organisations who won't have the national interest as a >>> concern, nor the constraints of operating as a media organisation within >>> the Australian jurisdiction. Which is kind of germane if you were say, >>> inclined towards leaking matters pertaining to national security. >>> >>> Kind regards >>> >>> Paul Wilkins >>> >>> On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 11:29, Mark Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 10:32, Paul Wilkins <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Comms Alliance submission >>>>> <https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=10156360-86ba-4fff-93c9-f2caa3577dd6&subId=668168> >>>>> makes the case that the costs of Data Retention are not being properly >>>>> compensated, with substantial incurred costs being a carrier expense. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The initial capital costs incurred by industry to meet the >>>>> requirements of the regime were >>>>> partially – but not fully – met via grants from Government. As has >>>>> been highlighted in >>>>> information presented to the committee, industry has incurred a net >>>>> cost to meet its >>>>> obligations under the regime of *at least $171m over a four year >>>>> period*, despite cost-recovery mechanisms being in place. >>>>> >>>>> This gets more interesting still, when you begin to consider the >>>>> substantially more expensive and complex TCNs/TANs. >>>>> >>>> >>>> The less carriers there are, the better suited it is to the >>>> government's surveillance agenda. It must have been really easy for LEAs to >>>> only have to deal with PMG and then Telecom. So if they cost a carrier out >>>> of business, they'll only be crying crocodile tears. >>>> >>>> There are many threats to many parties in this agenda, that's perhaps >>>> one not really recognised. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Kind regards >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Paul Wilkins >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2019 at 11:50, Paul Wilkins <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> This enquiry has data retention back in the news, that and recent AFP >>>>>> execution of search warrants on journalists. >>>>>> >>>>>> Link to PJCIS submissions >>>>>> <https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Intelligence_and_Security/Dataretentionregime/Submissions> >>>>>> >>>>>> Kind regards >>>>>> >>>>>> Paul Wilkins >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 at 11:38, Paul Wilkins <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> News this morning that the Victorian government is developing plans >>>>>>> to use mobile apps to track commuters. The government argues the data >>>>>>> will >>>>>>> be used to improve travel times. This however, ignores the larger >>>>>>> picture, >>>>>>> that across all Australian governments, both State and Federal, there's >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> forward going agenda to widen the meta data kept on citizens - CCTV >>>>>>> facial >>>>>>> recognition, license plate capture, and that these data bases are being >>>>>>> integrated by law enforcement. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So where there exists the theoretical possibility that data >>>>>>> retention metadata can now, under existing law, be integrated into other >>>>>>> law enforcement databases under TANs/TCNs, there is a genuine concern >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> blandishments by law enforcement that "we wouldn't do that" may not >>>>>>> actually be an effective check on creeping extensions of police powers, >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> that there should in fact be legislated protections against the use of >>>>>>> data >>>>>>> retention datasets. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Kind regards >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Paul Wilkins >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 at 17:05, Paul Wilkins <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Submissions close 1st July for those so foolhardy as to throw their >>>>>>>> random stream of consciousness into the void of Dep't Home Affairs' >>>>>>>> accountability. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And when you throw your random stream of consciousness into the >>>>>>>> void, the void throws its random stream of consciousness back at you, >>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>> something. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kind regards >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Paul Wilkins >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 11:26, Paul Wilkins < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I raised the point in my PJCIS submissions regarding the >>>>>>>>> Assistance and Access Act, that TANs/TCNs are potentially sufficient >>>>>>>>> grounds to serve as authorisation under s280/s313 of the >>>>>>>>> Telecommunications >>>>>>>>> Act for the access of Data Retention datasets, and so provide the >>>>>>>>> necessary >>>>>>>>> enabling legislation for law enforcement to institute access to >>>>>>>>> metadata >>>>>>>>> datastreams. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I had thought with the election announced, there'd be some respite >>>>>>>>> from this rinse/repeat cycle of calling for public submissions. Just >>>>>>>>> when >>>>>>>>> you thought it was safe to go back in the water. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Kind regards >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Paul Wilkins >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2019 at 19:29, Robert Hudson <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>>>>>>>>> From: ITPA President <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 20:27 >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Fwd: PJCIS: REVIEW OF THE MANDATORY DATA RETENTION >>>>>>>>>> REGIME, INVITATION TO MAKE A SUBMISSION >>>>>>>>>> To: <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> FYI >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>>>>>>>>> From: Little, Robert (REPS) <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 at 13:23 >>>>>>>>>> Subject: PJCIS: REVIEW OF THE MANDATORY DATA RETENTION REGIME, >>>>>>>>>> INVITATION TO MAKE A SUBMISSION >>>>>>>>>> To: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *PARLIAMENTARY JOINT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *REVIEW OF THE MANDATORY DATA RETENTION REGIME* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *INVITATION TO MAKE A SUBMISSION* >>>>>>>>>> The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security >>>>>>>>>> has commenced a review of the mandatory data retention regime >>>>>>>>>> proscribed by >>>>>>>>>> Part 5-1A of the *Telecommunications (Interception and Access) >>>>>>>>>> Act 1979 (TIA Act).* >>>>>>>>>> <https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2019C00010> On behalf >>>>>>>>>> of the Committee I am writing to invite you to make a submission to >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> Committee’s review. >>>>>>>>>> The mandatory data retention regime is a legislative framework >>>>>>>>>> which requires carriers, carriage service providers and internet >>>>>>>>>> service >>>>>>>>>> providers to retain a defined set of telecommunications data for two >>>>>>>>>> years, >>>>>>>>>> ensuring that such data remains available for law enforcement and >>>>>>>>>> national >>>>>>>>>> security investigations. >>>>>>>>>> Section 187N of the TIA Act provides for the review and requires >>>>>>>>>> the Committee to report by 13 April 2020. Terms of reference are >>>>>>>>>> available >>>>>>>>>> here >>>>>>>>>> <https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Intelligence_and_Security/Dataretentionregime/Terms_of_Reference> >>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>> The Committee has resolved to focus on the following aspects of >>>>>>>>>> the legislation: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - the continued effectiveness of the scheme, taking into >>>>>>>>>> account changes in the use of technology since the passage of the >>>>>>>>>> Bill; >>>>>>>>>> - the appropriateness of the dataset and retention period; >>>>>>>>>> - costs, including ongoing costs borne by service providers >>>>>>>>>> for compliance with the regime, any potential improvements to >>>>>>>>>> oversight, >>>>>>>>>> including in relation to journalist information warrants; >>>>>>>>>> - any regulations and determinations made under the regime; >>>>>>>>>> - the number of complaints about the scheme to relevant >>>>>>>>>> bodies, including the Commonwealth Ombudsman and the >>>>>>>>>> Inspector-General of >>>>>>>>>> Intelligence and Security; >>>>>>>>>> - security requirements in relation to data stored under the >>>>>>>>>> regime, including in relation to data stored offshore; >>>>>>>>>> - any access by agencies to retained telecommunications data >>>>>>>>>> outside the TIA Act framework, such as under the >>>>>>>>>> Telecommunications Act >>>>>>>>>> 1997; and >>>>>>>>>> - developments in international jurisdictions since the >>>>>>>>>> passage of the Bill. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Making a submission* >>>>>>>>>> The Committee invites written submissions addressing any or all >>>>>>>>>> of the areas of focus for the Committee’s inquiry. Submissions should >>>>>>>>>> clearly identify which areas of focus are being addressed. >>>>>>>>>> Prospective submitters are advised that any submission to the >>>>>>>>>> Committee’s inquiry must be prepared solely for the inquiry and >>>>>>>>>> should not >>>>>>>>>> be published prior to being accepted by the Committee. Documents do >>>>>>>>>> not >>>>>>>>>> attract parliamentary privilege until they are accepted by the >>>>>>>>>> Committee. >>>>>>>>>> Documents submitted during the election period will be held by the >>>>>>>>>> Secretariat and provided to the Committee as established in the 46th >>>>>>>>>> Parliament. >>>>>>>>>> Submissions are requested by *1 July 2019*. Further information >>>>>>>>>> about making a submission to a parliamentary committee inquiry is >>>>>>>>>> available >>>>>>>>>> here >>>>>>>>>> <https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House/Making_a_submission> >>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Robert >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Robert Little** |* *Inquiry Secretary* >>>>>>>>>> *Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security* >>>>>>>>>> *Department of the House of Representatives* >>>>>>>>>> PO Box 6021 | Parliament House | Canberra ACT 2600 >>>>>>>>>> Ph. (02) 6277 4589 | *www.aph.gov.au/pjcis* >>>>>>>>>> <http://www.aph.gov.au/pjcis> >>>>>>>>>> *Facebook:* @AusHouseofRepresentatives >>>>>>>>>> <http://www.facebook.com/aushouseofrepresentatives> | *Twitter:* >>>>>>>>>> @AboutTheHouse <http://twitter.com/aboutthehouse> >>>>>>>>>> Don’t take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them here. >>>>>>>>>> Register to be an organ donor *here.* >>>>>>>>>> <http://www.medicareaustralia.gov.au/public/services/aodr/index.jsp> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Robert Hudson >>>>>>>>>> President, ITPA >>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>> 0408 860 595 >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>> 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
