Australia - Digital Privacy Ends 13 Oct

Data retention and the end of Australians' digital privacy August 29, 2015 Quentin Dempster Contributing editor The digital privacy of Australians ends from Tuesday, October 13. http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/data-retention-and-the-end-of-australians-digital-privacy-20150827-gj96kq.html Authorised agencies to view metadata > ASIO (Australian Security Intelligence Organisation) > Australian Federal Police > All state and territory police forces > The Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity > Australian Crime Commission > Australian Customs and Border Protection Service > Australian Securities and Investments Commission > Australian Competition and Consumer Commission > NSW Crime Commission > NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption > NSW Police Integrity Commission > Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission > West Australian Corruption and Crime Commission > South Australian Independent Commission Against Corruption > Any other agency the Attorney General publicly declares ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- ꕤ

LIB-LABOR Stasi State: Mandatory Mass Surveillance of Australians & TPP

Mandatory data retention passes Australian parliament Summary: The government and Labor have jointly ensured that the telecommunications data of all Australians will be retained for two years for warrantless access by law-enforcement agencies. By Josh Taylor | March 26, 2015 -- 07:40 GMT (18:40 AEDT) Follow @joshgnosis The Australian government has relied on the votes of the Labor opposition to pass legislation on Thursday that will force telecommunications companies to retain customer data for two years for warrantless access by law enforcement. The legislation -- which will see call records, assigned IP addresses, location information, billing information, and other customer data stored for two years -- passed the Senate on Thursday with the support of Labor senators. The government and Labor shot down over a dozen amendments from the Greens, and several amendments from crossbench senators including those from David Leyonhjelm, Dio Wang, and Nick Xenophon. The amendments would have forced the data to be held in Australia, would have required warrants for all accessing of the data, and would have limited the storage to three months -- bringing Australia closer into line with international standards. Instead, the government agreed to a number of amendments from Labor, including requiring a warrant for accessing the data of a journalist for the purpose of identifying a source. The government will appoint a "public interest advocate" to argue on behalf of journalists -- who won't be aware that their data has been sought by law enforcement. There was also intended to be an amendment limiting access to the data for the purposes of civil litigation, but Attorney-General George Brandis on Thursday admitted that through third-party access orders and subpoenas, data could be made available through the court for cases such as copyright infringement. In the end, the Bill was condemned by Leyonhjelm, and Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, but ultimately passed 43 to 16. The Bill will need to be returned to the House to agree to the amendments, but with a government majority this is a mere formality. The legislation passed without the Australian public knowing the cost of the scheme to telcos to build systems to store the data, nor how much the government intends to contribute to the set-up. Earlier in the week, Brandis revealed that the cost per customer per year for the operation of the scheme will be $4, but the cost of building the systems, contained in a confidential PricewaterhouseCoopers report, remains unknown. Brandis said the government's contribution will be detailed in the Budget in May. Telecommunications companies will be given 18 months after the legislation is passed into law to get systems in place in order to comply with the legislation. Armed with a degree in Computer Science and a Masters in Journalism, Josh keeps a close eye on the telecommunications industry, the National Broadband Network, and all the goings on in government IT. Follow @joshgnosis http://www.zdnet.com/article/mandatory-data-retention-passes-australian-parliament/ COMMENT This isn't what a democratic government is for; this is a totalitarian state in action. Note: (1) MASS surveillance; and (2) WARRANTLESS access to data.  The Liberals and the Labor party have sold out every single Australian with this data retention legislation. Data retention is not only a totalitarian violation of civil liberties; it also exposes all Australians to third-party legal action (based on evidence obtained from data retained by internet service provider Stasi deputies). Personal data of Australians will not even be retained on Australian soil and there is no provision for regulating the destruction of that data: WHAT HAPPENS TO DATA THAT IS STORED AFTER THE MANDATORY RETENTION PERIOD? The new laws do not prescribe any rules for the de-identification or destruction of the retained data after the expiry of the two-year retention period. [Lexology] Furthermore, Australian taxpayers will foot the bill twice over for the 'privilege' of having their civil liberties pissed trampled on by bent, corporate serving politicians, aiming to maintain an iron grip on the freedom of all Australians, as taxpayers shall pay for:  (a) the undisclosed federal government contribution to this totalitarian surveillance scheme; and (b) the service provider costs that shall pass onto consumers. The driving force imposing this totalitarian state in Australia, is the practical alliance between the Liberals and their Labor Party sidekicks. Imagine what politicians are hiding from the public when they're targeting journalists with surveillance and secret probes into forcibly collected data. This isn't about national security; this is about control:  control of the press and control of the people, by politicians who serve American and corporate interests, without regard for public welfare or standards of acceptable conduct - which is why whistleblowers, and whistleblower publishers such as WikiLeaks, are important.  Just look at the Trans-Pacific Partnership 'free trade' agreement ('TPP') that government has hidden from public view during several years of negotiations.  What a rort.  They're negotiating away Australia's rights and democracy, and on a course to assign national sovereignty to the very corporations that politicians serve. It's thanks to WikiLeaks - and NOT these corrupt government actors, who dodge transparency and accountability - that the public has even come to know the contents of the SECRET TPP document.  So what does that tell us about the political order in Western democracies, and what does that say about government witch-hunts, criticism and propaganda unleashed at the independent publisher, WikiLeaks, and Julian Assange? The Lib-Labor Stasi, corporate-serving practical political alliance, is about to sell out Australia by signing up ALL Australian as subjects of the TPP (unregulated trade) agreement, which is a vehicle for corporate management of federal, state and local policies.   Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) Investment Chapter WikiLeaks Link - here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ TPP a corporate-managed FTA Signs away democracy & sovereign rights [12:26]  https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qaY46i0ECw8  VOTE THE BASTARDS OUT NEXT ELECTION )))   BILL SHORTEN   (((  2009 audition to US Consul General * Criticises Union Movement * #WikiLeaks - here. VOTE THE BASTARDS OUT NEXT ELECTION Hmmmm ... think I might get a bit melodramatic when I come across news that particularly annoys me. I've come back to edit 'pissed on' to 'trampled on'.  LOL

Don't Get Angry: Encrypt

AUSTRALIAN DIGITAL RAPE BY BRADIS & CO Why people ignore data retentions many perils >> http://www.smh.com.au/business/why-people-ignore-data-retentions-many-perils-20150330-1m9gtb.html REMEDY Gnu Privacy Guard  (GnuPG aka GPG)  Encryption   https://www.gnupg.org/  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Privacy_Guard Werner Koch caught my eye the other day, so I thought GnuPG (aka GPG) might be potential go-to encryption software. German, Werner Koch has authored this software based on open source GNU operating system software (by an MIT guy, Richard Stallman).  Being open source software is supposed to be a positive because it allows outsiders to spot vulnerabilities in code (I think). Werner Koch previously received grants from the German government (but they expired some time ago).  Koch is still kicking on, single-handedly patching the GnuPG program, but short on funding. TOR Anonymising  https://www.torproject.org/ Tor - Explained  .......................................................................... Tor originated with the US Navy and has received US govt funding.   Gee, even as I'm keying this in, Russian software is looking more and more appealing because I'm wondering if there's German backdoors in the encryption software and anticipating some NSA trick when it comes to the Tor anonymising software (see Silk Road FBI busts). I don't know enough to assess the merits of GnuPG or Tor (and wouldn't have a clue where to find Russian software), so this is pretty much it for the options (I think) ... except that you can use PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) instead of the GnuPG. Nope.  It looks like Philip Zimmerman has sold up, so GnuPG it is ... unless you're prepared to trust a US company:  Symantec. ...........................................................................  Photo: Alex Ellinghausen COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Regarding the SMH article, 'rape by Bradis & Co' is my take rather than SMH's ... just so there's no confusion.  ;) That's pretty much what it is when everybody has been placed under state surveillance. State surveillance without cause or consent is an abuse of power.  To be the subject of such an abuse of power is to live in a prison state. The snail-mail version of this would have been going on back in the 50s and 60s, when the Australian govt was in full surveillance and political suppression and sabotage mode, to blot out the 'evil' of communism. But it isn't Russians and communists looking evil now; it's the totalitarian West. Instead of getting angry but then just accepting the inevitable prison population living conditions: a) use technology to secure privacy; & b) vote for non-mainstream politicians, rather than the corporate and US lackeys who have spent years spying on their own citizens (and nations abroad). Did a bit of a summary on encryption basics the other day ... but I think I've forgotten it already, so I'm going to have to start all over.  Intend to keep at it until I get some kind of feel and overview for privacy tech basics, from a consumer perspective.  Only I'm rather lazy ... The above links are just a starter and I don't really know what I'm on about, so it's best to do your own research. Discovered that free Russian e-mail services bypass the intrusions of freebie Western e-mail services.  English log-in is available. VIDEO GPG for Journalists - Windows edition | Encryption for Journalists | Anonymous 2013 from anon108 on Vimeo.

AUSTRALIA: AFP Access Journalists' Metadata / Australian Greens - STOP Data Retention

AUSTRALIA - POLICE STATE COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Source - https://twitter.com/vanbadham/status/577955499703816192 See ADAM BRANDT video:   #StopDataRetention -- Adam Bandt https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=839543312747570 Adam Brandt is deputy leader of the Australian Greens. Why is there such a zeal to monitor what people do online? Labor has joined with the Liberals to push through poorly thought out legislation that violates the principle of prevention of government intrusion (eg state/police intrude only on those suspected of having committed a crime - not intrude upon entire civilian population, as is the case with mass surveillance & retention of data).  Brandt also pointed out that: Criminals can switch to international web-based servers and won't get caught by data retention bill, but the bulk of the unsuspecting population will (so this legislation does not serve the purpose it purports to serve). EUROPEAN UNION and NETHERLANDS have opted out of the data retention step, for good reason. Opens the public up to potential CIVIL LAWSUITS if information subpoenaed  (eg media conglomerates / copyright) -- HYPOCRITE LABOR JOINS LIBERALS TO RUSH THROUGH LEGISLATION Brandt says the public is told that there will be protection for journalists in the Bill and Labor says they'll back up the Liberal government, but no amendment has been circulated in the chamber or made publicly available and the Labor Party is prepared to take the LNP government on faith; but Greens are not.  Why should parliament be required to vote on legislation without a chance to properly look through amendments:  this is complicated & giving people protections from these kinds of laws is complicated. -- COMMENT Government intent on giving journalists protections?  Got to be kidding.  The police state is already violating the liberty of journalists. I'm shocked. If journalists are subject to state violation and intimidation, what hope of freedom has the average person got?

Adam Bennett / Lorax - Good Luck With the Defence, Under Brave New Australian Totalitarianism

Australian Government Prosecuting Anonymous Member Who Allegedly Exposed The Major Flaw In Its Data Retention Demands from the prison-is-for-useful-people dept Find a security flaw, go to jail. That's the general attitude of government entities around the world. Over in Australia, an Anonymous member and fundraising manager for a cancer support group is facing an ever-shifting number of charges for finding and testing security holes. Adam John Bennett is a rather un-anonymous member of Anonymous. He also acts as an unofficial mouthpiece for Anonymous via his LoraxLive online radio show. His supposed participation in a large-scale hack saw him raided by Australian Federal Police in May of 2014. Since then, he's been awaiting prosecution for a variety of charges -- charges government prosecutors seem unable to pin down. The data breach leading to Bennett's arrest involved a target of Australia's controversial data retention law, which requires ISPs to hold onto subscribers' internet activity (including social network use and emails) for two years and grant extensive access to a variety of government agencies. AAPT confirmed it was breached in July 2012, following claims by an Australian sect of Anonymous that it snatched 40GB of data from the major Australian internet service provider (ISP). After stripping out personally identifiable information from the data (which included members of the Australian government), Anonymous released the data to raise awareness around expectations of data security: To demonstrate that if an ISP as large and trusted as AAPT can't keep its own data secure, it will be unable to keep Australians' data safe under the proposed laws. Rather than consider this a point well taken, the government went after Bennett. As for the prosecution itself, it's been a complete shambles. On March 11, Adam Bennett -- known by most as the radio voice of Anonymous, LoraxLive, who was arrested last year for alleged computer crimes -- will finally learn what he's being charged with. This had been expected to happen this week. Instead, at the last minute, Australian Commonwealth prosecutors -- for the third time since the case began 10 months ago -- requested another delay to change its lineup of accusations against him. Maddeningly, the prosecution also indicated it will be dropping its initial charges against Bennett, and adding a slew of new ones. Not only can't the government decide what to charge Bennett with, but it's also been instrumental in hamstringing his defense counsel. It's hard enough to structure a defense when charges remain largely unknown. It's even harder when the prosecution shows up late on the Friday before the next court date and dumps 20 GB of "evidence" into the defense's lap. Even more irritating is the fact that the prosecution apparently hopes to add Bennett's vulnerability testing of his own employer to list of charges. One of the charges Bennett's counsel expect to be in the final lineup is "Heartbleed Vulnerability Testing for Cancer Support W.A. 2014." This is in regard to a Heartbleed vulnerability test created by Bennett to test his employer's servers (Cancer Support W.A.) for Heartbleed vulns, which would have put the CRM that Bennett was involved in building for the organization at significant risk. This addition of complete BS suggests the prosecution can't find much about the Anonymous ISP hack it can wrap charges around. Instead, it seems to be operating purely on bluster. Constant delays followed by last-minute data dumps aren't the sort of actions that indicate prosecutorial confidence. Instead, it gives the impression that the government hopes to obfuscate its way into a guilty verdict. Meanwhile, Bennett is still living under restrictive bail conditions that prevent him from using the internet for anything other than banking, employment (he lost his job at the cancer support group after his arrest) or legal advice. While the government may be right to complain about the unauthorized use of an ISP's data, it seems to be more concerned with making an example out of someone who may have had something to do with providing a practical demonstration of the stupidity of data retention laws. The fact that it's going after him for testing his own employer's defense against vulnerabilities suggests there will be some prosecutorial "piling on" when it finally gets around to enumerating its criminal charges -- presumably in hopes of deterring future exposures of flaws in its lawmaking logic. This is what happens when governments try to "protect" citizens with little more than expansions of surveillance and law enforcement powers. Retained data is just as apt to be misused by cybercriminals as it is by law enforcement/security agencies. Any time you ask a third party to hold onto data it normally doesn't, it increases the risk of serious breaches involving plenty of normally private information. There are no exceptions. Anonymous exposed the short-sightedness of data retention laws. In response, the government has decided to shoot as many messengers as it can get its hands on. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150308/16030230255/australian-government-prosecuting-anonymous-member-who-allegedly-exposed-major-flaw-its-data-retention-demands.shtml COMMENT Anyone who points the finger at Russian tyranny ought to look at the insane State intrusions:  data retention, mass surveillance, laws that erode civil liberties rushed through, secret courts, trials etc, and other violations that take place under Western democracies. Being the subject of State scrutiny, and control of the surveillance and data retention kind, is rather like being a lab rat under glass.  It's disgusting and it should be unlawful to subject the public to this level of State control. Authorities should not be permitted to make charges without presenting a case to answer then and there.  What's with dragging it out and eventually swapping charges, over almost a stretch of a year, while the accused remains under restrictive 'bail conditions'? While I'm sure it is lawful, it just doesn't sound right and just. I don't fancy Bennett's chances of a fair go under totalitarianism.

AUSSIES - SAY HELLO TO NSA & GOODBYE TO CIVIL LIBERTIES

George Brandis set to require internet, phone companies hold customer data for two years

Date     July 15, 2014 - 3:17PM

Attorney-General George Brandis has signalled the government could move to introduce laws forcing internet and phone companies to keep customers records for up to two years.

But the so-called data retention laws will not be part of legislation the government is planning to introduce on Wednesday that will grant new surveillance powers to Australia's spy agencies.

Under those changes, ASIO and other intelligence agencies would be able to hack into a third party's computer to access a target computer and infiltrate entire computer networks on a single warrant.

The government is planning further security reforms later this year that will, in part, seek to address concerns about the threat posed by up to 150 Australians who are currently involved with extremist groups in Iraq and Syria.

Senator Brandis told colleagues at Tuesday's meeting of Coalition MPs that while the first tranche of reforms contained no data retention provisions, "this is the way the west is moving". He pointed out Britain had recently introduced a data retention bill, to deal with the fact that the European Court of Justice had struck down a European data retention directive.

Most of the changes to be introduced to Parliament on Wednesday are based on a bipartisan report last year produced by the high-powered Joint Parliamentary Committee on Intelligence and Security.

But Senator Brandis said on Tuesday that one additional measure would be included - a new penalty for security agency officers who take information without authority.

At present it is an offence to pass that information on to a third party, but this can at times be difficult to prove.

Senator Brandis also moved to reassure colleagues in Tuesday's party room meeting that the first tranche of reforms would contain sufficient safeguards for civil liberties.

He said the first tranche of changes took into account the government's primary obligation to keep the community safe and had been approached in a "careful, thorough and considered way rather than in a hasty and reactive way".

SOURCE - SMH - here.

-------------------------------------
COMMENT



Here we go.

In the name of national security, the Aussies are going to introduce legislation that enables them to share information with US and other agencies, copying the UK (who seem to work for the US NSA), where the UK's introduced data retention laws to bypass the European Court of Justice decision.


Is it the way the west is going -- or just the way the west wants to go?

Is there sufficient justification to encroach on civil liberties, when were are talking 150 Syrian &; Iraq patriots (presumably) doing their patriotic thing?  How is this a threat to an entire nation - of the kind that requires far-reaching incursions on civil liberties?


So the powers that be are going to band together and spy on everyone collectively, sharing information and violating their citizens' privacy and freedoms in the name of 'security'?


Sounds like some kind of worldwide totalitarian secret police thing happening.


Good luck protecting freedom of press, freedom of information or any other freedoms in the west.

-------------------------------------
EDIT - see also:

Australian govt says data retention won't be like failed EU directive

Summary: Talking points obtained under Freedom of Information state that any mandatory data retention regime in Australia would be different to the European directive that was thrown out by the European Court of Justice.

...

Labor MP calls for data retention

In a speech to Parliament yesterday, the chair of the committee at the time of the report, Labor MP Anthony Byrne, called on the government to implement a mandatory data retention regime.

"If a government is concerned and is making the right noises about being concerned about this nation's security, it must give its agencies all of the suite of the powers that it needs to deal with the terrorist threat. And it has not done so," he said.

"I would urge the attorney-general... to bring all of the suites of the powers that the intelligence agencies have been asking for for some period of time...to the parliament at its earliest opportunity."

He said that the powers should be brought before the parliament so the public can debate the need for data retention."I don't want to see data retention debated in this chamber, and the chamber below, after an event has occurred on Australian soil."

The news comes as last week the UK Prime Minister David Cameron announced sweeping new emergency surveillance legislation that would force telecommunications companies in the country to retain customer data for up to 12 months.


SOURCE - ZDNET - here.

Go Labour!