Australian Parliament Approves Email Snooping

brindafella writes "The Sydney Morning Herald newspaper, reporting on a legislative change last week, says 'the [Australian] Government will have 12 months to access communications not only between the B-party and the suspect, but also between the B-party and anyone else. If you have unwittingly communicated with a suspect (and thereby become a B-party), the Government may be able to monitor all your conversations with family members, friends, work colleagues, your lawyer and your doctor.' The Australian Parliament's major parties combined to pass an amendment to the Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 1979."

Comments

I feel safe now

[McGiraf]

Before I wanted to go to Australia but I was scared, now i can go there feeling safe. I'm realy glad that they passed this law.

It Won't Apply To Me

[Elvis77]

I'm a programmer, I don't have any friends...

Re:It Won't Apply To Me

[ozmanjusri]

Anyone want to read the act and give a verdict on that?

I've been following the progress of this and similar acts and yes, in theory at least, it will give the Australian Government the right to collect information on us Aussie Slashdotters.

From the Gilbert + Tobin Centre of Public Law:

Second, in some circumstances, the government can use the information it collects even though that information is irrelevant to the original suspect. For example, if the government uncovers incriminating information from listening to a B-Party's conversations, this can set off a chain reaction allowing the interception of the incriminated person's communications or of anyone with whom they communicate.

The worst of it though, is the unseemly haste the government has used to rush this through parliament. Interested parties were given only 10 days to prepare submissions on the Bill, and the Senate Committee had only two weeks to review the submissions, hear evidence and prepare a report. They really badly want to read our private correspondence.

Re:It Won't Apply To Me

[Gideon Fubar]

I'm not sure where they're going to find all the people they need to READ all this email.. noone who knows how to do so can possibly pass the required security checks ;)

Seriously, though.. i'm simply not too worried about it.. the sheer volume of processing that actually putting this into practice requires will easily outstrip it's usefulness. Besides, they attempted to do it before (when it was only a grey area.. it was never illegal as such in .au, to the best of my knowledge) and it didn't work then.. i'm not too sure that they've gotten any smarter in the interim.

Re:It Won't Apply To Me

[tqft]

"but this just seems like an overly broad license to spy."
Not that I wouldn't put it past little johnnie and friends to go "overboard".

But any closed loops may be of interest, don't forget the ip addresses and other data the wrappers are carrying.

Some said you can't read it all - agreed. But some good data mining software and a Mk1 eyeball, may find patterns - time of day, closed loops, etc that supposedly may be the justification - if any of the people do become persons of interest.

More likely it all goes into the big archive to be dredged out when thay decide to create a smear file if you rub them the wrong way.

Australian Politics Gone Mad

[syousef]

Seriously these politicians have just gone plain loopy and it's all because the labour party has gone into a tailspin.

State labour in NSW (where Sydney is and the biggest state) has been unable to fix Sydney's transport problem and keeps closing roads around new tollways stuffing up public transport...not to mention they haven't been able to improve a constantly deteriorating health care system. Federal labour can't get enough votes to put up any serious opposition and the opposing party has a majority in both houses. The young labour party has recently been in the papers for calling for conscription - a total about face on their previous postion. Recently the labour party also did an about face on their position regarding forcing ISPs to filter pornography (and are now in favour of this with all of its technical problems). What's more they have personality issues within the party (nothing new in politics but this is when a party has to band together to survive).

I'm an Australian who feels I have zero representation. Not one politician here is even trying to make this country better...not even for the votes.

Re:Australian Politics Gone Mad

[caitsith01]

Grandparent's extremely valid point was that the federal ALP does absolutely nothing by way of providing effective and principled opposition and as such the Liberals can do what they want with no accountability whatsoever. Reverse the parties and you have the problem at the state level.

Re:Australian Politics Gone Mad

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe if those of us on the left had someone we felt comfortable voting for other than the Greens, who can be a bit loony... but as it is Beazley seems to be trying to outflank Howard on the right wing. Ten years and one month so far of covert and overt racism, blatant breaches of ministerial responsibility, and a complete lack of any decent opposition. Still, at least Australians feel can now safe wrapping themselves in the flag and bashing people of "Middle Eastern appearance", hey?

Typical of Australia

[caitsith01]

This is typical of the current government's attitude to privacy and telecommunications. The Telecommunications Act already allows for seizure of computers and other equipment when it is 'connected with' offences under the Spam Act, for example. There is also evidence that the government has been confiscating and destroying personal computers without a warrant when they contain 'sensitive' information.

All of this is part of a broader lack of accountability, due process and transparency that is becoming part of the culture of Australian lawmaking. There is a good article on the subject here.

For those from more sensible countries, supposedly democratic Australia currently has the following features:

1. One party entirely in control of both houses of parliament
2. No bill of rights, either legislative or constitutional
3. Legislation allowing for the arrest, detention, and interrogation without charge of persons not suspected of any offence if they may have information that is somehow relevant to a suspected terrorist offence; the onus of proof is reversed so that the person being interrogated must prove that they do NOT have any such information.
4. One of the highest rates of phone tapping in the world
5. Unelected bureacrats empowered to spy on Australians with no parliamentary oversight to speak of
6. Several semi-secret US intelligence bases operating on our soil
7. New crimes of sedition for exercising free speech in a manner that encourages the overthrow of the government
8. Troops in Iraq despite over 80% of the population opposing our involvement before the war
At the moment we also have an extremely disturbing rise in racial and religious intolerance, which in my opinion is in no small part attributable to the federal government's policies and fearmongering on those issues. But of course, this doesn't stop us selling weapons-grade uranium to China because they weeeeally promise to use it for civilian purposes only.

Re:Typical of Australia

[Anonymous Coward]

In the good ol' U S of A:

1. One party entirely in control of both houses of parliament
Check!
2. No bill of rights, either legislative or constitutional
Ok, you got us there
3. Legislation allowing for the arrest, detention, and interrogation without charge of persons not suspected of any offence if they may have information that is somehow relevant to a suspected terrorist offence; the onus of proof is reversed so that the person being interrogated must prove that they do NOT have any such information.
Pfft, legislation is for dweebs. Just ask Dubya
4. One of the highest rates of phone tapping in the world
Hmm, don't know enough to comment, sorry
5. Unelected bureacrats empowered to spy on Australians with no parliamentary oversight to speak of
Elected officials empowering agencies to spy on Americans with no oversight to speak of, check!
6. Several semi-secret US intelligence bases operating on our soil
Check!
7. New crimes of sedition for exercising free speech in a manner that encourages the overthrow of the government
Check! But really, see #3
8. Troops in Iraq despite over 80% of the population opposing our involvement before the war
Dunno about 80%, but sure does feel way over 50...

At the moment we also have an extremely disturbing rise in racial and religious intolerance, which in my opinion is in no small part attributable to the federal government's policies and fearmongering on those issues. But of course, this doesn't stop us selling weapons-grade uranium to China because they weeeeally promise to use it for civilian purposes only.
Check!

Sadly, this looks like the state of affairs all around the world :(

Links?

[vk2tds]

Not sure if anyone has looked at the links to this article, but the text to the amendment to the act cited at the end of the article was approved in 2004, and is not related at all. In fact the amendment to the act was slightly changed with an 18 month period listed instead of 12 months.

The admenment act is basically just, as far as I can tell, making some parts of the act plainer, saying that a router which buffers packets in memory is not actually storing those packets just because it needs to store them for a few milliseconds. It also clarifies that VoIP is not stored communications.

Any citations of the actual amendment?

Darryl

A few small, tiny questions...

[TheNoxx]

Why is the Australian government even doing this? Has there been any major terrorist attack on Australia? Do they really think there will be one in the future? What's the point, other than crushing freedom?

Re:A few small, tiny questions...

[Anonymous Coward]

1 - Get court order on a spammer.
2 - Wait for spammer to email everyone in Australia.
3 - Become legally entitled to monitor all Australians at will.

Re:A few small, tiny questions...

[Neo-Rio-101]

Actually a cadre of extremists were arrested in both Sydney and Melbourne and were charged with a slew of new terrorsism related offenses. It was thought the arrests had effectively prevented an attack on Australian soil.

Re:A few small, tiny questions...

[BJH]

Did you perhaps notice that they were able to catch these "extremists" WITHOUT the draconian legislative changes they're trying to introduce?

Maybe that means they've already got all the tools they need - in which case, why do they need this?

Re:A few small, tiny questions...

[BrokenHalo]

1 - Get court order on a spammer.

They wouldn't have to look very far. John Howard himself took to spamming his electorate just before the last election.

Re:A few small, tiny questions...

[StrawberryFrog]

Has there been any major terrorist attack on Australia?

Rightly or wrongly, the "2002 Bali bombings is percieved as such:
The largest group among those killed were holiday-makers from Australia. The Bali bombing is sometimes called "Australia's September 11" because of the large number of its citizens killed in the attack.

Re:A few small, tiny questions...

[lorelorn]

Actually it was claimed the arrests had stopped an attack on Australian soil. The media duly repeated this claim without comment or question, so now it has become somehow relevant.

The fact is, a group of people from an increasingly vilified minority in Australia were arrested and are being held without formal charges being laid or evidence tendered.

They are being held under dubious new laws that extend the amount of time someone can be held without formal charges or evidence.

I expect they will be held for several months and then released without charge, trial, or comment in the media.

Re:Big brother is watching....again.....

[CRCulver]

I recall now that Winston Smith's apartment in 1984 was built in such a way that part of his room was outside the glimpse of the telescreen. This allowed him to write his diary, although as anyone who has read the book knows, this small blow for freedom didn't mean much in the end.

But on the Internet, what spaces do we have that are truly private? What is our best bet for having a small amount of privacy to live as normal human beings? PGP? Or, as the previous Slashdot story tells, Freenet? On a system where all communication between two individual goes over a wire that Big Brother can watch with ease, finding a private nook is hard indeed.

*sigh*

[phreakv6]

"the Government may be able to monitor all your conversations with family members, friends, work colleagues, your lawyer and your doctor."

..and my SPAM too. good luck with tracing the person selling me viarga for years

Re:Use PGP/GPG

[CRCulver]

In other words, the CIA have been reading all my email for years now

In the United States, monitoring communications is the mission of the National Security Agency, not the Central Intelligence Agency, which focuses on various other fields of intelligence. For a good introduction to the NSA, what they do and (as best we know) how they do it, try James Bamford's Body of Secrets , written by the foremost public expert on the agency.

Re:Big brother is watching....again.....

[Goth Biker Babe]

I foresee the rebirth of Fidonet except possibly using Wi-Fi.

Re:Use PGP/GPG

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, you are of course correct. The equivalent in Australia is the DSD - "Defence Signals Directorate", although ASIO is responsible for domestic signals interceptions and indeed all domestic intelligence.

Dammit, I'm sure intelligence used to mean something else.

Chain letter

[kooshvt]

Just start a chain letter to everyone you know and make sure to CC all the politicians so they will also be subject to monitoring. Let them know they have now become a B-party. If every politician becomes a B-party to every citizen they may reconsider their actions.

Re:Chain letter

[Boronx]

They will demure from spying on anyone of consequence who might object and derail their plans. Their lists will be continually culled of the famous and the politically connected.

You WISH there was no rudder

[caitsith01]

But of course there is. No-one is drunk and out of control - they know exactly what they're doing. And that is far, far more disturbing. When you actually look at all this legislation it's very apparent that it is quite tailored to meet its objectives, which generally are not quite the objectives stated to the media and the people.

I know exactly what you mean about feeling like we're in a downward spiral here though...

Mohammed Jihad Uranium Sarin Sydney Howard

[Simon Garlick]

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2

hQEMAyndGpy58lMCAQf/fyLAH++iB8hQSsAEN87ihbS8R6ZSjo nlXxSrGfiB/15J
RUN3vfTkrDDpZPQtJtXNxAlykvKJRNd+pVz5NeITD5p2janveZ /SyezJA9mvNpsH
hq2EkpTUZx7kp/bM20j9G3pJC+sh19B4iUbjV0L9s7VJ3NzZBh /k67b2gpGJ5ypf
DWZMgI+8hNzyi6ldF7Wcv1iAqKH89OTQK1mdnyEsWjM8iu9hdd V4gl5tKWl/iVE8
Z8rDxQk7N3s9dp17zsT2V9NIw1FfSpEPx4RknDbBtpPcyFNkN4 WqT2TBYEAFGofN
Pcf2EGA5nDvhKbE1Zt8oIZX/jjz2eOOqAHu7XVgJwNJTAVBE89 7A+8o+Qrj2DST4
+IuL7ibwweSJpniElDGuhsLX/fTDycXMkYAuhhazsdZcr6/YXr 3aNZTpTRcOnqlQ
uMlCAwvuuBDf9pLaLIKzZEzNUnU=
=R5l2
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----

Welcome to 1984

[Alain Williams]

Welcome to the totalitarian world.

The excuse for all of this is "the rise in global terrorism", well if that were really the reason then the terrorists have won, they have fundamentally changed our societies.

The reasons are deeper than that, terrorism is an excuse that is brought out as a bogey man to try to provide justification for further infringements of civil liberites. The Tony Blair, in the UK, is now pushing an act that will allow any government minister to change almost any bit of legislation without having to bother to pursuade parliament to agree.

We will suffer for sleep walking to a state where unelected civil servants have the power to snoop on us without any real oversight. This will be abused by these civil servants for their own personal ends.

You thought that Russia 20 years ago was bad - we will have it far worse.

Re:Welcome to 1984

[pe1chl]

the terrorists have won, they have fundamentally changed our societies

It has amazed me for a long time that major politicians fail to see this, or at least act as if they do so.
5 years go, all "free western country" politicians were telling you that freedom was the highest goal in life, that communism was lack of freedom and so it was bad, that totalitarian governments were evil, etc.
They were also claiming they would never negotiate with - or give in to terrorists because that would mean the end of this sacred freedom.

And now, they are taking away all freedom at will to "combat" a problem that is mostly caused by their own behaviour. Freedom suddenly is worth nothing, now "security" is the buzzword. All other priorities and values have to give way to this.

Wouldn't it be better to look at the reasons for terrorism and do something about that, than to always try to "fight a war" against it?
Terrorism is a byproduct of fighting wars against defenseless minority groups, and so fighting a war against terrorism is completely counter-productive.

Re:Welcome to 1984

[glesga_kiss]

The excuse for all of this is "the rise in global terrorism", well if that were really the reason then the terrorists have won, they have fundamentally changed our societies.

ARGGHHHH! Stop it, stop it, STOP IT RIGHT THERE!!

They do not hate our freedom. They don't want us to change our countries. They don't want you to lose unrestricted travel. While they might think your lifestyle is immoral, as long as you are on the other side of the world, they'll happilly let you reserve your place in the Islamic equivalent of hell.

What they do hate is the policies of our governments. They hate how we have interfered in their own governments for our own ends. They hate how we overthrow their democraticly elected governments with crackpot dictators, and then give those dictatorships/monarchies the arms and financial means to survive. They hate how we used them in Afganistan to fight the soviets, then turned on them when it suited us. Al Qaida used to be our friend; the name itself was given to them by the CIA and they adopted it themselves.

Every time someone says "the terrorists have already won", the only winner is liars such as Bush and Blair who claim it is a war on freedom. Until people start calling them out publically on these patriotic-manipulation lies, things like Austrailia's email snooping habits will be the tip of the iceberg.

Re:Welcome to 1984

[slavemowgli]

Wouldn't it be better to look at the reasons for terrorism and do something about that, than to always try to "fight a war" against it?

It would, if curbing terrorism really was the goal, but it isn't. The actual goals are (in no particular order):

• Money
• Power (including control of every aspect of people's lifes)

Terrorism is useful because it keeps the population scared. Politicians can't publicly support or endorse it, of course, but they can act in a manner that they full well know will increase terrorism. Terrorists are useless idiots at best, and paid shills doing black ops at worst.

Don't believe me? Think that people like Bush would never allow thousands of innocent people to die for his political goals? Then keep in mind that more than 2000 US soldiers (as well as, probably, a bunch of soldiers from other nations like Poland, Japan, Australia etc.) died in Iraq. Keep in mind that more than 30000 civilians died in Iraq. And keep in mind that more than 100000 people died in Afghanistan.

If politicians really cared about solving the problem, they'd take a look at how christian missionaries operate, for example. Not that I'm advocating missionary work, but you can't deny that they're successful - don't tell people that they're all a bunch of subhuman heathens, but rather set a good example; treat others as you want them to treat you, and they will do so, too. If any high-up really cared about putting an end to terrorism, they'd do this, too - and while the problem wouldn't go away immediately, it'd pretty much be history in 50 or 100 years (at least as long as people continue to respect each other).

The fact that that's not what's happening is, at the very least, evidence that what I said above is correct. Politicians aren't stupid; but if there's no possibilities outside of "stupid" and "not interested in solving the problem", then that leaves just one option.

To recap: terrorism is a useful tool. For (certain) politicians, it's like the goose that lays golden eggs - eggs of power and money. Why would they want to kill that goose?

Re:Welcome to 1984

[glesga_kiss]

Despite the fact that they've specifically stated so?

When? Cite a time and place where they say they want to remove personal freedom in the USA. Bush says "they hate freedom" often enough, but it doesn't make it true. Banging the freedom and liberty drum is a great way to get patriotic Americans on side, without them asking too many questions.

You're getting normal middle-easterners mixed up with the terrorists. Very sloppy. The terrorists (Islamic theocrats) have always been against democracy, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion. They've even published books saying so.

So what? Democracy is not compatible with their traditional culture. That's not why they are flying planes into buildings.

They've distributed pamphlets in Iraq listing how democracy is against sharia law.

It probably is against Sharia law, whatever, that's not the issue here. The question is; are they attacking us because of our freedom? The answer to that is no. They have stated our reasons for their hate many times, and never has it had anything to do with the fact we can gamble and watch porno. Now, when we bring those things to their world, that's what pisses them off. When we use our power to dispose of Islamic governments (e.g. Iran) or station troops to guard other corrupt dictatorships (e.g. Saudi Arabia), then we make enemies. Bin Laden iterates this in every one of the messages that you are not allowed to see.

Huh? You mean turned against them after Sept 11th? Or maybe you're complaining that we stopped interfering once we helped them drive the Soviets out.

No, the fallout with the Taliban came around the end of the 1990s. The main reason was the allocation of a key strategic oil pipeline from the Caspian Sea. In 1997, they visited the USA to discuss this deal. In the end the contract went to an Argentinian firm. Then all of a sudden "the evil Taliban" seems to get mentioned a lot. Funny that, one minute they are strategic allies and partners, the next they are supposedly the most evil regime on the planet. It's almost comical. Towards the end of end of negotiations, the phrase "we'll either carpet you in gold or carpet you in bombs" appeared in the press.

Work on the pipeline started very soon after the Taliban was regime-changed for a more ecconically friendly govenment. US troops were used to guard the construction of the pipeline, and are still there today. I have friends who served in both Iraq and Afganistan; they spent a large ammount of time defending these "strategic institutions" and at least one resigned from the army as a result of this ("not what I signed up for").

However, the key thing to remember here is that Al Qaida != Taliban. The Taliban were just folks who hadn't expelled the terrorists from their country (most other countries had). The Taliban owed it's existance to groups like Al Qadia and could not turn their back on them. Their biggest crime, not giving up Bin Laden, was becase they asked for proof that he was involved in 9-11 (something Al Qaida still deny to this day).

The idea that it's the free world verses a globally united force is a complete fabrication. Each party has their own reasons for being involved, and my or your personal freedom here in the west has nothing to do with it.

Both the CIA and Al-Qaida have stated that they didn't work together in Afghanistan. Both say that the CIA worked with other groups in the area. The idea that the CIA named Al Qaida is as crazy as it sounds.

It does sound utterly preposterous, but it's true. The name originally comes from a database in Langley, which was later adopted by those seeking to align themselves against the west. Bin Laden originally anounced the group in 1998 as: "The Islamic World Front for the struggle against the Jews and the Crusaders" (Al-Jabhah al-Islamiyyah al-`Alamiyyah li-Qital al-Yahud wal-Salibiyyin).

Al Qaida is not

Re:Follow the leader (USA)

[Bruce Losis]

I don't know about you, but I'd rather be a deported political activist (the majority of Australian transportees were Irish republicans and people displaced by the potato blight famine) than a religious freak anyday.

Six degrees of separation...

[Malor]

With the six degrees of separation thing, and careful choices of 'suspects', they can probably get a 90% surveillance rate by declaring only a couple of thousand primary targets.

In other words, as far as I can see, the Australian Parliament has just decreed that the government can read all the email it likes, whenever it likes.

If I were in charge, and unscrupulous, the first person I'd declare a suspect would be the chief of the opposition party.

I say vote Greens.

[babbling]

Considering this new bill, surely even if you're not a Greens supporter, you can at least agree that having a few more Greens politicians in parliament wouldn't be a bad idea, right?

I don't really see what you mean by "loony", though. Everything they do seems to be in the interests of the people. Yes, maybe their policies wouldn't be "the best thing for the economy", but have you ever considered that always doing what is "best for the economy" involves completely forgetting about social, ethical and moral considerations?

Forget the economy. There are more important things in life than money.

Re:I say vote Greens.

[Mac Degger]

I agree with you, but I'm always amazed at how the green option is supposed to be bad for the economy. That just doesn't make sense.

Say you implemented the most draconian of green laws. This would mean all these companies had to spend money to get up to code. This would mean they'd have to hire people internally to find out and implement what needs to be done, and hire externally to get it done. They might have to hike prices up a bit, but there would be many, many new jobs created.

So what exactly is the downside to the economy? You get more people employed, you get new companies fromed, all that AND you get a healthier environment (something which government should be legislating for and enforcing ANYWAY).

Redneck agenda....

[MickDownUnder]

This does not surprise me, as an Australian I can say that I've definitely noticed a slide into a very right wing agenda here. The current government is right wing and has an absolute majority in our parliament, meaning they can pretty much pass any law or any bill they want without the chance it might be vetoed by opposition parties.

I've been out of Australia for quite some time, I've found there to be quite a contrast to the Australia I left more than a year ago. I arrived back here just a couple of days before the Cronulla Race Riots. Since then our leaders have been spouting racist generalisations. There has been a large police crack down, the muslim community have made many claims that they are being unfairly targeted, I can personally verify this as on two occasions I've personally witnessed police unfairly targeting muslim men. I've also noticed since the riots (where our flag was used as a symbol of racial hatred), many police cars have had Australian flags mounted to their cars. I can't help thinking this is a sign of solidarity with the rascist mob.

I really don't even know how these riots could have occurred without police complicity. We have Racial Villification Laws here in Australia, that if they were applied that day could have been used to arrest most of the mob that day before any violence even began.

And with all this, in the background we have our detention camps in which whole families including children have been kept in detention. There have been cases where children have basically grown up in detention.

Unless there's a big turn around here I think the future for Australia could be something straight out of Huxely's Brave New World or 1984.

Re:Big brother is watching....again.....

[barefootgenius]

Did a little searching and it looks like New Zealand may well be ahead of you. To quote from InternetNZ .

"Clause 19 introduces a new computer offence of intentionally accessing a computer system without authorisation; commonly known as "hacking" (new section 305ZFA) (the unauthorised access offence). However, the offence will not apply to everyone because clause 19 provides qualified exemptions for the following State agencies:

1)the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service (the SIS) (new section 305ZFB)
2)the Government Communications Security Bureau (the GCSB) (new section 305ZFC)
3)"law enforcement agencies", such as the police (new section 305ZFD)."

Etc...Can't find if it has been passed yet though. That was in 2001. Would look more, but I'm supposed to be studying.

Re:If you have nothing to hide...

[Aranth Brainfire]

Considering s/he's posting about how nobody honest needs privacy, it's kind of funny s/he posts as AC...

Something to hide, probably.

Re:What doe this mean for SPAM?

[fbjon]

It's "spam", not "SPAM".