Slashdot Mirror
2 Year Data Retention For Australian ISPs
freddienumber13 writes "Following similar acts passed by foreign governments, the Australian government is now seeking feedback on its plans to bring into law the requirement for ISPs to retain user data for up to 2 years. They're also seeking changes to the law that would allow undercover ASIO agents and its sources to commit crimes which would include, for example, hacking into your computer."
I hope our pollies' blatant disregard of anything other than what will make them the most popular will contrive to prevent this from being passed!
Also, first.
People say the USA is bad, but Australia seems to have the most draconian internet legislation I've heard of.
This is US policy by proxy. The US pushes foreign governments into doing stuff like this in return for "cooperation", especially trade agreements.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
From crikey.com.au
"The final terms of reference for the inquiry match the proposals sent to the committee by Roxon, and include the controversial 2 year data retention proposal long urged by Attorney-Generalâ(TM)s bureaucrats. However, the committee has now also published a discussion paper prepared by the Attorney-Generalâ(TM)s Department to commence the inquiry, outlining the rationale for three types of proposals: those the government wants to progress, those it is considering, and those it is merely seeking views on."
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=pjcis/nsl2012/additional/discussion%20paper.pdf
Orwell's 1984 was supposed to be a warning Ms Roxon, not a guidebook for you.
Who are the weasels who think up shit like this ? I'm reasonably certain that if any citizen obtained the communication history of any other, they'd be thrown in jail.
When these moronic wombles (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EP7CDvQULXw) get the sack, Australia will be a better place.
With police like these, who needs criminals?
Asking for feedback? You know what that means? It means that if you are Australian then you really ought to tell them what you think about this. Ideally before the end of the month to be sure that your feedback can be read before the hearings start.
"Modernise and streamline ASIOâ(TM)s warrant provisions" means fixing these perceived problems:
naturally, there are solutions proposed for all these issues !
>This is US policy by proxy.
That it is, and if it's not direct, it's a wink and a nod, because our politicians can then turn around and tell us here in the states that we need to "harmonise" with our trade partners, and thus things like SOPA and Lamar Smith's recent shenanigans by chopping up SOPA into smaller bits and getting the pieces passed.
It's a gigantic circle jerk with nobody's actual rights, or even opinions, being considered except those of the media companies and the statists.
Just wait for Romney to be elected. The fix is in.
--
BMO
So much for a fucking democracy. Virtually none of us want this and yet it'll still get passed.
And what the fuck is going on here: the same politicians who want all of our secrets are keeping mum when it comes to themselves:
Web snooping policy shrouded in secrecy
No Minister: 90% of web snoop document censored to stop 'premature unnecessary debate'
How the FUCK did we end up in this bizarro world?
People say the USA is bad, but Australia seems to have the most draconian internet legislation I've heard of.
This is US policy by proxy. The US pushes foreign governments into doing stuff like this in return for "cooperation", especially trade agreements.
Hear, hear...
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
Lets have TOTAL TRANSPARENCY in government first (let's call it wikileaks diplomatic cables on steroids) AND then, and only then can you record any conversation or discussion or action for two or more years of those you govern... Feels different when it's on the other foot doesn't it...
I think 2 years means it will all be gone by the time anyone wants to look, so if you really want the data then something like 10 years is needed along with a mandated retention system. Every litigation I've been involved in has lost data even when a company had a 7 year retention policy. Not through any malicious erasures but through hardware or software failures. One even had a printout but it was no longer legible. Do the Management and IT guys go to jail because a hardware device failed after 1 year 11 months? Or 6 years and 11 months? Or because they can't find it and the people who were responsible then are long gone? Don't get me wrong I think it is a mistake to require the retention, but if you are going to require it, then do it right. If Australia really wants the data they better say forever and they better decide on a highly reliable storage system and require that as well IMHO.
http://pirateparty.org.au/
Pretty useful for nefarious purposes to have access to the last two years of somebody's traffic...
Identity theft will be impossible to guard against.
The ISPs responsible for storing all this data, need to do it at the lowest possible cost. That always works out well....
The best bit will be the assumption that all this data collected from the ISP couldn't possibly be wrong, incomplete, or misleading.
Framing people for child pornography, murder, terrorism, sedition, etc, will become really really easy -- gain access to someone's LAN, and you can paint a big red X on them that lasts two years!
Aside from coming up with a better system of government that won't use Orwell as a how-to guide, we need to massively ramp up the level of cryptographic protection considered acceptable -- a million orders of magnitude ought to slow the bastards up for a while....