Australia’s Attorney-General, Nicola Roxon, has tried to take some of the heat out of the data retention debate. In a letter to the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Intelligence and Security, which is investigating data retention as part of its examination of national security legislation, Ms Roxon has written: “The government …
For my protection
I feel safer already
'... the government does not intend to allow warrantless access to “the content of communications”.'
This highlights the real problem with the rule-by-fear mentality prevalent in the West and the unnecessary laws it brings with it. We promise we won't misuse it - but of course a future goverment - or more likely a local council wishing to make sure you're recycling your goods correctly or enrolling your kids at the correct school - can and will.
Which in this case is that once the data retention law is in place, the government will inevitably enable warrantless access at a later date - if not on Roxon's watch, then on someone else's. And she knows this just as well as we do, which makes her pathetic attempts at manipulating public opinion even more sickening.
So yet another little piece of freedom dies. I wonder how long I'll be allowed to keep using my VPN once this goes through? Rest assured, I won't stop merely because the fucking law says I must.
This is what they do..
I am not surprised by what ASIO says, after all they are in the business of gathering information and it is in their own interest that everything is retained. If they could find a logistical cheap way to copy every letter that gets sent via AusPost they would have done so a long time ago. Now with the advent of digital, this can be done and by the heavens they want it done as soon as possible.
As for Roxon, well, she's sadly out of her depth, or she's simply, as most governments, aren't worried about our privacy or the implications of what such laws will have in the long term. Incompetence is the is the rule of the day on either side of government and when I say incompetence I mean in what they are supposed to do, i.e. serve the people for the people and be visionary like the founding fathers of the USA (they were a brilliant bunch those guys) not to follow party lines in serving themselves and the elites of this world, like most so called democracies these days do!
When the metadata is data?
So what do they record when the message is nothing more than a knock at an electronic door?
Re: When the metadata is data?
And how deep can metadata be?
IP A connected to IP B on port 1234 at 12pm is Layer 3.
Thats pretty light and is a lot like telephones. A stupidly large amount of data though.
Email from User A was sent to User B at 12pm is somewhat deeper.
That actually means intercepting everything including the data and pulling the bits of interesting 'metadata' out.
User A is chatting to User B over IRC.
That goes really deep and isn't just a matter of listening to the headers. You need to listen to the entire connection for the entire duration that it exists and every fragment of data has to be analysed closely.
Its a lovely fluffy word to say but on a technical level it can mean any amount of deep packet inspection.
If you've done nothing wrong...
...you have nothing to fear.
- One HUNDRED FAMOUS LADIES exposed NUDE online
- Twitter: La la la, we have not heard of any NUDE JLaw, Upton SELFIES
- China: You, Microsoft. Office-Windows 'compatibility'. You have 20 days to explain
- Apple to devs: NO slurping users' HEALTH for sale to Dark Powers
- Is that a 64-bit ARM Warrior in your pocket? No, it's MIPS64