Australia’s Mandatory Metadata Retention Legislation: Everything You Need To Know

The Government has officially introduced a Bill into the House Of Representatives today that would compel ISPs and telcos to store your data for a prescribed amount of time. This is everything you need to know about who will store your data, how long it will be kept for, and who can access it.
Update: Data Retention Bill Delayed Until 2015
Wait, What’s Going On?

If you’ve been living on the Moon for the last six months, here’s a quick backgrounder.

As part of a new anti-terrorism push, the Coalition Government led by Prime Minister Tony Abbott is looking to push through three pieces of new legislation.

The first Bill — which has already been passed into law — grants our law enforcement agencies more powers to hunt for bad guys; the second Bill is called the Foreign Fighters Bill and looks to establish “no go zones” for Australian travellers in a bid to stop locals leaving the country to train as lone-wolf terrorists; and the third is an amendment to the Telecommunications Interception Act which would compel ISPs and telcos to store customer metadata for the purposes of intelligence gathering and law enforcement for a period of two years.

The third bill for the TIA Amendment is the one being introduced into Parliament today, and that’s the one that’s most likely to upset Aussie geeks and privacy advocates.

more…

Australian Federal Police: We Could Use Metadata To Prosecute Pirates

Worried that your metadata could be used to prosecute you in a piracy case? You should be: the Australian Federal Police Commissioner thinks that metadata could be very helpful to prosecute pirates. Updated with comments from Attorney General George Brandis.

When asked if stored metadata could be used to combat piracy, Australian Federal Police Commissioner, Andrew Colvin, replied at a press conference that the stored data of Australians could be used for a whole number of things, including anti-piracy:

more…

well hopefully the Australia government will be hit by 7 plagues in the near future

CrazyNeutrino said:

Australia’s Mandatory Metadata Retention Legislation: Everything You Need To Know

The Government has officially introduced a Bill into the House Of Representatives today that would compel ISPs and telcos to store your data for a prescribed amount of time.

great news. stored metadata & it’s retrieval was the weapon needed to prevent terrorist attacks taking place in australia.

so why do they need these new laws if they have already done it?

CrazyNeutrino said:

Australian Federal Police: We Could Use Metadata To Prosecute Pirates

Worried that your metadata could be used to prosecute you in a piracy case? You should be: the Australian Federal Police Commissioner thinks that metadata could be very helpful to prosecute pirates. Updated with comments from Attorney General George Brandis.

more great news.

apparently CN believes its ok for a person to shoplift say music & videos from a store?

apparently CN believes authorities should be powerless to prosecute these people ?

Worried CN that your metadata could be used to prosecute you in a piracy case?

I hope so!

>Australian Federal Police Commissioner thinks that metadata could be very helpful to prosecute pirates.

So they’re going to be sifting through everyone’s chat on Talk Like a Pirate Day.

ChrispenEvan said:

so why do they need these new laws if they have already done it?

far as I know there were moves to cease the practice.

Now there will be laws to compel ISPs and telcos to store metadata & give authorities access to it.

nothing changing

Bubblecar said:

>Australian Federal Police Commissioner thinks that metadata could be very helpful to prosecute pirates.

So they’re going to be sifting through everyone’s chat on Talk Like a Pirate Day.

Arrrrrrrrr

I suppose realistically, the police and spooks don’t have the time and resources to worry about people who aren’t committing any crimes. Data retention of this kind is in the same category as surveillance cameras, i.e., they store a vast amount of information that no-one is ever likely to look at.

but the telcos don’t keep it. never have as it is of no use to them. it isn’t like the old days when you were charged for where you called to, and so they needed this data. now you are charged solely on usage so they don’t require that info.

Bubblecar said:

I suppose realistically, the police and spooks don’t have the time and resources to worry about people who aren’t committing any crimes. Data retention of this kind is in the same category as surveillance cameras, i.e., they store a vast amount of information that no-one is ever likely to look at.

yes, surveillance footage is only retrieved & investigated if a crime has taken place in that specific area

but it can be used. say abbott’s mate rupert wants something done to stop him losing money.

ChrispenEvan said:

but the telcos don’t keep it. never have as it is of no use to them. it isn’t like the old days when you were charged for where you called to, and so they needed this data. now you are charged solely on usage so they don’t require that info.

firstly;- ASIO director-general Duncan Lewis said his agency had used metadata to thwart four mass-casualty terrorism attack plans in recent years, one of which resulted in 18 convictions.
“The seriousness of the crimes that are addressed by us through the access to metadata is critical,” he said.

and

Police commanders and spy bosses have been critical of telcos that erase their metadata – background information about calls and internet use but not the content itself – saying this has hindered investigations into terrorism, organised crime and child exploitation.

Metadata plays a central role in almost every counter-terrorism, espionage and organised crime investigation.
But telcos say the cost of mandatory retention of metadata could be up to $700 million a year, depending on what data elements they need to keep.
Mr Turnbull said the government would make a “substantial contribution” to cover company costs

ChrispenEvan said:

but it can be used. say abbott’s mate rupert wants something done to stop him losing money.

paranoid tripe

it was just an example of what it could be used for. you can insert any number of scenarios into that. and you response to the other post doesn’t follow as to what was in it.

maybe you are better at C&P large swathes of other peoples ideas than thinking for yourself.

Data Retention Delayed Until 2015

The Labor Opposition has confirmed that it will move to delay debate, and therefore passage, of the Data Retention legislation introduced into Parliament today to ensure the Bill can be subjected to “proper scrutiny”.

In a bid to stop the Coalition ramming its proposed Data Retention amendment Bill

more…

ChrispenEvan said:

it was just an example of what it could be used for. you can insert any number of scenarios into that. and you response to the other post doesn’t follow as to what was in it.

maybe you are better at C&P large swathes of other peoples ideas than thinking for yourself.

no I think for myself & draw my opinion using the evidence presented by people more clued up than me.

Thats what we all do & your views are not created from your own experience but born from others ideas.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Data Retention Delayed Until 2015

The Labor Opposition has confirmed that it will move to delay debate, and therefore passage, of the Data Retention legislation introduced into Parliament today to ensure the Bill can be subjected to “proper scrutiny”.

labour would delay the healing of cancer in the action was introduced by the liberals

i’ll just spell it out a bit. the spooks have already used metadata to stop attacks. isp don’t retain this data. where did the spooks get this data from then? hint, they collect it already. spooks aren’t interested in piracy. feds are. feds don’t collect this data and can’t access it from the spooks. new laws are required to allow feds to get this data. so it isn’t about terror but piracy.

:-)

ChrispenEvan said:

i’ll just spell it out a bit. the spooks have already used metadata to stop attacks. isp don’t retain this data. where did the spooks get this data from then? hint, they collect it already. spooks aren’t interested in piracy. feds are. feds don’t collect this data and can’t access it from the spooks. new laws are required to allow feds to get this data. so it isn’t about terror but piracy.

:-)

piracy is it. Good then. read my second post.

do you support the crime of piracy ?

if they were honest about the intent then they would not have so much opposition. that is the crux. not whether one supports or opposes piracy. after all who hasn’t ripped a cd to make a compilation, or taped a mates vinyls?

ChrispenEvan said:

if they were honest about the intent then they would not have so much opposition. that is the crux. not whether one supports or opposes piracy. after all who hasn’t ripped a cd to make a compilation, or taped a mates vinyls?

You’d think the AFP would have more important matters to worry about.

ChrispenEvan said:

if they were honest about the intent then they would not have so much opposition. that is the crux. not whether one supports or opposes piracy. after all who hasn’t ripped a cd to make a compilation, or taped a mates vinyls?

what is it exactly you are scared of?

evil rupert

you would but money talks. though i have never seen it do so and have my doubts as to whether it is even possible.

>>if they were honest about the intent

They probably are, it’s probably just the usual suspects trying to twist it into another outrage moment who have got it all cocked up.

what makes you think i am scared? just like an honest government and not legislation by stealth. don’t you want that too?

or it could be people with honest intent questioning proposed laws that may very well affect those that think it it the usual suspects cocking things up.

I found it interesting in the media Malcolm Turnbul is having a whinge about how the private details Nova Peris’ emails were made public. Oh the ironing…

i mean if you just want to be a sheeple type and go along with this stuff then that’s ok too.

ChrispenEvan said:

or it could be people with honest intent questioning proposed laws that may very well affect those that think it it the usual suspects cocking things up.

Also people not wanting vast amounts of money wasted on something of dubious value.

ChrispenEvan said:

what makes you think i am scared? just like an honest government and not legislation by stealth. don’t you want that too?

you’re the one who seems to think that the government is in a conspiracy to do evil things to its citizens using

da da da daaaaaaar….METADATA

i thought that too DS.

seeing brandis has trouble even explaining what metadata is it must make you wonder.

don’t you want to make informed decisions TO? i mean you think there is some conspiracy with climate change.

ChrispenEvan said:

don’t you want to make informed decisions TO? i mean you think there is some conspiracy with climate change.

you said it yourself. the feds want access to the data for piracy.

whats wrong with that?

and I have never said anything about a conspiracy about CC.

& leave that at that

read some of the online stories on this topic and some of the comments. there are good observations about this legislation.

On my car forum we’re talking about this and how it’s a gross invasion of privacy, etc.
It’s none of the governments goddamn business what we look at.

We’re working out which is the best VPN service/software so they can’t track what you do. When we get some kind of conclusion I’ll post it here.

The_observer said:

ChrispenEvan said:

don’t you want to make informed decisions TO? i mean you think there is some conspiracy with climate change.

you said it yourself. the feds want access to the data for piracy.

whats wrong with that?

and I have never said anything about a conspiracy about CC.

& leave that at that

The issue is there is no need for it – invoking piracy is just nonsense.

There is a reason that very few people are ever convicted on piracy charges – it’s because sharing media without financial benefit isn’t a breach of copyright (if it were we would have all been pinched making mixed tapes of the radio or recording tv).

Spiny Norman said:

On my car forum we’re talking about this and how it’s a gross invasion of privacy, etc.
It’s none of the governments goddamn business what we look at.

Under the laws, a person’s web browsing history would not be captured, nor would service providers be allowed to keep detailed location records tracking a person’s movements.

The_observer said:

Spiny Norman said:

On my car forum we’re talking about this and how it’s a gross invasion of privacy, etc.
It’s none of the governments goddamn business what we look at.

Under the laws, a person’s web browsing history would not be captured, nor would service providers be allowed to keep detailed location records tracking a person’s movements.

Go away to another forum, no-one wants you here.

Spiny Norman said:

On my car forum we’re talking about this and how it’s a gross invasion of privacy, etc.
It’s none of the governments goddamn business what we look at.

We’re working out which is the best VPN service/software so they can’t track what you do. When we get some kind of conclusion I’ll post it here.

which is what makes it so ridiculous – it’s beaten by a $4/month charge. Anyone who is serious about protecting their online presence isn’t going to have their details recorded anyway.

i’m returning to In-Cranium imagination

Spiny Norman said:

The_observer said:

Spiny Norman said:

On my car forum we’re talking about this and how it’s a gross invasion of privacy, etc.
It’s none of the governments goddamn business what we look at.

Under the laws, a person’s web browsing history would not be captured, nor would service providers be allowed to keep detailed location records tracking a person’s movements.

Go away to another forum, no-one wants you here.

fixed

diddly-squat said:

The_observer said:

ChrispenEvan said:

don’t you want to make informed decisions TO? i mean you think there is some conspiracy with climate change.

you said it yourself. the feds want access to the data for piracy.

whats wrong with that?

and I have never said anything about a conspiracy about CC.

& leave that at that

The issue is there is no need for it – invoking piracy is just nonsense.

There is a reason that very few people are ever convicted on piracy charges – it’s because sharing media without financial benefit isn’t a breach of copyright (if it were we would have all been pinched making mixed tapes of the radio or recording tv).

well the music industry would disagree with you.

access to download music for free is easy.

if there is no need for it as you say, then why, in your opinion, are the laws being introduced?

Spiny Norman said:

The_observer said:

Spiny Norman said:

On my car forum we’re talking about this and how it’s a gross invasion of privacy, etc.
It’s none of the governments goddamn business what we look at.

Under the laws, a person’s web browsing history would not be captured, nor would service providers be allowed to keep detailed location records tracking a person’s movements.

Go away to another forum, no-one wants you here.

speak for you self.

I don’t want you here troll

The_observer said:

speak for you self.

I don’t want you here troll

Put it to a poll, go on, I dare you.

The_observer said:

diddly-squat said:

The_observer said:

you said it yourself. the feds want access to the data for piracy.

whats wrong with that?

and I have never said anything about a conspiracy about CC.

& leave that at that

The issue is there is no need for it – invoking piracy is just nonsense.

There is a reason that very few people are ever convicted on piracy charges – it’s because sharing media without financial benefit isn’t a breach of copyright (if it were we would have all been pinched making mixed tapes of the radio or recording tv).

well the music industry would disagree with you.

access to download music for free is easy.

if there is no need for it as you say, then why, in your opinion, are the laws being introduced?

I’m sure many people would disagree… but given the prevalence of P2P file sharing, it’s surprising more people are prosecuted… The fact is its incredibly difficult to prosecute if either:

• the artist can’t prove they have suffered financial penalty
• the person ‘sharing’ has had some form of financial windfall.

Spiny Norman said:

The_observer said:

speak for you self.

I don’t want you here troll

Put it to a poll, go on, I dare you.

poll please

but you don’t dictate to me.

if you’re not happy I’m here, go

ps this thread was fine till you trolled it

diddly-squat said:

The_observer said:

diddly-squat said:

The issue is there is no need for it – invoking piracy is just nonsense.

There is a reason that very few people are ever convicted on piracy charges – it’s because sharing media without financial benefit isn’t a breach of copyright (if it were we would have all been pinched making mixed tapes of the radio or recording tv).

well the music industry would disagree with you.

access to download music for free is easy.

if there is no need for it as you say, then why, in your opinion, are the laws being introduced?

I’m sure many people would disagree… but given the prevalence of P2P file sharing, it’s surprising more people are prosecuted… The fact is its incredibly difficult to prosecute if either:

• the artist can’t prove they have suffered financial penalty
• the person ‘sharing’ has had some form of financial windfall.

then why, in your opinion, are the laws being introduced?

The_observer said:

Spiny Norman said:

The_observer said:

speak for you self.

I don’t want you here troll

Put it to a poll, go on, I dare you.

poll please

but you don’t dictate to me.

if you’re not happy I’m here, go

I’ve been here 14 years and don’t spam the place with idiotic trolling threads like you & the other dickhead PF do. The place would be vastly better without you & him.

Spiny Norman said:

The_observer said:

Spiny Norman said:

Put it to a poll, go on, I dare you.

poll please

but you don’t dictate to me.

if you’re not happy I’m here, go

I’ve been here 14 years and don’t spam the place with idiotic trolling threads like you & the other dickhead PF do. The place would be vastly better without you & him.

this ain’t your loungeroom son

on yer way then or stop complaining

diddly-squat said:

The_observer said:

diddly-squat said:

The issue is there is no need for it – invoking piracy is just nonsense.

There is a reason that very few people are ever convicted on piracy charges – it’s because sharing media without financial benefit isn’t a breach of copyright (if it were we would have all been pinched making mixed tapes of the radio or recording tv).

well the music industry would disagree with you.

access to download music for free is easy.

if there is no need for it as you say, then why, in your opinion, are the laws being introduced?

I’m sure many people would disagree… but given the prevalence of P2P file sharing, it’s surprising more people are prosecuted… The fact is its incredibly difficult to prosecute if either:

• the artist can’t prove they have suffered financial penalty
• the person ‘sharing’ has had some form of financial windfall.

I remember some one saying in regards to music that perhaps a musician needs to look as the music as a promotion of the band and make money from concerts and other merchandise if the music is downloaded for free. Not all musicians are upset by music piracy Trent Reznor encourages people to download his music for free

Cymek said:

diddly-squat said:

The_observer said:

well the music industry would disagree with you.

access to download music for free is easy.

if there is no need for it as you say, then why, in your opinion, are the laws being introduced?

I’m sure many people would disagree… but given the prevalence of P2P file sharing, it’s surprising more people are prosecuted… The fact is its incredibly difficult to prosecute if either:

• the artist can’t prove they have suffered financial penalty
• the person ‘sharing’ has had some form of financial windfall.

I remember some one saying in regards to music that perhaps a musician needs to look as the music as a promotion of the band and make money from concerts and other merchandise if the music is downloaded for free. Not all musicians are upset by music piracy Trent Reznor encourages people to download his music for free

whats it cost,, to make an album these days?

The_observer said:

diddly-squat said:

The_observer said:

well the music industry would disagree with you.

access to download music for free is easy.

if there is no need for it as you say, then why, in your opinion, are the laws being introduced?

I’m sure many people would disagree… but given the prevalence of P2P file sharing, it’s surprising more people are prosecuted… The fact is its incredibly difficult to prosecute if either:

• the artist can’t prove they have suffered financial penalty
• the person ‘sharing’ has had some form of financial windfall.

then why, in your opinion, are the laws being introduced?

because the government want our metadata so it makes it easier for agencies to gather intelligence without the need for oversight (it ain’t rocket science). It’s not as if the government can’t collect this data now, it’s just they need a warrant.

diddly-squat said:

The_observer said:

diddly-squat said:

I’m sure many people would disagree… but given the prevalence of P2P file sharing, it’s surprising more people are prosecuted… The fact is its incredibly difficult to prosecute if either:

• the artist can’t prove they have suffered financial penalty
• the person ‘sharing’ has had some form of financial windfall.

then why, in your opinion, are the laws being introduced?

because the government want our metadata so it makes it easier for agencies to gather intelligence without the need for oversight (it ain’t rocket science). It’s not as if the government can’t collect this data now, it’s just they need a warrant.

I have nothing to fear but fear itself

The_observer said:

Spiny Norman said:

The_observer said:

poll please

but you don’t dictate to me.

if you’re not happy I’m here, go

I’ve been here 14 years and don’t spam the place with idiotic trolling threads like you & the other dickhead PF do. The place would be vastly better without you & him.

this ain’t your loungeroom son

Neither is it yours to keep on arguing idiotic arguments for months at a time. You insist on being a nauseating pest, go somewhere else with that crap.

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

diddly-squat said:

I’m sure many people would disagree… but given the prevalence of P2P file sharing, it’s surprising more people are prosecuted… The fact is its incredibly difficult to prosecute if either:

• the artist can’t prove they have suffered financial penalty
• the person ‘sharing’ has had some form of financial windfall.

I remember some one saying in regards to music that perhaps a musician needs to look as the music as a promotion of the band and make money from concerts and other merchandise if the music is downloaded for free. Not all musicians are upset by music piracy Trent Reznor encourages people to download his music for free

whats it cost,, to make an album these days?

A friends band made a CD for a couple of thousand, that was studio hire and the sound technician who recorded the album, the CD cost sod all to burn, I think they did that themselves.

Spiny Norman said:

The_observer said:

Spiny Norman said:

I’ve been here 14 years and don’t spam the place with idiotic trolling threads like you & the other dickhead PF do. The place would be vastly better without you & him.

this ain’t your loungeroom son

Neither is it yours to keep on arguing idiotic arguments for months at a time. You insist on being a nauseating pest, go somewhere else with that crap.

whose being the nauseating pest on this thread then?

hmmm..

Cymek said:

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

I remember some one saying in regards to music that perhaps a musician needs to look as the music as a promotion of the band and make money from concerts and other merchandise if the music is downloaded for free. Not all musicians are upset by music piracy Trent Reznor encourages people to download his music for free

whats it cost,, to make an album these days?

A friends band made a CD for a couple of thousand, that was studio hire and the sound technician who recorded the album, the CD cost sod all to burn, I think they did that themselves.

I imagine the cost would vary a great deal depending on the artist & the depth of sophistication of the album.

the money not only needs to be recuperated but a profit made, otherwise whats the point?

Cymek said:

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

I remember some one saying in regards to music that perhaps a musician needs to look as the music as a promotion of the band and make money from concerts and other merchandise if the music is downloaded for free. Not all musicians are upset by music piracy Trent Reznor encourages people to download his music for free

whats it cost,, to make an album these days?

A friends band made a CD for a couple of thousand, that was studio hire and the sound technician who recorded the album, the CD cost sod all to burn, I think they did that themselves.

given the increase in the availability of the equipment and the reduction of its cost, actually recording and mixing music is far less expensive these days. The big costs now are in marketing and distribution.

Conflicted here, I generally go with the theory of I am doing nothing wrong I have nothing to fear but at the same time I am always wary of the gubmint, any gubmint, having the potential, or increasing powers to monitor. Having said that I think it is a big expensive hammer to crack a tiny nut, which I assume is terrorism. I supected it is easy to circumvent, and the means to do so will be probably circulated on the internets as well.

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

The_observer said:

whats it cost,, to make an album these days?

A friends band made a CD for a couple of thousand, that was studio hire and the sound technician who recorded the album, the CD cost sod all to burn, I think they did that themselves.

I imagine the cost would vary a great deal depending on the artist & the depth of sophistication of the album.

the money not only needs to be recuperated but a profit made, otherwise whats the point?

True, I wouldn’t think most big bands would cry poor though

diddly-squat said:

Cymek said:

The_observer said:

whats it cost,, to make an album these days?

A friends band made a CD for a couple of thousand, that was studio hire and the sound technician who recorded the album, the CD cost sod all to burn, I think they did that themselves.

given the increase in the availability of the equipment and the reduction of its cost, actually recording and mixing music is far less expensive these days. The big costs now are in marketing and distribution.

A lot of the musicians I listen to record it themselves on a PC

Who actually trusts government (any government) to not misuse data they gather, I personally think government dislike the internet as they are no longer easily able to control the dissemination of information especially information showing them abusing power of even committing crimes against humanity. Liberal are pushing this legislation as they are buddies with big business who are the ones claiming loss of revenue which I bet is exponentially lower in reality than what they claim.

Cymek said:

Who actually trusts government (any government) to not misuse data they gather, I personally think government dislike the internet as they are no longer easily able to control the dissemination of information especially information showing them abusing power of even committing crimes against humanity. Liberal are pushing this legislation as they are buddies with big business who are the ones claiming loss of revenue which I bet is exponentially lower in reality than what they claim.

its a conspiracy, no doubt about it.

Dam that big business!

AwesomeO said:

Conflicted here, I generally go with the theory of I am doing nothing wrong I have nothing to fear but at the same time I am always wary of the gubmint, any gubmint, having the potential, or increasing powers to monitor. Having said that I think it is a big expensive hammer to crack a tiny nut, which I assume is terrorism. I supected it is easy to circumvent, and the means to do so will be probably circulated on the internets as well.

exactly… and like I said before, it’s so easy to beat… so anyone that is in any way serious about protecting their online presence is not going to have their data captured anyway…

diddly-squat said:

AwesomeO said:

Conflicted here, I generally go with the theory of I am doing nothing wrong I have nothing to fear but at the same time I am always wary of the gubmint, any gubmint, having the potential, or increasing powers to monitor. Having said that I think it is a big expensive hammer to crack a tiny nut, which I assume is terrorism. I supected it is easy to circumvent, and the means to do so will be probably circulated on the internets as well.

exactly… and like I said before, it’s so easy to beat… so anyone that is in any way serious about protecting their online presence is not going to have their data captured anyway…

aren’t the ‘spooks’ technologically pretty sophisticated ?

They’d have vaves of making you talk!

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

Who actually trusts government (any government) to not misuse data they gather, I personally think government dislike the internet as they are no longer easily able to control the dissemination of information especially information showing them abusing power of even committing crimes against humanity. Liberal are pushing this legislation as they are buddies with big business who are the ones claiming loss of revenue which I bet is exponentially lower in reality than what they claim.

its a conspiracy, no doubt about it.

Dam that big business!

Not a conspiracy because I’m not a woo woo person

They may be better off targeting data of financial transactions, follow the money and all that and at the same time hoovering up druggies and tax evaders.

The_observer said:

diddly-squat said:

AwesomeO said:

Conflicted here, I generally go with the theory of I am doing nothing wrong I have nothing to fear but at the same time I am always wary of the gubmint, any gubmint, having the potential, or increasing powers to monitor. Having said that I think it is a big expensive hammer to crack a tiny nut, which I assume is terrorism. I supected it is easy to circumvent, and the means to do so will be probably circulated on the internets as well.

exactly… and like I said before, it’s so easy to beat… so anyone that is in any way serious about protecting their online presence is not going to have their data captured anyway…

aren’t the ‘spooks’ technologically pretty sophisticated ?

They’d have vaves of making you talk!

Wouldn’t smart terrorists not make it so obvious they are planning something using mobile phones, social media etc. A good all fashioned paper swap at a cafe would easily work and nothing to intercept

They may be better off targeting data of financial transactions,…

good grief man, are you mad??? that could “hoover” some of their mates up.

:-)

The_observer said:

diddly-squat said:

AwesomeO said:

Conflicted here, I generally go with the theory of I am doing nothing wrong I have nothing to fear but at the same time I am always wary of the gubmint, any gubmint, having the potential, or increasing powers to monitor. Having said that I think it is a big expensive hammer to crack a tiny nut, which I assume is terrorism. I supected it is easy to circumvent, and the means to do so will be probably circulated on the internets as well.

exactly… and like I said before, it’s so easy to beat… so anyone that is in any way serious about protecting their online presence is not going to have their data captured anyway…

aren’t the ‘spooks’ technologically pretty sophisticated ?

They’d have vaves of making you talk!

The cliche is plan your outrage under guise of organising a wedding. Or you can go off line. Or you can use a simple code using a book or newspaper that you and the recieve both posses and using page number and letter combinations. The disadvantage with that, despite it being very hard to crack is the presence of a code alerts the authoritah.

The disadvantage with that, despite it being very hard to crack is the presence of a code alerts the authoritah.

DV and Alex better watch it then.

AwesomeO said:

The_observer said:

diddly-squat said:

exactly… and like I said before, it’s so easy to beat… so anyone that is in any way serious about protecting their online presence is not going to have their data captured anyway…

aren’t the ‘spooks’ technologically pretty sophisticated ?

They’d have vaves of making you talk!

The cliche is plan your outrage under guise of organising a wedding. Or you can go off line. Or you can use a simple code using a book or newspaper that you and the recieve both posses and using page number and letter combinations. The disadvantage with that, despite it being very hard to crack is the presence of a code alerts the authoritah.

Low techology weaponary is hard to combat with our modern weapons technology, the same would work with planning secret meetings, you could do it all via paper swaps and not even talk

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/latest/australias-internet-wrapped-up-in-data-retention-red-tape/story-e6frg90f-1227108393968

Game of Thrones downloaders not a priority

The minister has also shed some light on what implications the proposed data retention laws may have on combating online piracy, saying that copyright holders will be able access the data held by the telcos to chase down alleged illegal downloaders, provided they get the green light from the courts.

Earlier, Mr Turnbull dismissed suggestions that police and spy agencies may use metadata to catch people illegally downloading TV shows and movies, telling ABC Television that authorities had better things to do.

“The Australian Federal Police and ASIO frankly are not interested in whether you are illegally downloading a copy of the Game of Thrones,” he told ABC Television.

While the government may not be keen to go after people breaching copyright, Mr Turnbull’s latest comments highlight that the pools of data stored by the telcos may prove to be attractive targets for copyright holders and other civil litigants.

more at url.