According
to the Australian
Parliamentary Library on 24 October 2012 there were 29.28 million
active mobile services (voice and data)in Australia, 10.54 million fixed-line
telephone services, 3.8 million home VoIP users, 10.9 million Internet service
subscribers. With 57 per cent of people using three communication technologies
(fixed-line telephone, mobile phone and Internet), 26 per cent using four
communication technologies (fixed-line telephone, mobile phone, Internet and
VoIP) and 21 per cent of people (aged 14 and over) accessing the Internet via a
mobile phone.
With
the exception of fixed-line services, it is probable that numbers in all
these communication categories will have increased by now.
Warrentless searches of subscribers' metadata have apparently been surreptitiously occurring for years, as indicated in The Canberra Times on 20 August 2014:
The federal
government has been left red-faced following revelations that law-enforcement
agencies have been accessing Australians' web browsing histories without a
warrant.
Access to
phone and internet data held by telecommunications companies has been the
subject of much debate recently, as the government seeks to extend the power of
intelligence and law-enforcement agencies to fight terrorism and crime. It has
proposed telcos retain customers' metadata for
up to two years for investigation.
However, spy
agency ASIO and federal police have given assurances that data on what websites
Australians visit - know as web history - could only be obtained with warrants.
Now a
paper published by the parliamentary library on Monday has revealed an
industry practice of providing website addresses (URLs) to law enforcement without warrants.
Telstra
confirmed on Tuesday evening it had provided URLs to agencies without a warrant
"in rare cases". It did not name the agencies or how many times
it provided information.
* when and where online communications services start and end;
* a user’s IP address;
* type and location of communication equipment; and
* upload and download volumes, among others.
One rather suspects that with this definition of retained metadata the Federal Government and its agencies can do a lot more than keep alert to any alleged domestic terrorist threat.
There is room for 'function creep' to become established.
Previously in an August 2012 submission
to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security the Human Rights Law Centre expressed concern that:
Everyone’s
communication data is kept, not just those suspected of a crime. Large
repositories of private data tempt ‘fishing expeditions’ – trawling though
private data in search of suspicion, not on the basis of it. A nation of
citizens thus becomes a nation of suspects.25
UPDATE
The 2010 version of consultation concerning the proposed data retention policy also clearly outlines an intention to monitor the daily habits and social networks of ever Australian resident via their Internet and telephone use.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.