Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday April 06 2015, @10:27PM   Printer-friendly
from the authoritarian-government dept.

Boing Boing reports

The exceptionally broad new surveillance bill lets the government do nearly unlimited warrantless mass surveillance, even of lawyer-client privileged communications, and bans warrant canaries, making it an offense to "disclose information about the existence or non-existence" of a warrant to spy on journalists.

Despite that move away from retaining communications metadata by the EU and continuing concerns in the US about the National Security Agency's bulk phone metadata spying program, the Australian government was able to push through the amendments implementing data retention thanks to the support of the main opposition party. Labor agreed to vote in favor of the Bill once a requirement to use special "journalist information warrants" was introduced for access to journalists' metadata, with a view to shielding their sources. No warrant is required for obtaining the metadata of other classes of users, not even privileged communications between lawyers and their clients. Even for journalists, the extra protection is weak, and the definition of what constitutes a journalist is rather narrow--bloggers and occasional writers are probably not covered.

Warrant canaries can't be used in this context either. Section 182A of the new law says that a person commits an offense if he or she discloses or uses information about "the existence or non-existence of such a [journalist information] warrant." The penalty upon conviction is two years imprisonment.

During the relatively quick passage of the amendments, the Australian government made the usual argument that metadata needs to be retained for long periods in order to fight terrorism and serious crime--even though the German experience is that, in practice, data retention does not help. Toward the end of the debate, when concerns about journalist sources were raised, one senior member of the Australian government adopted a more unusual approach to calming people's fears.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by gman003 on Monday April 06 2015, @11:36PM

    by gman003 (4155) on Monday April 06 2015, @11:36PM (#167246)

    "As of April 6th, 2015, we have received no warrants for user information, or orders to insert a backdoor or other data-gathering system.

    As of April 6th, 2015, we have received no warrants for information subject to a gag order.

    As of April 6th, 2015, we have received no court orders to lie to you about receiving warrants subject to a gag order.

    As of April 6th, 2015, we have received no court orders to deny lying to you about warrants subject to a gag order.

    As of April 6th, 2015, we have received no court orders to remove all references to court orders and warrants."

    Eventually they'll either realize that they're being evil and stop, or get pissed off at people foiling their sinister plots and throw you in jail (which itself serves as a sort of warrant canary).

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=3, Overrated=2, Total=6
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday April 07 2015, @12:01AM

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Tuesday April 07 2015, @12:01AM (#167256) Homepage
    +1 +1 +1
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by sjwt on Tuesday April 07 2015, @09:12AM

    by sjwt (2826) on Tuesday April 07 2015, @09:12AM (#167370)

    Not sure if you read, but thats the point, posts like that are now illegal, each with a 2 year jail sentence.

    • (Score: 1) by rea1l1 on Wednesday April 08 2015, @01:08AM

      by rea1l1 (5192) on Wednesday April 08 2015, @01:08AM (#167663)

      "As of April 6th, 2015, we cannot confirm if we have or have not received warrants for user information, or orders to insert a backdoor or other data-gathering system.

      As of April 6th, 2015, we cannot confirm if we have or have not received warrants for information subject to a gag order.

      As of April 6th, 2015, we cannot confirm if we have or have not received court orders to lie to you about receiving warrants subject to a gag order.

      As of April 6th, 2015, we cannot confirm if we have or have not received court orders to deny lying to you about warrants subject to a gag order.

      As of April 6th, 2015, we cannot confirm if we have or have not received court orders to remove all references to court orders and warrants."

      FTFY

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 08 2015, @01:45AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 08 2015, @01:45AM (#167674)

      Are the Australians familiar with "Jury Nullification"? I assume the government won't risk a show trial in a Kangaroo Court.