Australian Senate passes data-retention legislation

[Epis]

The controversial mandatory metadata-retention bill has been passed by the Senate, forcing Australian internet service providers to keep records of phone and internet usage of all users for a minimum of two years. The terms of this bill allow the data to be accessed by government security agencies at their will. Many companies already did retain user data but did so for varying durations and in an unregulated environment.

 

The bill was passed with 43 votes for and 16 votes against.

 

Older news - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-24/metadata-debate-in-the-senate/6344246

Newer news - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-26/data-retention-laws-pass-federal-parliament/6351278

 

The Coalition and Labor have argued the laws were necessary to help authorities in counter-terrorism and serious crime investigations.

 

Both major parties knocked back several amendments put forward by the Greens and concerned crossbenchers during Senate deliberations.

 

 

Labor announced last week that it would vote with the Coalition after the two parties agreed to several amendments, including specific protections for the phone and internet records of journalists, in a bid to protect anonymous sources and whistleblowers.

 

The Greens argued strongly against the law, saying it would entrench "passive, mass surveillance".

 

The cost of retaining the information is set to be partly covered by the taxpayer in what the Government described as a "significant" contribution.

 

The cost of retaining the data will almost certainly be paid for by taxpayer funds and/or by ISPs increasing their prices to consumers (as if those prices weren't high enough).

[Nineshadow]

That was a 3:1 outvote.

 

Damn,

[NeverNotExhausted]

Well I'm off to Canada then.

[Castdeath97]

And that's why politicians don't ever care about us.

[Paralectic]

Like they wouldn't do it even tho they would say they wouldn't.

[slightlyjaded]

Well I'm off to Canada then.

lol, didn't the canadian secret services just get caught using an echelon clone?

[NeverNotExhausted]

lol, didn't the canadian secret services just get caught using an echelon clone?

 

Not a clue tbh. I've always planned to move there after I've finished uni anyway and if their government isn't as ridiculous and laughworthy as the current Australian Liberal government then I think this is the tipping point to try get my act together and jump ship before I get my degree.

[Dabombinable]

Ok, there needs to be a think tank of sorts to discuss ways to tell them to get fucked.

[Dabombinable]

Here is more on it which will help get the full picture:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-17/metadata-data-retention-what-is-it/6324962

[SkilledRebuilds]

The controversial mandatory metadata-retention bill has been passed by the Senate.

 

 

The cost of retaining the data will either be paid for by taxpayer funds and/or by ISPs increasing their prices to consumers (as if those prices weren't high enough).

FFS....

[Guest]

Stupid. Just stupid.

[Geldar]

i saw this like an hour ago, but didnt think it was really news. Telco's have been doing it all along

[Dabombinable]

iinet seems to have their priorities straight BTW:
http://blog.iinet.net.au/protecting-your-privacy/

[soaringchicken]

Thanks guys! Didn't think Australia could get worse!

[mr moose]

Whilst I don't like it because of the fact it is another step to more sinister laws, This particular incarnation will have little to no impact on the privacy of most Australians.  I am more concerned about the ISPs trying to get the green light to hand over personal data to third parties than this.

 

EDIT:  should also say,   @Epis great post. rarely do we see unbiased news when politics and tech cross paths.

[Dabombinable]

-snip-

EDIT:  should also say,   @Epis great post. rarely do we see unbiased news when politics and tech cross paths.

I second this.

[Dabombinable]

From November, there is a juicy tidbit of information once you read through to the bottom: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-19/leyonhjelm-metadata-and-the-law-of-unintended-consequences/5901958

[Smoka]

iinet seems to have their priorities straight BTW:

http://blog.iinet.net.au/protecting-your-privacy/

 

Yup but unfortunately they could be getting bought out by TPG and they don't care about this type of stuff

[Dabombinable]

Yup but unfortunately they are getting bought out by TPG and they don't care about this type of stuff

IKr? Its got to be one of the worst times to have a plan with iinet.

[Smoka]

IKr? Its got to be one of the worst times to have a plan with iinet.

 

Yeah I have been with them for 7 years, I actually feel more worse for the people with Internode as I read somewhere they will be getting rid of all the others that iiNet bought

[Dabombinable]

Yeah I have been with them for 7 years, I actually feel more worse for the people with Internode as I read somewhere they will be getting rid of all the others that iiNet bought

Ouch.

[mr moose]

From November, there is a juicy tidbit of information once you read through to the bottom: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-19/leyonhjelm-metadata-and-the-law-of-unintended-consequences/5901958

I read that a while ago, apart from all the politic speak, the thing that stood out the most to me was that this politician says the policy is no good because it was thought up by politicians.  So my question is seeing as he is a politician, what separates him from the rest when it comes to being right about a subject that is not strictly a political one?

 

Don't get me wrong, I am scared where all this is going and have several letters in the process ready to fire of to my local MP,  And the federal opposition as I don't trust my local. But at some stage we need to sit back and look at the bigger picture.  Why do they want to do this in the first place if it is clearly a flawed practice that will not help catch criminals? 

 

 

 

My current thoughts on the situation (open to change with more information):

 

The internet is not quite as simple as we make out and ASIO/CIB/federal police have some very cluey IT guys telling them what they need.  If there was no point to these changes then our dear friends in government would be finding another way to butter up the voter rather than play risk with potential voters over a non-issue.

[mr_pants66]

Just when you thought politicians could not be any more out of touch with the opinions of the people.

[JAKEBAB]

Whilst I don't like it because of the fact it is another step to more sinister laws, This particular incarnation will have little to no impact on the privacy of most Australians.  I am more concerned about the ISPs trying to get the green light to hand over personal data to third parties than this.

 

EDIT:  should also say,   @Epis great post. rarely do we see unbiased news when politics and tech cross paths.

No this is so they can do that BS pirate thing where they charge you $25 every time. 

 

Yup but unfortunately they could be getting bought out by TPG and they don't care about this type of stuff

That doesn't really look like it's going to happen since shareholders and iinet's board aren't happy at all.

[mr moose]

No this is so they can do that BS pirate thing where they charge you $25 every time. 

 

That doesn't really look like it's going to happen since shareholders and iinet's board aren't happy at all.

 

no it's not, the $25 fine BS proposal is a completely different thing from this.  Whether they use this as a spring board for other more insidious things is yet to be seen, however this in of itself has nothing to do with the private proposal made by the  ISP consortium.