I can't speak to that Paul. I attended NZNOG as a guest, I'm from Australia. Others will have to say how the NZ industry is approaching this, I'd get it wrong if I tried!
-G On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Paul Ferguson <fergdawgs...@mykolab.com>wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > So is there just reluctant acceptance of this law, or is there > push-back and plans to repeal, or...? > > I guess my question is something along the lines of "Are people just > reluctantly accepting that government surveillance & micromanagement > of private businesses/networks is a fact of life?" > > I am purposefully making a distinction here between the U.S. CALEA [1] > and NSLs [2] and a NZ spy agency getting "...to decide on network > equipment procurement and design decisions". > > The latter seems like a bit of an overreach? > > - - ferg > > > [1] > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_Law_Enforcement_Act > [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_security_letter > > > On 5/13/2014 6:40 AM, George Michaelson wrote: > > > It got a pretty firefight discussion at the NZNOG. None of the ISPs > > feel comfortable with it, but in avoiding a shoot-the-messenger > > syndrome they tried to give good feedback to the reps from GCSB who > > came to talk. Basically, a lot of post-act variations are expected > > to clarify what changes do and do not have to be notified. > > > > There was a lot of bitter humour about calling them at 3am to > > report BGP failures and ask permission to remediate. > > > > > > On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Paul Ferguson > > <fergdawgs...@mykolab.com <mailto:fergdawgs...@mykolab.com>> > > wrote: > > > > I realize that New Zealand is *not* in North America (hence > > NANOG), but I figure that some global providers might be interested > > here. > > > > This sounds rather... dire (probably not the right word). > > > > "The new Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) > > Act of 2013 is in effect in New Zealand and brings in several > > drastic changes for ISPs, telcos and service providers. One of the > > country's spy agencies, the GCSB, gets to decide on network > > equipment procurement and design decisions (PDF), plus operators > > have to register with the police and obtain security clearance for > > some staff. Somewhat illogically, the NZ government pushed through > > the law combining mandated communications interception capabilities > > for law enforcement, with undefined network security requirements > > as decided by the GCSB. All network operators are subject to the > > new law, including local providers as well as the likes of > > Facebook, Google, Microsoft, who have opposed it, saying the new > > statutes clash with overseas privacy legislation." > > > > > http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/05/13/005259/new-zealand-spy-agency-to-vet-network-builds-provider-staff > > > > FYI, > > > > - ferg > > > > > > > > > > > > - -- > Paul Ferguson > VP Threat Intelligence, IID > PGP Public Key ID: 0x54DC85B2 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ > > iF4EAREIAAYFAlNyItUACgkQKJasdVTchbL5GwEAxMtkr0W8oCtLTEdJDcdJHZTw > hCGmG1ZTbWdb7NTEnwIA/j4YYMcN/gOQCQfABs1UIYFX30i/SewOkXYDOvfO6ReM > =rAdv > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >