Re: [AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS

"If "there is a need for these powers over the Christmas period," then that ship has sailed. Too late, they needed to pass it in September." Apparently change freezes also apply to national security :) On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 17:33, Paul Wilkins wrote: > Just checked, and cyber stalking

Re: [AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS

Just checked, and cyber stalking qualifies as it has 3 year max sentence. On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 17:21, Paul Wilkins wrote: > To get a TAN approved, you'll need: > >- to be an interception agency >- to have your TAN approved by the AFP >- the investigation must attach a 3 year

Re: [AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS

To get a TAN approved, you'll need: - to be an interception agency - to have your TAN approved by the AFP - the investigation must attach a 3 year sentence - there *may *need to also be a data / computer warrant. Then again there may not. So no TANs for councils. TARs I'm not

Re: [AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS

On Thu, 6 Dec. 2018, 4:20 pm Paul Wilkins The original 172 page Bill was so obviously deficient in so many areas, it > was easier to just say the Bill should be thrown out in its entirety and > start over. Now, post 50 pages of amendments, there's still plenty of scope > for serious criticism,

Re: [AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS

On 12/05/2018 11:48 AM, Paul Wilkins wrote: "If this passes I can see similar legislation being introduced in other jurisdictions." I think this legislation and all its warts is going to be a particularly Australian feature. Exported globally, though. A 5-eyes power who wants to surveil

Re: [AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS

The original 172 page Bill was so obviously deficient in so many areas, it was easier to just say the Bill should be thrown out in its entirety and start over. Now, post 50 pages of amendments, there's still plenty of scope for serious criticism, and the debate around getting the balance right

[AusNOG] Call For Presentations - DNS-OARC Workshop, Thailand, Bangkok, 12th/13th May 2019

(Apologies in advance if you see this message from multiple mailing lists) The 30th DNS-OARC Workshop will take place at the Shangri-La Hotel, Bangkok, Thailand, on May 12th and 13th 2019, hosted by ICANN. (Note that several co-located meetings are taking place immediately prior to the DNS-OARC

Re: [AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS

Remember these are proposed as interim powers. *Labor members have moved to progress this Bill despite our concerns because of the evidence from law enforcement and security agencies that there is a need for these powers over the Christmas period, and because the proposed amendments deliver

[AusNOG] AARNET Mirror Max Connections

Hi all, Apologies for the noise but are there any AARNET admins on this list? We mirror CentOS from the AARNET mirror internally and have been getting a "@ERROR: max connections" error for the last day or two. Regards, James ___ AusNOG mailing list

Re: [AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS

Some sensible amendments. Recommendation 4 The Committee recommends that the Bill be amended to incorporate recommendations from the *Commonwealth Ombudsman to establish clear authority to inspect and gather information on the exercise of the industry assistance measures* by the Australian

Re: [AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS

PJCIS have released a unanimous report , recommending Bill be passed with their

Re: [AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS

Reuben, Anyone with an interest in FOSS is deeply concerned for the consequences. eg: the Mozilla submission makes for compelling reading. The specific concerns with FOSS is that the code base is public domain, where the inclusion of binary blobs is antithetical to the community trust model.

Re: [AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS

Motion for 2nd hearing in Lower House. On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 at 23:59, Reuben Farrelly wrote: > On 5/12/2018 8:33 am, Nick Stallman wrote: > > Also does this mean that the custom firmware for one or a handful of > > targets is not a systemic weakness, but if (when) the custom firmware > > leaks