8 ms·
The Australian Government now wants ISPs to record browsing history
- pmccool 16y agoIf this law ever comes into existence, I predict its number-one use will be pursuing illegal downloaders or something. I bet it won't be explicitly limited to terrorism or whatever its ostensible purpose is. Hope I'm wrong, on both points.
- loewenskind 16y agoIt doesn't matter what its number one use today is. If such a law exists at all, sooner or later it's going to be abused.
- frio 16y agoThey're such two-faced shits. On the one hand, they pan Google for collecting the locations of wireless networks and logging some packets off them, criticising them for invading privacy. On the other, they're attempting to legislate a way to record all of what people actually do online.
- jstevens85 16y ago>On the other, they're attempting to legislate a way to record all of what people actually do online. It's unfair to say they're attempting to introduce any sort of legislation. At this stage they're exploring whether or not EU regulations would be appropriate for Australia.
- prawn 16y agoThere's another story on this from Renai LeMay (ex-ZDNet) who is an IT writer who started his own IT news site, Delimiter. An underdog worth supporting I think: http://delimiter.com.au/2010/06/11/govt-may-record-users-web-history-email-data/ http://delimiter.com.au/2010/06/11/govt-may-record-users-web...
- philk 16y agoI'm getting sick of the words "paedophilia" and "terrorism" being trotted out to justify every invasive new policy.
- bennysaurus 16y agoEspecially since it's such a poor excuse - these sorts of people do not use standard http to communicate or distribute this sort of content (the dumb ones do but they would just as easy to catch without filters or logs like this). Good example, hop on TOR and try to access almost any image site such as 4chan as a test. 99% of endpoints are banned for uploading child-pornography or other material while these sorts of users simply look for another exit point. The government is either ignorant about how these sorts of people actually operate, and how the internet facilitates them, or it really is a Big Brother style solution to put a full blanket audit-at-will on the general population.
- pyre 16y agoThe 'government' is a blanket term. I'm sure there are parts of the government that know perfectly well how these people operate. On the other hand, initiatives like these seem to be instituted by politicians who probably don't know their ass from a hole in the ground. [Insert nefarious reason that the people that know don't bother to inform the people that don't]
- bennysaurus 16y agoThat's true - the policy makers is probably a better term here.
- ErrantX 16y agothese sorts of people do not use standard http to communicate or distribute this sort of content Well, actually they do. At least the "end user" types. Whilst it is reasonable to assume that pedophiles are using secure systems to transfer information the majority don't fit that profile. The ones who do fit that profile are usually the ones creating the content for sale (that operation is extremely well organised :() and a relative minority. the dumb ones do but they would just as easy to catch without filters or logs like this Damn straight. In fact it's arguable whether or not we would have much more success with filtering and logs. It would be easier to secure a prosecution because you could turn around and say "well we have a log of you accessing X at Y time, explain that". But to be honest usually such things aren't needed. The problem with filtering when pitched as a solution to pedophilia is: how do you filter for it? Oh, you could probably watch for keywords. But typing "Lolita" into Google is not illegal, so how do you figure out which traffic actually represents a pedophile downloading images? It's a dodgy path to go down; and I doubt any one of the proponents of this idea will be much impressed to find their computers seized because, say, their teenage son searched "lolita" for a school project or something :) In actual fact the vast majority of peadophiles are caught in two ways: being reported by a friend, relative, passer by etc. OR because they tried to groom a child over the internet, and we have great success using the current logging methods to track down such individuals. Catching the gangs behind the commercial stuff; well, filtering certainly won't improve our efforts there...
- robryan 16y agoDoes this really help? If I just browsed everything sensitive through SSL sure they will have the domain viewed but nothing to prosecute on?
- CWuestefeld 16y agoExcept that we have good reason to believe that governments are getting backdoors into SSL certificates. If they can also control DNS, they can set up man-in-the-middle spying. Of course, if they did that, there'd be no reason for ISPs to be doing the recording.
- Naga 16y agoTime to encrypt everything!
- biafra 16y agoUntil encryption is outlawed, or key escrowed. Then we are doomed!
- reginaldo 16y agoYes, but for now I bet a startup that finds a way to do to anonymous access what dropbox has done to backups/synchronization will earn a lot of money. Now that the cost per GB is so low, you can route the traffic trough 3 or 4 countries, and any scheme to tap connections will be prohibitively expensive.
- sdurkin 16y agoDear Aussies and Limies, Regarding your internet and privacy policies: Get it together. Most Sincerely, the Yanks.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- jodrellblank 16y agoDear Yanks, Remember this? http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/04/70619 Regards,
- sdurkin 16y agoExcellent point. Perhaps it should have been obvious that I was joking. By referencing the somewhat deragatory nicknames used by soldiers in WWII, I was calling to mind our nations' shared heritage of the British Common Law. When I see Common Law countries misbehave in this fashion, it is always especially irksome. It is the ultimate "could it happen here" test. I expect more from the Common Law nations, and I wholly agree that us Yanks have had some embarassing episodes in this regard as well. We should all resolve to hold ourselves to the high standards of human and civil rights guaranteed under our shared legal tradition. And we should hold each other to it.
- coderdude 16y agoThe thing I find so surprising about all of this is that I would never expect a "normal" country like Australia to have censorship issues. China, North Korea, Iran... Australia? Is the Australian government simply too powerful for its people's own good?
- zmmmmm 16y agoAustralians are very apathetic about their rights. Many people think it goes back to our roots. Most countries have some kind of founding story that involves revolution, violence, some kind of struggle for freedom (even if it is more myth than reality). Australia doesn't. We were handed a cosy democracy by the British and it's been all rosy ever since. So while most people easily conceive of the government as incompetent, misguided or even corrupt, almost nobody ever even conceives of government as potentially evil.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- philk 16y agoWe are "blessed" with a two party system where the two major parties are both headed up by religious conservatives.
- adrianwaj 16y agoSomeone goes to Rudd and gives him a folder of 'objectionable material.' Also gives Rudd stats on how frequently it's accessed. And it's been on Rudd's mind ever since and he's trying to disinfect Australia and himself from it.
- pmccool 16y agoI'd answer "No". 1. A lot of these creepy proposals never get past the proposal stage. Take the Australia Card. 2. Australia's legal institutions have proved reasonably effective in dealing with such creepy laws. E.g. laws banning the Communist Party were struck down in the '50s. 3. This latest proposal is about law enforcement, not censorship. Creepy anti-terrorism laws aren't a peculiarly Australian vice. 4. The government doesn't have a majority in both houses; it needs the complicity of non-government members to make laws. None of this is to say that this is a good thing. It's creepy and embarrasing and I wish they'd stop.
- ams6110 16y agoOpportunity for an off-shore VPN service?
- Devilboy 16y agoThere's about a million of those already!
- c00p3r 16y agoIt will not work. Today's average internet user is technically incompetent to set up something complicated as non-standard VPN connection, leave alone third-party one, like OpenVPN. The second problem - is monetization. Most people wouldn't pay. And the last one - you cannot alter an iPhone/iPad and other closed systems. Seems like it is possible to port (recompile) openvpn to android. (IPsec and GRE probably would be discarded on ISPs) btw, openssh's built in socks proxy is a great deal, for linux laptops or netbooks, but you still need a DNS server.
- Terry_B 16y agoPurely tactics to get their filtering bill passed? In the end we'll all be thanking them for being such nice people that they are only filtering our internet...
- c00p3r 16y agoChina is lagging a lot. =)
- studioprisoner 16y agoI work within an ISP in Australia and have dealt with providing information to the Federal Police for investigations. I was under the impression that we already recorded that information. Looks like I was wrong.
- Devilboy 16y agoSome ISPs do record that information but they are currently not required by law to do so.
- studioprisoner 16y agoOh, maybe we do record the information then. As i'm pretty sure that I've sent that sort of information to the Fed Police before. Anyway, I do support that that information is stored. And is used to investigate the right sort of crimes that do need to be investigated. And through the proper channels that the right people are requesting to look for that information.
- loewenskind 16y agoDo your customers know they are being recorded like this?
- studioprisoner 16y agoWe cannot view that information, only by an intersection order is that information is available. In our TOS and Privacy Statements on our website, it does state that we keep connection logs.
- Devilboy 16y agoConnection logs are not the same as logging every URL your customers request, am I correct?
- nl 16y agoPerhaps too political for HN, but anyawy... I can't understand Labor's plan. They seem to be going out of their way to alienate everyone who is attracted to voting for them. They have lost the green vote by dropping the emissions trading scheme. They have lost the "doctors wives" (see last election) with their refugee policy. They have lost most political progressives with the internet filter and now this plan. Even the unions aren't 100% behind them because of the impact of the Super Profit Tax policy. I can understand that they think that they might lose primary votes to the Greens, say, and then regain them via preferences. But it seems to me that many people are getting to the point where they think that even Tony Abbot couldn't be as bad as this. (Disclaimer: I'm Australian)
- Andys 16y agoMore importantly, Tony Abbot is what he says he is, which makes him more charismatic than Ruddbot.
- philk 16y agoUsing the phrase "is what he says he is" to describe a politician who admitted to lying during an interview on a major nightly news program strikes me as a rather creative interpretation of reality. Luckily for him actually being honest and consistent is an absolute irrelevance, all he needs to do is give the appearance of being a straight up guy.
- tomhoward 16y agoAdmitted to lying! Yep, the ones who don't admit it are far preferable :) He admitted explicitly to doing what every politician does, what everyone knows they do, and what Lindsay Tanner did only hours later on the ABC. It was an unfortunate, clumsy thing to say, but the "gotcha" triumphalism should be reserved for people who don't admit to their failings, not the ones who do.
- nl 16y agoKevin Rudd isn't charismatic, but that doesn't particularly matter to me.
- AlexBlom 16y agoBoo. Glad I moved to Canada.
- Devilboy 16y agoCan you confirm or deny that Canada is the sanest English-speaking country in the world?
- jbarham 16y agoAs a Canadian I will admit we are generally sane (aka "dull"), but there are enough crazies around to keep things interesting, especially in BC (e.g., Bill Vander Zalm, Svend Robinson). So, although it is generally overlooked, my vote is for New Zealand.
- i386 16y agoAnd Senator Conroy calls Google creepy.
- pmccool 16y agoTo be fair, this creepiness is coming from the Attorney-General's department, so Conroy doesn't necessarily have anything to do with it.
- zmmmmm 16y ago> Conroy doesn't necessarily have anything to do with it That is being a little bit too fair. They are members of the same party, the same government. Conroy is the Minister responsible for broadband and the internet. It would be insane to think he is not intimately involved in this. Perhaps they've decided the best way to take some heat off Conroy is to suggest something even more horrific from another department.
- jstevens85 16y agoI think perhaps you're underestimating just how much autonomy Australian political ministers are given in managing their portfolios, particularly in areas that the public don't give a shit about. I believe that's why the Internet filter is still being proposed. Stephen Conroy is the leader of the right-wing faction within the ALP, and therefore Rudd can't tell him to shut up and do something else. He's been given the autonomy to do whatever he wants (except on "important" issues like the NBN). The same situation existed with Michael Atkinson in SA. He pretty much determined himself without any outside consultation that he wouldn't support R18+ video games, and it appears the new AG has been given the same level of freedom and autonomy to determine his own policies.
- megablast 16y agoIn Australia, they also make you provide ID for any sim card for your mobile that you buy. Looks like it might be time to head to the UK, since they decided to scrap the ID card.
- taitems 16y agoDon't worry, you can still use the pay-phones to organise your drug deals. What a terrible thing to take issue with.
- andrewtj 16y agoThat's right — registration prevents drug dealers from getting disposable phone numbers because they are incapable of circumventing the law.
- zmmmmm 16y agoHmm - I just bought a sim card on Monday - over the internet. It came yesterday, works great. http://www.tpg.com.au/mobile/plans.html http://www.tpg.com.au/mobile/plans.html Now - they do have a fix on me - my credit card and the fact that the sim card was sent to my home address. I don't know if they would have baulked if my CC address was different to the address where the sim went. However at no point did they ask for or see any actual identification of me.
- Devilboy 16y agoThey have your name, address and credit card number. That's more than enough identification.
- zmmmmm 16y agoSure, but I could easily have lied about all those things except the CC number, which is why I wonder if it would have gone to 'manual verification' if my address didn't match. From all appearances I could enter any name, address and get a phone tied to that identity, with the billing going somewhere else.
- JacobAldridge 16y agoMoving to the UK in September. Wish I could say this was a motivating factor (experience is the real reason), but I'm scared about what I might return home to at some future point. Maybe I should list every book I own or have read as part of my packing, and send it to Senator Conroy et al, as a preemptive move against those needing to be recorded as well.
- neurotech1 16y agoPerhaps, someone should start a "technology" party. I can't believe how crazy the Australian federal government has gotten. I could never vote for this ass-backwards internet and technology policy.
- alexkay 16y ago> Perhaps, someone should start a "technology" party. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party_Australia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party_Australia
- dejb 16y agoI don't think the name 'Pirate Party' will work in Australia. They won't get any support (financial or otherwise) from any credible organisations. From what I've seen people are turning to the Greens as anti-filtering party.
- hugh3 16y agoWe're still waiting to see what the Liberals are going to do. At the moment they're maintaining strategic ambiguity on the issue, which means somebody needs to get out there and start convincing them there's more votes in opposing it than supporting it.
- nailer 16y agoNot the same thing. I support and make technology. I think piracy is disgusting.
- pmccool 16y agoConsider the two recent creepy proposals together. They point to everything being censored and everything being monitored. Consider Wikileaks. Consider how these laws work together against whistleblowers. How convenient for a government to be able to - block such a site from the majority of citizens; and - have a red-hot go at tracking down anyone rash enough to upload anything. Throw in a law or two to make it illegal for paedophiles and terrorists to circumvent these arrangement and you have a truly nasty arrangement.
- ww8520 16y agoIt's a form of populace control by the government; otherwise how would they rule over you?