5 ms·

FBI gets access to Australian telco records

128 points by ra 13y ago

mschuster91 13y ago
Just where does the reach of the FBI/NSA/other US agencies stop? Is nothing safe from them anymore?
- dendory 13y ago
  When you're a global power and have no scruple, like the US, then there's nothing any country can do. Either they do exactly what the US agencies tell them, or they risk getting thrown out of trade agreements, financial treaties, diplomatic consequences, and in the end, the US will just do whatever it wants anyways, since they have military bases all around the world and enough power to monitor and spy as much as they want, international laws be damned.
  - ra 13y ago
    Even more than that, the US has most of the best military hardware on sale. If you want to be able to buy the weaponry to compete in todays world, you pretty much have to buy it from the US (or it's closest allies). That's a very big stick right there.
    - TsiCClawOfLight 13y ago
      The more I hear about this, the more glad I am about ESA/EADS/Airbus et al. I know that the large european countries aren't much better, but it's still comforting to know that we work on Galileo, use Leopards and Eurofighters, etc.
    - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
      >If you want to be able to buy the weaponry to compete in todays world, If you'd said this twenty five years ago, it would make sense. But today? Who is the great menacing villain (other than the US)? What weapons do they have? There is no enemy other than our own warmongers.
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    Of course there is something a country can do. They can object loudly and obnoxiously. It would require the other countries to have more scruples than the US.
xmodem 13y ago
As much as I object to Prism, the headline is a bit sensationalist - it implies (and as a customer of Telstra, this was my first reaction and immediate concern) that Telstra is handing over data from Australian retail customers. The article itself doesn't actually claim this. Albeit still concerning.
- synchronise 13y ago
  Considering that they still honour a Howard-era government contract even though they're now 89.1% privately owned, it's still quite unsettling news.
- thejosh 13y ago
  Considering Telstra is storing so much data already, are you really not scared of the implications of that?
tokenadult 13y ago
From the article: "The contract was prompted by Telstra's undersea telecommunications joint venture called Reach. When it sought a cable licence from the US Federal Communications Commission, the DoJ and the FBI insisted on a binding security agreement. "The contract does not authorise Telstra or law enforcement agencies to undertake surveillance. But under the deed, Telstra must preserve and 'have the ability to provide' wire and electronic communications involving any customers who make any form of communication with a point of contact in the US, as well as 'transactional data' and 'call associated data' relating to such communications." . . . . "The document was signed by Douglas Gration, a barrister who was then Telstra's company secretary and official liaison for law enforcement and national security agencies. "He told the Herald he could not remember much about the agreement. 'Every country has a regime for that lawful interception,' he said. 'And Australia has got it as well.'" This looks like a pattern of mutual agreements among governments that cooperate in routing and connecting cables for international telecommunications. The statement is NOT that every telephone call from Australia to another country is listened to, but that a data archive is maintained that might be accessible with court orders. Particularly significant is the statement that other countries ask for the same arrangement if a cable connects to or through that country.

128 points by ra 13y ago

mschuster91 13y ago

Just where does the reach of the FBI/NSA/other US agencies stop? Is nothing safe from them anymore?

dendory 13y ago
When you're a global power and have no scruple, like the US, then there's nothing any country can do. Either they do exactly what the US agencies tell them, or they risk getting thrown out of trade agreements, financial treaties, diplomatic consequences, and in the end, the US will just do whatever it wants anyways, since they have military bases all around the world and enough power to monitor and spy as much as they want, international laws be damned.
- ra 13y ago
  Even more than that, the US has most of the best military hardware on sale. If you want to be able to buy the weaponry to compete in todays world, you pretty much have to buy it from the US (or it's closest allies). That's a very big stick right there.
  - TsiCClawOfLight 13y ago
    The more I hear about this, the more glad I am about ESA/EADS/Airbus et al. I know that the large european countries aren't much better, but it's still comforting to know that we work on Galileo, use Leopards and Eurofighters, etc.
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    >If you want to be able to buy the weaponry to compete in todays world, If you'd said this twenty five years ago, it would make sense. But today? Who is the great menacing villain (other than the US)? What weapons do they have? There is no enemy other than our own warmongers.
- fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
  Of course there is something a country can do. They can object loudly and obnoxiously. It would require the other countries to have more scruples than the US.

xmodem 13y ago

As much as I object to Prism, the headline is a bit sensationalist - it implies (and as a customer of Telstra, this was my first reaction and immediate concern) that Telstra is handing over data from Australian retail customers. The article itself doesn't actually claim this. Albeit still concerning.

synchronise 13y ago
Considering that they still honour a Howard-era government contract even though they're now 89.1% privately owned, it's still quite unsettling news.
thejosh 13y ago
Considering Telstra is storing so much data already, are you really not scared of the implications of that?

tokenadult 13y ago

From the article: "The contract was prompted by Telstra's undersea telecommunications joint venture called Reach. When it sought a cable licence from the US Federal Communications Commission, the DoJ and the FBI insisted on a binding security agreement. "The contract does not authorise Telstra or law enforcement agencies to undertake surveillance. But under the deed, Telstra must preserve and 'have the ability to provide' wire and electronic communications involving any customers who make any form of communication with a point of contact in the US, as well as 'transactional data' and 'call associated data' relating to such communications." . . . . "The document was signed by Douglas Gration, a barrister who was then Telstra's company secretary and official liaison for law enforcement and national security agencies. "He told the Herald he could not remember much about the agreement. 'Every country has a regime for that lawful interception,' he said. 'And Australia has got it as well.'" This looks like a pattern of mutual agreements among governments that cooperate in routing and connecting cables for international telecommunications. The statement is NOT that every telephone call from Australia to another country is listened to, but that a data archive is maintained that might be accessible with court orders. Particularly significant is the statement that other countries ask for the same arrangement if a cable connects to or through that country.