🚀 go-pugleaf

Originally from Wired: - and posted to waia.users mailing list by
Karen - and I snitched it for you guys - be warned!!


http://wired.lycos.com/news/politics/0,1283,32853,00.html

Orwellian Nightmare Down Under?
	by Stewart Taggart 3:00 a.m. 4.Dec.1999 PST

SYDNEY, Australia -- Any data seem different on your computer today?

If you're in Australia, the government has the ability to modify your
files. Its cyber spooks have been given legal power not only to
monitor private computers around the country, but to change the data
they contain.


The new powers are contained in a bill passed by Australia's
parliament late last month (the Australian Security Intelligence
Organization Legislation Amendment 1999). They now await only the
largely ceremonial assent of Australia's governor general before
becoming law.

"These are really untested waters," says Chris Connolly, a vocal
Australian privacy advocate. "I don't think there's any example
anywhere else in the world that's comparable."

Under the new law, Australia's attorney general can authorize legal
hacking into private computer systems, as well as copying or altering
data, as long as he has reasonable cause to believe it's relevant to a
"security matter."

The keyboard spies will come from the Australian Security Intelligence
Organization (ASIO), Australia's equivalent of the Central
Intelligence Agency. Catherine Fitzpatrick, spokeswoman for Attorney
General Daryl Williams, said the law merely "modernizes" an existing
1979 statute that previously governed ASIO, and sorely needed
updating.

"This just brings ASIO's powers in line with new technologies," she
said. "It doesn't give them increased powers at all."

For example, the new law bars sleuths from introducing viruses or
interfering with data used for lawful purposes on targeted computers,
she said. In addition, the bill limits the power to alter data on a
computer to concealing surveillance, she said.

While all this is true, the bill also specifically authorizes -- among
other things -- anything that's "reasonably incidental." And it's
broad wording like this -- as well as the weak oversight of the
nation's cyber spies -- that have opponents aghast. "I hate to use the
word 'Orwellian,' but I can't think of anything better to describe
this," said Greg Taylor, vice chairman of Electronic Frontiers
Australia.

"This is another stop down the path of legalized surveillance of all
information by authorities," he said.

Taylor believes the new law could be especially damaging to people's
faith in encrypted communications, because government hackers could
potentially lift encryption keys from individual computers.

"This bill seems to get around the problems that strong cryptography
presents law enforcement," Taylor said. "Now, they can attack the
problem at the source -- the originating computer -- before the data
even gets encrypted."

In addition, the new law could introduce tricky new issues into legal
cases, he said. "It opens to question all computer evidence if there's
been the potential for legalized tampering of it. Computer evidence
already poses problems of validation, and that's before you even open
up these legal avenues of tampering."

Connolly, as director of Australia's Financial Services Consumer
Policy Center and national coordinator of the Campaign for Fair
Privacy Laws, spoke out against the proposed legislation in a
parliamentary submission earlier this year.

"Australia doesn't really need an intelligence agency with dictatorial
powers," he said. "People here largely trust the federal police to
deal with most matters, and the police are subject to more controls
and supervision by judges than ASIO is."

He believes the government hastily pushed the bill through parliament
using, among other things, national nervousness about the approaching
Sydney Olympics to convince parliamentarians to go along. He thinks
ASIO's expanded powers clearly go too far, and were sought by an
agency seeking a new role after the Cold War.

To Brian Greig, a West Australian senator from the populist Democrats
Party -- which voted against the bill -- the law now tilts the balance
of power between the individual and government too far in favor of
government.

"If we're going to expand ASIO's surveillance powers, we should have
expanded equally the rights and liberties of individuals to be
protected from that," he said. "My suspicion is that citizens of other
countries wouldn't have been so apathetic about an issue like this."

As Australia's fourth largest political party, the Democrats could
only voice concern about the proposed law. Both the ruling
Liberal-National party coalition and the opposition Labor Party both
voted to pass the measure.

Under the new system, a citizen's most likely recourse if he feels
improperly snooped would be to complain to the attorney general -- who
authorized the snooping in the first place, or to the inspector
general of intelligence and security, a government watchdog that
conducts periodic reviews of ASIO's activities, Connolly said. Neither
of which is likely to pursue an aggressive, impartial investigation,
Connolly believes. So, if the law's a done deal -- what now?

Connolly suggests it's up to individuals and companies in Australia to
take additional measures to protect confidential information if
they're worried about government hackers. He suggests seeking out
better encryption, as well as software that can detect computer
intrusions.

However, if government now has legal power to change computer data, it
can legally tamper with intrusion detection software, erasing records
of its visits, he said.

To Paul Budde, a Sydney-based independent telecommunications analyst,
the new law sends the wrong message.

"If the government is allowed to be the biggest hacker in town, it
really undermines computer security rather than enhances it," he said.
"How can they now criticize 16-year-old kids who break into computer
systems for fun if the government's doing it, too?"

---------------
Black Holes suck!
.... and just to show I am not racially tilted - so do white holes!