Pirate Party Australia raises concerns over the mandatory nature of the new Interpol Internet filtering regime, in regards to its opaque nature and the dubious use of §313 of the Telecommunications Act.

ISPs have been ordered to implement Interpol’s “worst-of-the-worst” filter that specifically targets websites that provide access to child abuse material. This order has been made under §313 of the Telecommunications Act 1997. It is unclear whether or not the use of §313 for the purposes of Internet censorship is appropriate or even legal.

“While an Internet filtering regime that focuses squarely on the Interpol blacklist is a major step back from the proposed mandatory censorship regime which would have encompassed all Refused Classification content — and even some R18+ and MA15+ content — the opaque nature and lack of control over the blacklist are still issues that raise significant concern,” said Brendan Molloy, Secretary of Pirate Party Australia.

Read More

Pirate Party Australia is happy with the Labor Government’s backflip on Internet censorship, however still raises concerns over the opaque and ineffective nature of the Interpol blacklist scheme.

“The Interpol filter, which is updated weekly, is designed to prevent access to websites that are known or appear to be distributing child abuse materials. In practice, this is a system that blocks websites at the domain name level, meaning operators of such sites can simply change their domain name, a task easily accomplished within minutes,” said David W. Campbell, President of Pirate Party Australia.

“Obviously this will just lead to a perpetual game of cat and mouse. The Australian Government must be incredibly naïve to think these criminals will be deterred by having their domain name blocked.”

Read More

The deadline for submissions to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security’s (PJCIS) Inquiry into potential reforms of National Security Legislation was August 20, and today, PJCIS allowed for the publication of submissions. Pirate Party Australia submitted a comprehensive response to the discussion paper.

In the lengthy submission the Party comments on many points in the discussion paper, including:

  • Strongly objecting to penalties for individuals who refuse to assist in decrypting information or provide their passwords, eroding a person’s right to avoid self-incrimination;
  • Strongly objecting to keeping all Internet users’ browsing and email history for two years, introducing an arbitrary violation of privacy; and
  • Suggesting adding controls to various powers that certain agencies have to breach individuals’ privacy.

Read More

In what Crikey’s Bernard Keane has rightfully called an “government wishlist of new surveillance powers”[1], the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Intelligence and Security (JPCIS) has asked for submissions on the Attorney-General’s Department’s discussion paper ‘Equipping Australia Against Emerging and Evolving Threats.'[2]

The discussion paper suggests “a massive expansion of intelligence-gathering powers including data retention, the surveillance of Twitter accounts, forcing people to give up computer passwords, ASIO stop-and-search powers, government authority to direct telecommunications companies about infrastructure and the power for ASIO to plant or destroy information on computers.”[1]

Given the gravity, complexity and sheer volume of proposals and implications arising from the proposals, the window of a mere month for public comment and submissions to the Inquiry is far too small for any meaningful or considered response to the Terms of Reference.

Read More