Top federal officials are trying to quell concerns that a major overhaul of Australia’s outdated GPS monitoring law could result in “big brother” style surveillance of everyday citizens. ..
The Australian Strategic Policy Institute held a web-based panel discussion on law on Thursday. Interior Minister Karen Andrews said in a public discussion paper last month that he was “overtaken by rapidly evolving technology that is overly complex and inconsistent.”
The panel heard that authorities are working on new, evolving encryption and anonymized communication technologies, etc., but the current “patchwork” surveillance system is difficult to understand and covers 1000 pages of legislation. There are 35 different warrants and authorizations.
Many observers posted questions on the forums, expressing concern about whether the new law would get in the way and lead to an “overkill” by the authorities.
However, Secretary-General Michael Petzullo of the Ministry of Interior said the law only covers the worst crimes such as terrorism, child exploitation and organized crime, and those who were not involved in such crimes are worried about getting on the authorities’ radar. He said he wouldn’t.
“Appropriate scrutiny, approval and surveillance of the state’s use of the most intrusive powers made available by Congress … similar surveillance, interception and surveillance of citizens and non-citizens, and to do what we ask them to do. Combined with supporting our institution, it is to keep us safe from harm, it is very important that we correct that duality of balance, “Pezullo said.
“In fact, in legal design, Australians are convinced that it is very rare for data, devices, or their involvement with devices through data to be monitored on a daily basis. Interception.”
He said the proposal for “massive capture of data for later storage and use” sneaked into the debate on this issue.
“I can start my day-to-day work, assuming that most everyday citizens should have a very high level of confidence in communication, devices, and interactions if they are not involved in criminal activity. I would like to think that the Internet is not, in fact, the subject of any kind of government surveillance … whatever. “
There was considerable concern about privacy around power, but it was strange that many did not appreciate the vast amount of information gathered by “surveillance capitalism,” Pesullo said.
“We shed more of our own personal, sometimes very intimate data, perhaps in a way that we didn’t fully understand or evaluate,” he said.
“Citizenship oversight … We have complex terms and conditions. We have mods built into software updates, so we have a complete picture of where the data is stored, scraped, used, sold, etc. I can’t understand.
“The more pressing issue for citizens is to really understand what a company is doing with its personal and sometimes intimate data … your privacy, your self, your tastes, Turn your attitude, who you are, into a product.
“Everything the government does is always intentionally designed … much more restrictive.
“As citizens … we don’t want the feeling of being under such a ubiquitous gaze, but that’s actually what’s happening in our private lives.”
Privacy concerns swirl over a review of surveillance laws, but top bureaucrats instead warn of capitalists’ data trawl nets.
Source link Privacy concerns swirl over a review of surveillance laws, but top bureaucrats instead warn of capitalists’ data trawl nets.