[MLB-WIRELESS] A letter I got....

[Trevor Harding]

I'm not sure that talking to them would make any difference, unless we've
got someone who we already have a working dialogue with.  We'll simply have
to sit back and watch the wheels of beaurocracy grind away.

Perhaps this sort of thing makes for a very good arguement for MW not to own
anything - We were talking about setting up APs and nodes owned by the
association, but if we own infrastructure, then what does that open us up to
legally?

Trev
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-melbwireless at wireless.org.au
[mailto:owner-melbwireless at wireless.org.au]On Behalf Of Robert Tchia
Sent: Tuesday, 12 November 2002 9:37 PM
To: melbwireless at wireless.org.au
Subject: RE: [MLB-WIRELESS] A letter I got....


Maybe it's a good time for the committee to speak to AG dept to clarify
this matter.


Cheers
Rob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-melbwireless at wireless.org.au [mailto:owner-
> melbwireless at wireless.org.au] On Behalf Of Andrew Griffiths
> Sent: Tuesday, 12 November 2002 4:36 PM
> To: melbwireless at wireless.org.au
> Subject: Re: [MLB-WIRELESS] A letter I got....
>
> Steven Haigh wrote:
> > Got a letter today from the Attorney-General's Department....
>
> Uh oh... How about we invite whomever onto this list for the duration
of
> this discussion?
>
> >
> > it follows:
> >
> > --- Begin Letter ---
> > Dear Mr Haigh
> >
> >     WIRELESS BROADBAND INTERNET ACCESS PROVIDERS
> > OBLIGATIONS UNDER SECTION 313 OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT 1997
> >
> > I understand Melbourne Wireless is operating or intending to operate
a
> > wireless broadband network to facilitate access by customers to the
> > Internet and/or the PSTN.
>
> Ouch. Possibly a Internet connection may not be in our interests
(though
>   I suspect places like the various mirrors wouldn't joining our
network
> but not routing for us..).
>
>  > I am writing to all wireless broadband access
> > providers to inform them of their obligations under section 313 of
the
> > /Telecommunications Act 1997/.
> >
> > Under the Act, carriers and carriage service providers must do their
> > best to prevent telecommunications networks and facilities from
being
> > used to commit offences.
>
> Does this mean we have to monitor everything? (Censorship). If so, how
> about when people see material they do not agree with and so on.
>
> What about cryptography?
>
> > They must also give the authorities such help
> > as is reasonably necessary for the purposes of enforcing the
criminal
> > law and laws imposing pecuniary penalties; protecting the public
> > revenus;
>
> Myself, so long as it is of a criminal nature (such as some person
going
> around breaking into computers and using our network for a launch pad)
> and not something commerical related (like pirating), I don't mind so
> much.
>
> > and safeguarding national security.
>
> "They" seem to through this one around; possibly because its hard to
> refute. However, at what line is freedom and safety drawn?
>
>  > This may help include
> > provision of interception services, including services in executing
an
> > interception warrant under the /Telecommunications (Interception)
Act
> 1979/.
>
> Mmmmkay.. I rememeber a draft of a Law/something mentioning the
various
> security people would like all the (cryptographic) keys used.
>
> So lets say I had an account on some box, and some .gov agency wanted
to
> break into this box (assuming they have whatever is needed to say they
> can) does this mean, for example, I might have to hand over SSH keys
or
> whatever?
>
> And if SSH, why not say, GPG keys?
>
> And if you don't comply (for the public's safety of course) why not
jail
>   time?
>
> If I can find a link to what they where proposing a while ago, you'll
> find I'm not joking.
>
>
> >
> > An Overview of these obligations, including a link to the manual
> > 'Telecommunications and Law Enforcement', is available at the
Australian
> > Communications Authority website:
> >
> > http://www.aca.gov.au/licence/public_interestobligations.htm
>
> erm. Mozilla returns
>
> Not Found
> The requested URL /licence/public_interestobligations.htm was not
found
> on this server.
>
> >
> > An officer from my office, the Australian Security Intelligence
> > Organisation or a law enforcement agency may have already made
contact
> > with you to discuss details of the services offered by your company
>
> Company? AFAIK, we are not a commerical entity. Does anyone know if
this
> changes anything wrt .gov agencys?
>
> > and the assistance that may be requested. If not, you should expect
> contact
> > to be made in the near future. Specific issues to be discussed will
> include:
> >
> > a.    architecture/technical details of the service being offered,
the
> > customer base and distribution, and roll out plans;
>
> WGPrivacy/Security?
>
> >
> > b.    the nature of subscriber and historical traffic
>
> Historical data? I guess they will be giving us data storage stuff as
> well.
>
>  > data that might be
> > requested, the information that might be provided as part of the
> > request, and the format in which the information can be provided;
> >
> > c.    the telecommunications interception warrant process;
> >
>
> And people will have to keep secrets about this and thusly will create
> distrust in our/the community.
>
> > d.    identifiers for each service;
>
> Service types?
>
> >
> > e.    technical implementation facilities, and interception product
> > delivery arrangements;
>
> interception products? Someone want to find out
>
> >
> > f.    service level agreements; and
>
> Hrm. Seriously, is anyone going to gaurentee that they will offer X
> bandwidth over a network with no centeralised control? (Even possibly,
> once someone has decided they want in, we can't keep them off it).
>
> >
> > g.    physical security arrangements and security clearance
requirements
> > for the handling of classified information.
>
> Does this mean people running an access point / backbone whatever have
> an agreement with melb-wireless, or does the various .gov agencies
make
> there own arrangements with said person?
>
> >
> > I would appreciate your advice of the most appropriate point of
contact
> > within your organisation. If you have any queries, please do not
> > hesitate to contact myself or <name withheld>, (xx) xxxx.xxxx or
email
> > her at: xxx at xx.xxx.xx <mailto:xxx at xx.xxx.xx>
> >
> > Yours sincerely
> >
> >
> > Joan Sheedy
> > A/g Agency Coordinator.
> >
> > --- End Letter ---
> >
> >
> > Any comments on this? I'm not sure if I like what it's implying.....
>
> Myself included... I can see this as being problematic and headache
> causing. Why do I get the feeling that its time to leave .au? (Someone
> read to me a quote when talking about various things happening, "The
> Jews who could see what was happening left Germany as quickly as
> possible" or something like that..)
>
> >
> > Signed,
> > Steven Haigh
> > http://wireless.org.au
> > (Visit https://wireless.org.au to install our Root Certificate.)
>
>
> This can possibly be seen as overreacting, but when I read in the
paper
> that "People shouldn't question the government over how its acting"
and
> so on, it starts to really worry me.
>
> For example, the recent article in the Herald Sun about "kids going to
> libraries to look at pr0n", and people saying we should install
filters.
> (Which
>    1) Don't work (Moving targets)
> 	The only solution is to white list sites? Now, would this be
> possible
> with all the content on the 'net?
>    2) Are not open (I've read many reports saying that various
filtered
> places do not agree with the creaters political beliefs and thereforce
> are blocked, amongst other things)
>    3) Do not have an easy recourse of removing said blocked sites.
>    4) And people sign agreements saying they won't bring up
> "objectionable material" at the library.
> )
>
> Well, lets get this discussion rolling..
>
> Andrew Griffiths.
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
> with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message


To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.410 / Virus Database: 231 - Release Date: 31/10/2002


To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message