[brongondwana]

We've never done blanket surveillance, and specifically mention "individual users" in the blog post. There's been a lot of FUD about warrants not being needed - I think the ZDNet article we linked covers that very well:

"[a judge doesn't have to sign off on the specific method by which data is requested] However there must be an underlying warrant to access communications under the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act or the Surveillance Devices Act or state-level equivalents."

So the request still requires a warrant that specifies which communications are to be intercepted, but not a warrant that specifies how the interception is to be performed.

Sadly, random commentary on the net does tarnish reputations every bit as well as facts :(

[cyphar]

> There's been a lot of FUD about warrants not being needed - I think the ZDNet article we linked covers that very well

There is definitely a lot of FUD, though I think the ZDNet article is underplaying several quite reasonable concerns about the legislation.

In addition, I've not seen any concrete explanation of how you could make use of the Commonwealth Ombudsman to effectively appeal the decision of assessors for a TCN.

[bad_user]

Thanks for the clarifications.

You might want to update the article, to make it clear that warrants are still needed.

Also keep up the good work and I hope #AABill doesn't hurt your business.