| > One problem not being addressed is that via #AABill data access requests can now be submitting without warrants issued by a judge, so it removes the judicial oversight. TANs require a warrant (or rather, a TAN is unenforceable if it would require the agency to get a warrant -- but a TAN instead is a method to give force to a warrant). The restrictions on notices are in s317ZH (which is a while after the definitions of the notices so people might be forgiven for misunderstanding the limitations). > And companies like FastMail cannot report abuse publicly, or the people responsible risk 10 years in jail. 5 years in gaol is the limit. There are also processes for them to provide statistical information about how many notices they've received, as well as provisions for courts and the Commonwealth Ombudsman to make public notice information. > Couple this with the fact that Australia is part of the "Five Eyes", being the only country without a "Bill of Rights", it means that agencies like the NSA could use Australia for their dirty work. This is definitely true, and GCHQ has already started requesting similar powers in the UK (not that they need to, since they can just use the Australian powers). There are several provisions in the act which specify that it can be used for investigations into "serious foreign crimes". > Please correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't read the actual bill, just random commentary on the net. I would recommend reading it, a lot of people haven't. |