Privacy fears on 'spy' laws

Victorian police are seeking access to people's phone and internet data at least 1200 times a week, prompting privacy advocates to warn such numbers will soar if controversial "data retention" proposals go ahead.

Figures provided to a parliamentary inquiry into plans to force phone and internet companies to keep customer's data for at least two years show the police sought authorisations to access data 310,000 times in the past five years.

Australian Federal Police meanwhile sought authorisations 110,000 times in the same period. NSW and Queensland have not yet provided figures but, if they are consistent with Victoria, it would mean the nation's combined police forces are likely have sought access close to 1 million times in the past five years.

So-called "metadata" such as the time and destination of a phone call can be accessed by police and some government agencies without a warrant. Instead they need only the authorisation of a senior officer or official.

The revelations have prompted privacy advocates to sharpen their attacks on the Abbott government's so-called "data retention" bill, which would compel telecommunications companies to keep for at least two years communication "metadata". This includes the identities of account holders, the time and duration of calls, IP addresses and email addresses of internet communications and the location of a device such as a mobile phone at the time of a call.

It does not include the content of communications, nor does it include the continuous position of a mobile phone through GPS.

Police and security agencies say metadata is vital to preventing terrorism and solving crimes but that tool is being eroded as companies stop routinely keeping records for billing purposes and charge customers by data usage instead.

The recent terrorist attacks in France and the Sydney siege have fuelled calls for data retention proposals to be ratified as an essential tool against terrorism and serious crime.

In an opinion article this week sparked by the French attacks, Attorney-General George Brandis wrote that passage of the government's data retention bill was "an urgent priority".

The high-powered parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security is examining the legislation.
Jon Lawrence, executive officer of internet privacy organisation Electronic Frontiers Australia, said it was "backward logic" to say it was essential to most investigations.

"It's used a lot because it's easily available," he said. "I can't imagine there are that many serious incidents being investigated in Victoria in one week that justify those numbers. It just seems way off the scale to me.
"We need a proper threshold that it is only used for serious crime and not, say, an unpaid rego."

Suelette Dreyfus, a researcher in computing and information systems at Melbourne University, said far more data was being created about people's communications than ever before, yet it was being accessed without warrants.

"This is not just metadata, it's your life," she said. "We should be very concerned about the frequency with which the police are seeking to access our metadata," she said.

"If we don't stop this creep into our private worlds that government is using technology for, it only becomes a matter of time before these other lines are crossed as well. It's important that we draw that line right here and now."

Neither Victoria Police nor the AFP were able to answer a question by the inquiry about how many convictions they had secured with the help of metadata.

But both said it was vital. The AFP said metadata was critical in stopping the major terrorism plots in recent years.

Victoria Police said in its submission that most authorisations for metadata were obtaining the identities of people who owned particular phones or internet services.

Victoria Police spokeswoman Sergeant Jo Stafford could not comment on the type of investigations that most commonly required the data.

She also could not comment on how often applications related to data that was more than 12 months old, nor how often accessing this data resulted in charges being laid.

  14 Jan 2015

Victoria Police is a organisation that commits criminal offences every single day, without any intervention from the government.

What the general public should be concerned about is not so much the [alleged] 'terrorist' activities of the the community, but rather the criminal actions of Victoria Police.

Privacy does not exist to protect the individual but rather the laws are constructed in such a manner as to protect the illegal actions of corporations, including the criminal actions of Victoria Police.