Australian Data Retention Won't Help Prevent Terrorist AttacksAdded: Saturday, November 8th, 2014
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Current Events
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, 2013, www.extratorrent.cc
The US lawyer for Edward Snowden has questioned whether the law to retain metadata can improve national security, after Australia introduced the bill to parliament.
Snowden’s lawyer said there was no good evidence that data retention could help national security authorities to prevent terror attacks. He acknowledges that the retention of metadata could help connect the dots after the attack already took place, but pointed at the lack of evidence that mass surveillance can prevent terrorist attacks.
The Australian government introduced the bill that would force phone companies and ISPs to retain users’ metadata (which is a digital footprint left behind when people use their devices) for 2 years. That data would be available to law enforcement agencies.
The country’s communications minister said that the law would not increase the extent to which metadata could be obtained by the authorities. He explained that the bill would rather establish an industry-wide standard to make sure telecommunications companies kept this information for 2 years.
However, both the prime minister and the chief architect of the data retention bill failed to clearly explain what data would and would not be collected under the proposed law when they first floated it. For example, it was claimed at the time that web browsing history wouldn’t be included in data collected. As a result, the tech experts and civil libertarians had to call on the government to release an exposure draft of the legislation, which would clearly define metadata and explain exactly what oversight provisions are expected to minimize the potential for data breaches.
At the same time, it is unclear who would bear the costs of the retention program, but as usual the guesses are that they would be handed down to consumers in the form of a “spied upon tax”.
The Australian government argued that data retention is necessary to protect citizens from terrorist cells and lone wolf attacks. However, public sentiment turned against data retention back in 2013, when a whistleblower Edward Snowden disclosed the extent to which American NSA was monitoring and storing phone and web data.
Although Snowden’s lawyer himself is against data retention, he had to admit that the Australian government has handled the issue well, pointing out that it managed to avoid the veil of secrecy that is normally “deeply corrosive” to public trust.
Posted by: Date:
Saturday, November 8th, 2014
|since 2001 the USA have been collecting and monitoring its own citizens contrary to their constitutional rights and since 2003 the world has been under scrutiny whether aware of it or not,not to mention the NSA hacking Google servers outside the USA with the intention of datamining,so who are the real criminals on the www.|
|posted by (2014-11-08 23:36:30)|
|nsa can be for chambers commerce and have with who to talk about it on data retentions for communities so can't be boring on your own country per populations.|
|When a foreign power is given all my or anyone else`s data from emails,meetings,phone calls etc given the size of the population it would take a long time in disseminating such as you say given the millions using the internet,but once they have collected the said data unilaterally they can then simply just target persons of interest and exploit them as they see fit,people like ministers of parliament and leading figures in the world of commerce to their own ends,no one with half a brain cell can really believe it is all for their own good or that it will stop terrorism or stop pedophiles ,c`mon people wake up they are the NSA (spooks) for Christ sake.||
Most Popular Stories