Listen up: Govt law to aid eavesdropping

It will be easier for law enforcement to install wiretaps in public telephones, cafe computers and mobile phones under proposed amendments to the Telecommunications (Interception) Act (TIA) discussed in a Senate hearing last week.

The amendments will allow law enforcement agencies to wiretap devices not specified under interception warrants and supply data across agencies for separate investigations.

The Australian Federal Police and the Attorney-General's Department met with senators and privacy advocacy groups to discuss whether the changes are in breach of the Privacy Act and how it can increase the responsiveness of law enforcement.

To continue reading, register here and become an Insider. You'll get free access to premium content from CIO, Computerworld, CSO, InfoWorld, and Network World. See more Insider content or sign in.

It will be easier for law enforcement to install wiretaps in public telephones, cafe computers and mobile phones under proposed amendments to the Telecommunications (Interception) Act (TIA) discussed in a Senate hearing last week.

The amendments will allow law enforcement agencies to wiretap devices not specified under interception warrants and supply data across agencies for separate investigations.

The Australian Federal Police and the Attorney-General's Department met with senators and privacy advocacy groups to discuss whether the changes are in breach of the Privacy Act and how it can increase the responsiveness of law enforcement.

Australian Federal Police (AFP) spokesperson Peter Whowell said the TIA is stifling law enforcement efforts to catch criminals using multiple devices to communicate.

The [amendments] permit monitoring of a conversation between to people known to be innocent.

Senator Bob Brown -leader of the Greens party

"The overall time taken to add new [devices] to warrants is not quick enough [because] satisfying legislation takes time," Whowell said.

"We're losing access if [suspects] are counter-acting to interception."

The TIA specifies that law enforcement must acquire separate warrants for each device planned for interception. The changes would include device interception under a broader service warrant.

The bone of contention is whether wiretapping is a breach of third party privacy, and has put consumer advocacy groups at loggerheads with proponents.

Conversations unintentionally recorded through wiretaps can be distributed to law enforcement agencies around the country for separate criminal investigations, according to Whowell.

Data irrelevant to investigations is destroyed at the expiration of warrants in accordance with section 68 of the Act.

Privacy groups expressed outraged over a clause in the bill which states devices will be wiretapped based on the likelihood of a suspect using them.

Spokesperson for the Attorney General's Department, Catherine Smith, stood by the decision when asked by senators if the word 'likely' could be replaced by a more concise term.

She refused to quantify the term when asked by senators what percentage of probability the term represents.

Electronic Frontiers Association (EFA) chair Dale Clapperton said the term is highly subjective.

He said the courts consider 'likely' as stated in the Trade Practices Act, as meaning a greater than a 50 percent chance of occurrence.

Whowell said the clause has the same application as its use in search warrants, which can be acquired to search all likely areas.

Smith admitted suspects can subvert interception techniques by changing the unique identification number of a device.

"It may be possible to change the unique identifier [but] I am not aware of specific examples," Smith said.

Successful interception requires a device to maintain a unique identification number, such as a mobile phone serial, telephone number, or MAC address. However, almost all devices can be hacked to modify or remove identifiers.