Aussie Govt tries to block two sites, takes down 1,200 - Accused of sneaking in web filter

ASIC’s action came to light after the regulator in April blocked several sites suspected of providing fraudulent investment information, but also resulted in the inadvertent blockage of some 1,200 other innocent sites.

The news was immediately greeted with alarm by a number of political groups and digital rights lobby organisations, which expressed concern that ASIC’s move could herald the covert return of the Federal Government’s previous mandatory Internet filtering scheme, which the Government abandoned in November last year. Commentators immediately called upon the Government to reveal how widespread the blocking practice was, and the news spurred journalists and activists to file Freedom of Information requests in an effort to ascertain the full extent of the situation.

In a new statement tonight, ASIC revealed that the blocks in March and April were only the latest in a series of such actions it had taken over a sustained period. “ASIC has used this power numerous times over the past 9 months,” a statement issued by the regulator said. “This is the first time we have encountered this problem. We are reviewing our processes to ensure this doesn’t happen again.”

May 16, 2013
ASIC is one of Australia’s most inept regulators, with a string of courtroom defeats marking its efforts to enforce corporate law. Despite its record of bumbling, last year ASIC used the Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security’s inquiry into data retention to demand an expansion of its power to intercept internet and phone communications.

September 27, 2012
The Australian Securities and Investment Commission has called for sweeping powers so it can access phone call and internet data for its war on white-collar crime.

Not only does the authority want the powers to intercept the times, dates and details of telecommunications information, it also wants to access the contents of emails, social media chats and text messages.

This is more power than the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation have sought to assist the crime agencies in investigating terrorism and murder suspects.

September 28, 2012
ASIC wants open sesame on all phone, internet data

September 27, 2012
Attorney-General Nicola Roxon has specified that the data retention proposal would only see so-called ‘metadata’ collected – constituting data about senders and receivers of communications such as phone calls and emails, as well as the time sent and location, but not the actual content of communications, such as the text of emails or recordings of voice telephone calls.

However, according to a media release issued by free market thinktank the Institute of Public Affairs this afternoon, one of Australia’s key regulators wants to go further. “In evidence given to the National Security Inquiry in Sydney today, ASIC stated that the content of online communications was needed to investigate insider trading and Ponzi schemes,” wrote the IPA. The transcript of today’s proceedings is not yet available.

Such a move would dramatically increase the scope of the data retention scheme, which is already heavily opposed by a broad coalition of groups ranging from civil liberties organisations to privacy groups and even telecommunications companies and ISPs. The IPA damned ASIC’s proposed expansion of the data retention scheme, in its statement.

“The Australian Securities and Investments Commission’s push to access the personal data of all Australian web users shows exactly why the government’s proposed mandatory data retention regime should not go ahead,” said Simon Breheny, director of the Rule of Law Project at the IPA.

“The IPA predicted that power-hungry regulators would make a concerted effort to get hold of any information retained under a data retention regime. The fact that ASIC has demanded this and more before the laws have even passed is a stark warning to all Australians,” he added. “The Australian people have been told we need new mandatory data retention laws to fight terrorism. ASIC’s push to access this data, and to make it even more comprehensive, completely undermines all assurances we’ve heard from the federal government.”

“ASIC is just the latest in a fast growing list of government agencies that have demanded the use of communications data. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and Australian Customs and Border Protection Service made similar claims earlier this month,” the IPA added.

“The IPA remains unconvinced that police need these new laws. The case has not been made and studies have shown data retention to be completely ineffective in fighting crime. But the idea that any agency of government could access this data is even more frightening. The only way to ensure that doesn’t happen is to stop these laws being passed in the first place,” said Breheny.

Haha, maybe they should block GLP,

so, what were the sites? Porn? What sites would they need to block FFS?

Haha, maybe they should block GLP,

so, what were the sites? Porn? What sites would they need to block FFS?

a slew of online poker sites, YouTube links, regular gay and straight porn sites, Wikipedia entries, euthanasia sites, websites of fringe religions such as satanic sites, fetish sites, Christian sites, the website of a tour operator and even a Queensland dentist.

The Fake Stephen Conroy website at stephenconroy.com.au that Crikey mentioned on Friday lasted just two days. At 5pm AEDT Friday it was taken offline by .au Domain Administration Ltd (auDA), the industry self-regulatory body for Australian internet domains, who deleted the domain with less than three hours notice.

The site’s content, including the header “Stephen Conroy: Minister for Fascism”, is now online at stephen-conroy.com instead, where auDA has no jurisdiction — although it’s hosted in the same location.

This take down was unusually fast. “Generally, such a deregistration/removal process takes a few weeks,” reports iTWire.

“We didn’t even get a written copy of the take-down notice, it all happened so fast,” says Tim March, owner of the IT consultancy Sapia Pty Ltd, which registered the domain and one of the site’s driving forces.

Australians!

April 04, 2013
ASIS - Australia's foreign intelligence service - is arguing for an equivalent legal framework for what it calls "particularly intrusive" activities such as the use of listening devices, tracking devices and telecommunications intercepts as that currently allowed by its domestic counterpart, ASIO.

It is well documented that ASIS was conceived by Robert Menzies in 1950 and that for much of its early life ASIS was itself one of Australia's best-kept secrets.

It was not until 1977 that it was publicly acknowledged and it was only last year that an ASIS director-general, Nick Warner, made the first public address about the role and nature of Australia's foreign spy service.
[...]
In its submission to the joint parliamentary inquiry into potential reforms of national security legislation, ASIS argues the intelligence environment has changed considerably and that in the post 9/11 environment it is working much more closely with ASIO.
[...]
Cyber security has emerged as one of our biggest threats and computer-generated communicators like Skype, Twitter and Facebook were not even thought of just a few years ago, let alone back in Menzies's day.

The ASIS submission argues that in this new world, the functions of ASIS and ASIO now often intersect and overlap.

"It is in Australia's national interest that where this occurs, Australia's foreign intelligence and security services are able to interact and work seamlessly together," it said.
[...]
Simon Breheny, director of the legal rights project at the Institute of Public Affairs, describes the ASIS submission as a "grab for more power".
[...]
"We simply can't be in the situation where year on year we're piling more and more powers on to our intelligence services.

"We're giving them more and more money and were allowing them more and more to take away Australia's civil liberties, in particular our right of privacy.

Following the revelation that the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) accidentally blocked over 1,200 websites after sending a Section 313 request to Australian ISPs to block a website linked to fraud, the Australian government has defended the process and said it will work with agencies to get it right in the future.

ASIC Censorship Wholly Irresponsible and Reckless

Global eyes are watching: EFF condemns Australia’s new Internet filter

There is no list of websites blocked under Section 313. Every Federal, State and Local government department, tens of thousands of them, have the right to invoke Section 313 sanctions: and we, the Australian people, have no access to what is being blocked or why. And we have no right to appeal these shut-downs.

Actions like these and the censorship and monitoring of social media raises a very ugly spectre in Australian society, previously unheard of: that our own government sees expression of the democratic rights of its citizens as a threat.

Polliter.com itself has come under fire, and for a period of time in April our web-site was also taken down: but only by extensive coverage in the United States and reports to the Australian Federal Police did it miraculously “reappear”.