Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


nunz

1423 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user


#144288 13-May-2014 23:41
Send private message

I'm trying to get my head around the TICSA legislation. For the average lay person like myself its a maze of befuddlement so was wondering if it is possible to find a dumbed down source of information.

E.G: I know Telecommunications Provider means network provider and according to the act network provider means some one who provides a public data network ( and I quote) 

 

public data network—

 

     

  •  

    (a)means a data network used, or intended for use, in whole or in part, by the public; and

     

     

  •  

    (b)includes, without limitation, the following facilities:

     

       

    •  

      (i)Internet access; and

       

       

    •  

      (ii)email access

       


So if I provide email access to over 4000 people do I count as a Telecommunications provider? Is it 4000 people or 4000 connections? IE there are six in my family, are we one or six?

If I provide internet services but not email services do I count as a network provider.

Does email also cover off things such as web based mail systems with no pop / smpt / imap access?

Where do message sites, private message sites etc fit into this? For example, terrorist cells used gmail by writing a message in draft format on gmail, saving ti and the recipientlogs in reads the raft email, deletes it and never lets it leave the system. Does a private message board system count in a similar fashion?

What is to stop me making the public a private network? IE a busness is easy - its private and not public but an organisation that you join, is a private organisation, but it also provides network and email capabilities - is this covered under the law?

Is Geekzone, an orgnaisation which provides email, and potentially has over 4000 members, expempt or included? Personally - either way I don't care - I'm not changing memberships but am interested - where are the grey edges and how are they covered?

Lastly, if you are not sure if you are covered or required to be covered under this legislation this month is deadline to talk to them - if my reading is correct. I know I haven't but do I need to? According to the act if I am not sure i should but imagine every it geek who provides support for businesses, runs a web hosting services, email service, voip services etc signed up - they would be swamped.






Create new topic
nunz

1423 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user


  #1043342 13-May-2014 23:45
Send private message

Other thought - If I'm a contractor or asked t bne contracted to a telecommunications provider and cant work as my secuirty clearence isn't completed, is thet a breach of my hman rights? If you apply for a tcom job do you need to be police checkd via the GCSB? Certainly the info makes it look like you might need to.

If the GCSB isn't doing the checking but NZ police are, how will they know ifI am an overseas terrorist or linked to overseas terroism without asking the GCSB, and if the GCSB is interested in protecting from overseas threats - as is their established role, why are the getting the police who have national security info to do the asking?

Hmm - legislation makes my brain hurt.


gzt

gzt
11670 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #1043346 14-May-2014 00:16
Send private message

No idea. There is a concise summary here but beware it is marked 'not the latest version' at the top: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2013/0108/5.0/whole.html

Maybe ask the people responsible for enforcing for a summary. They suggest you contact them and ask if you are required to register.

It looks like it will create a kind of 'phone book' for police/gcsb so they know who to call.

Personally I can't help finding it a little creepy, but I think the claim is that this does not change the existing requirement that a warrant (or secret gcsb type action) is required for actual interception to occur.

 
 
 
 


SaltyNZ
5475 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1043366 14-May-2014 07:08
Send private message

nunz: Other thought - If I'm a contractor or asked t bne contracted to a telecommunications provider and cant work as my secuirty clearence isn't completed, is thet a breach of my hman rights? If you apply for a tcom job do you need to be police checkd via the GCSB? Certainly the info makes it look like you might need to.

If the GCSB isn't doing the checking but NZ police are, how will they know ifI am an overseas terrorist or linked to overseas terroism without asking the GCSB, and if the GCSB is interested in protecting from overseas threats - as is their established role, why are the getting the police who have national security info to do the asking?

Hmm - legislation makes my brain hurt.



Very few people will require vetting, as we understand it so far. Probably just the people who have to deal with the spooks directly. I don't think the average contractor is going to be required to. So far it is more smoke than fire. In many ways it makes sense. Who better to advise on security than the people who know what all the bad guys are up to? (The people who actually design and run these things for a living? Well, yeah, there is that. We're not idiots. *shrug*). 

It's the potential for abuse that is of more concern. Any one of us could be required to prove we're not a bad guy and be out on our butts if we can't (because the legislation is vague enough to allow that). But on the flip side there is no reason to trust the GCSB other than that the law says we have to. They don't have to prove to us that they're not being bad guys, and they can refuse to answer any question they don't want to just by saying the magic phrase 'national security'. If anything, there's plenty of reason not to trust them - after all they're working hand in glove with people who do exactly the kind of things they're supposed to be protecting us against. Unclean hands and all that.




iPad Pro 11" + iPhone XS + 2degrees 4tw!

 

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.


Sounddude
I fix stuff!
1849 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Vocus
Lifetime subscriber

  #1043379 14-May-2014 08:33
Send private message

You don't need the security clearance to work in the industry. You only need the security clearance to discuss classified information with the GCSB. (For example if they reject your proposal, based on XY, and you want to know what XY was, and XY was classified).



dman
946 posts

Ultimate Geek


  #1062766 10-Jun-2014 17:26
Send private message

Is concerning also what kind of regulatory burden this will put on ISPs, especially the smaller ones which will take the brunt of this. 

 

 

 

"Internet service providers in New Zealand have new surveillance legislation to comply with, and it makes it more obvious that big brother is watching. Meanwhile, governments in the United States, United Kingdom, and elsewhere are working to mitigate a similar image in the wake of revelations by Edward Snowden.

 

The Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Act (TICSA) requires ISPs and other telecommunications services to register with New Zealand's police force, and disclose how many connections they provide in total, how many customers they have, and what their geographic scope is. This is meant to allow law enforcement agencies to have unhindered access to customer data.

 

Under the new law, New Zealand's Government Communications Security Bureau must also be notified of any infrastructure changes or major equipment purchases before they happen. Previously, ISPs and other telecom companies could make these decisions independently."

 

"It's a bold, and strange, step, given the international climate surrounding government surveillance right now."


 

"The new law was slammed by web giants Google, Facebook and Microsoft last year as being from the 19th century and incompatible with international privacy legislation.

 

Despite this, the New Zealand government declined to exempt overseas operators from the new law."

 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/05/14/new_zealand_is_requiring_isps_to_register_with_the_police_and_give_agencies.html




Create new topic





News »

Nanoleaf enhances lighting line with launch of Triangles and Mini Triangles
Posted 17-Oct-2020 20:18


Synology unveils DS1621+ 
Posted 17-Oct-2020 20:12


Ingram Micro introduces FootfallCam to New Zealand channel
Posted 17-Oct-2020 20:06


Dropbox adopts Virtual First working policy
Posted 17-Oct-2020 19:47


OPPO announces Reno4 Series 5G line-up in NZ
Posted 16-Oct-2020 08:52


Microsoft Highway to a Hundred expands to Asia Pacific
Posted 14-Oct-2020 09:34


Spark turns on 5G in Auckland
Posted 14-Oct-2020 09:29


AMD Launches AMD Ryzen 5000 Series Desktop Processors
Posted 9-Oct-2020 10:13


Teletrac Navman launches integrated multi-camera solution for transport and logistics industry
Posted 8-Oct-2020 10:57


Farmside hits 10,000 RBI customers
Posted 7-Oct-2020 15:32


NordVPN starts deploying colocated servers
Posted 7-Oct-2020 09:00


Google introduces Nest Wifi routers in New Zealand
Posted 7-Oct-2020 05:00


Orcon to bundle Google Nest Wifi router with new accounts
Posted 7-Oct-2020 05:00


Epay and Centrapay partner to create digital gift cards
Posted 2-Oct-2020 17:34


Inseego launches 5G MiFi M2000 mobile hotspot
Posted 2-Oct-2020 14:53









Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.