Information Security News mailing list archives

Kiwi Tech Laws Taking Hard Turn


From: William Knowles <wk () C4I ORG>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 15:27:22 -0600

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,40230,00.html

by Kim Griggs
11:00 a.m. Nov. 16, 2000 PST


WELLINGTON, New Zealand -- It was supposed to be an easy bit of
legislation to reflect the advance of new technologies.

But a soft approach to changes to computer hacking laws in New Zealand
has failed. Now the proposed changes are under intense scrutiny

Researcher Nicky Hager, author of the 1996 book Secret Power about the
existence of the Echelon surveillance network, argued in New Zealand's
Sunday Star Times newspaper that planned extensions to New Zealand
law, when taken together, have the same effect as Britain's
controversial Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.

And Hager says the proposed laws have their genesis in an FBI-led
meeting on surveillance laws in 1993 that New Zealand representatives
attended.

The first proposed change is an amendment to New Zealand's Crimes Act,
which would make it illegal to access a computer system without
authorization. But the amendment would exempt New Zealand's law
enforcement and security agencies, working with appropriate authority.

This amendment also extends the definition of "private communication"
to include not only oral communication but also e-mail, faxes, and
message pagers. The second phase of the changes will be amendments to
the Telecommunications Act, expected to go before parliament next
month. That proposal would require telecommunications network
operators to ensure their networks are capable of being intercepted.

The minister sponsoring both pieces of legislation, Paul Swain,
introduced into New Zealand's parliament the amendment that would
outlaw hacking. "We need this legislation to protect the privacy of
law abiding New Zealand citizens," he said Thursday. "Just as it is
not cool or clever for a criminal to break into someone's home or
workplace, it is not cool or clever to break into some one's
computer."

And he said the exemptions for law enforcement and security agencies
were necessary so that all forms of private communication were on the
same footing as phone calls. "We need to give the police and security
agencies powers to go after criminals who are using new technology to
further their criminal activity," Swain told parliament.

On Thursday, Swain was merely asking that this legislation be
forwarded to a parliamentary committee.

But even though a majority voted for the bill to go to the select
committee, there is no chance it will pass without debate.

One group of lawmakers, the parliamentary Green Party, wouldn't even
support the legislation's referral to a committee. Green MP Keith
Locke says his party sees the anti-hacking legislation "as a fig leaf
to cover the main purpose of the bill: to allow snooping by the
security agencies and the police."

Locke says the Green Party would support the anti-hacking legislation,
but not any increase in interception powers for state agencies. "If
overseas experience is anything to go by, these systems provide for
large-scale interception, completely different from anything that the
police have done in the past, in terms of postal and telephone
surveillance. We see these new powers as being much more open to
abuse," Locke said.

Hager's article suggests the new legislation would allow a permanent
"interception interface" to be built into every Internet and phone
company's system, which could be remotely controlled by intelligence
and police agencies.

The major opposition party, the National Party, latched onto this.
"What I am concerned about," National's Tony Ryall said, "is the
government having a permanent line into every Internet service
provider in this country. And the reason why I am concerned about that
is that this government can offer no guarantee that those lines will
only be used for authorized and warranted purposes, because privacy is
at stake."

New Zealand's Act Party also has reservations about the law. Stephen
Franks, the party's spokesman on justice and commerce, is adamant that
he'd want to ensure that the government sticks to its proposals to
leave traditional safeguards for interception warrants in place. "They
shouldn't be allowed to do routine monitoring of traffic," Franks
says.

Both Act and the Greens would be happier if New Zealand's parliament
could consider the changes to the Telecommunications Act alongside the
hacking laws. Fewer details on the amendment to the Telecommunications
Act are known. Although the legislation has been in the pipeline for a
while, it won't be made public until it goes before parliament next
month.

According to David King, manager of telecommunications policy at the
Ministry of Economic Development, the proposed changes to the
Telecommunications Act are also a result of advances in technology.
The police are unable to intercept calls on digital mobile networks
and have pushed for the changes to require network operators to make
their networks and any encrypted messages capable of interception.

Hager has argued this might mean new provisions to force people to
hand over passwords and encryption keys. The Act Party, Stephen Franks
says, will look closely at anything that forces people to facilitate
interception. "While there should be no reason that law enforcement
agencies cant try and overhear conversations or eavesdrop," he says,
"nor should there be a law that says people aren't allowed to
whisper."

The man who looks out for New Zealanders' privacy, New Zealand's
independent Privacy Commissioner Bruce Slane, has serious concerns
about the powers the proposed legislation could give police.

"I'm concerned that proposal should not establish search warrants as
legal authority for remote access to computers ... a sort of 'police
hacking' provision," says Slane. "I consider that the exception should
be limited to having access to computers on premises which the police
have entered pursuant to a search warrant."

"If the exemption were to enable the police to have access without
ever having entered the premises, it would be an entirely new
surreptitious means of carrying out investigations which would carry
worrying privacy and accountability issues," Slane said.

A new set of safeguards to govern the practice would need to be
developed, he added.

Tim McBride, chair of the Auckland Council of Civil Liberties, says
the government needs to produce a comprehensive assessment of the
impact on privacy of the proposed changes in the law in order to aid
informed debate. "In terms of anything that has the potential to
violate or infringe aspects of individual privacy, we put a heavy onus
on the proponents to justify it," McBride said.

The Internet Society of New Zealand is keen to discuss the issues the
proposed legislation has raised and plans to hold a forum early next
year to do it. The society supports the proposed legislation that
would make hacking illegal, according to Frank March, the secretary of
ISOCNZ.

"The ISOCNZ people have been concerned for a long time about the
absence of any criminal sanction for computer crime, and particularly
for hacking," March said.

But ISOCNZ believes other proposed changes need discussing. There is,
for example, a huge difference between asking an Internet service
provider to hand over encryption keys and asking an individual to do
that. "Thats the sort of thing that has to be discussed around," March
said.

Nicky Hager's article has ensured that passage of the legislation will
not be a mere formality. The Law and Order Committee, which must
consider the legislation, has until the end of May 2001 to scrutinize
the amendments to the Crimes Act.

Hager's article had suggested that the legislation would be pushed
through the committee stage in just a few weeks. Rank-and-file Labor
members, annoyed at a lack of consultation, helped ensure this
legislation did not face a truncated committee process.

Nonetheless, Hager remains skeptical about the scrutiny. "The trouble
is that when the government has committed itself, internally before
the issues are even made public it's much harder to make them change
their minds. However, I don't think they have appreciated at all how
big the public reaction may be," Hager said.

But for the minister Paul Swain, the choice is clear. "If New Zealand
is to be successful in the new economy, we have to have an environment
where our law-abiding businesses and consumers can conduct their
business with confidence that their privacy is being protected."


*==============================================================*
"Communications without intelligence is noise;  Intelligence
without communications is irrelevant." Gen Alfred. M. Gray, USMC
================================================================
C4I.org - Computer Security, & Intelligence - http://www.c4i.org
*==============================================================*

ISN is hosted by SecurityFocus.com
---
To unsubscribe email LISTSERV () SecurityFocus com with a message body of
"SIGNOFF ISN".


Current thread: