The Department of Home Affairs says it would take “considerable time and resources” for it to determine how many agencies across Australia’s three tiers of government have accessed metadata held under the nation’s data retention laws.
Responding to Questions on Notice, Home Affairs pointed out another of the loopholes that gives agencies, not on the list of 21 enforcement agencies, the ability to access metadata.
“Section 280(1)(b) of the Telecommunications Act 1997 creates an exemption to the general prohibition against the disclosure of metadata for Commonwealth, state, or territory entities that are not enforcement agencies,” Home Affairs said.
“The authorities that can utilise this exemption are not specified.”
Agencies that have the power to order the disclosure of information could force the issue with a court order or notice to produce powers, the department said.
“Listing all Commonwealth, State, and Territory agencies with this existing lawful authority would take considerable time and resources. Examples include tax authorities and corrective services,” it said.
As ZDNet reported nearly three years ago, 61 agencies that previously had access to metadata looked to be added as declared enforcement agencies, which would give them warrantless access.
In June 2017, it was revealed the Attorney-General’s Department (AGD) had been advising agencies and departments to attempt to access metadata through other means.
“On advice from the Attorney-General’s Department, the department has considered other methods of obtaining metadata using statutory coercive powers under portfolio legislation, and by engaging the Australian Federal Police (AFP) to obtain metadata,” the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources wrote a letter dated June 10, 2016, and published on RightToKnow.
“The department has received preliminary legal advice as to the merits of using coercive powers, which suggests that the approach is problematic due to the construction of portfolio legislation.
“Advice received from the AFP indicates that it does not have the resourcing, compliance, or risk considerations to obtain metadata on behalf of other agencies, including the department.”
Last month, the Communications Alliance detailed a list of agencies that tried to access telco metadata following the introduction of Australia’s metadata retention regime.
The industry group pointed out that a request for metadata does not mean data was disclosed. It was not possible to accurately compile how many requests and disclosures were made.
“We have seen, for example, one carrier that made 132 disclosures in response to 114 requests over a 12-month period, while some other carriers have experienced smaller volumes over similar periods,” it said.
Free PDF: Australia’s encryption laws: An insider’s guide
“Determining volumes is further complicated by the fact that while responses to some requests are derived from the mandatory data retention store, some requests can also be met by interrogating business systems or databases that hold similar or identical information for commercial use.”
The list contained four local councils, Centrelink, and the Victorian Institute of Teaching.
Comms Alliance added that its list might not be complete.
In March 2017, AGD said it had no issue with the ability of government agencies to make demands on telco data outside of the scope of Australia’s data retention laws.
“There have long been provisions in the Telecommunications Act 1997 allowing records, including telecommunications data, to be disclosed where required or authorised by law,” a spokesperson for AGD told ZDNet at the time.
“These powers are distinct from the data retention regime set out under the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979.”
In its response to ZDNet, AGD did not say it would look to prevent agencies from accessing metadata by other means.
Australia’s data retention regime came into being after it was supported by both major parties in Parliament.
Speaking in June 2016, then Shadow Communications Minister Jason Clare said Labor helped “fix” the government’s data retention legislation.
“The changes we forced the government to make mean tighter rules, and for the first time real oversight over the use and misuse of this data,” Clare said.
Adventist Risk Management Data Protection Infrastructure
Companies always want to enhance their ability to quickly address pressing business needs. Toward that end, they look for new ways to make their IT infrastructures more efficient—and more cost effective. Today, those pressing needs often center around data protection and regulatory compliance, which was certainly the case for Adventist Risk Management. What they wanted was an end-to-end, best-in-class solution to meet their needs. After trying several others, they found the perfect combination with HYCU and Nutanix, which provided:
- Ease of deployment
- Outstanding ROI
- Overall TCO improvement
Nutanix Cloud Platform provides a software-defined hyperconverged infrastructure, while HYCU offers purpose-built backup and recovery for Nutanix. Compared to the previous traditional infrastructure and data protection solutions in use at Adventist Risk Management, Nutanix and HYCU simplified processes, speeding day-to-day operations up to 75%. Now, migration and update activities typically scheduled for weekends can be performed during working hours and help to increase IT staff and management quality of life. HYCU further increased savings by providing faster and more frequent points of recovery as well as better DR Recovery Point Objective (RPO) and Recovery Time Objective (RTO) by increasing the ability to do daily backups from one to four per day.
Furthermore, the recent adoption of Nutanix Objects, which provides secure and performant S3 storage capabilities, enhanced the infrastructure by:
- Improving overall performance for backups
- Adding security against potential ransomware attacks
- Replacing components difficult to manage and support
In the end, Nutanix and HYCU enabled their customer to save money, improve the existing environment, and, above all, meet regulatory compliance requirements without any struggle.
Secure Insight: GigaOm Partners with the CISO Series
Don’t look now, but GigaOm, the analyst firm that enables smart businesses to future-proof their decisions, is forging new partnerships to extend its reach and better inform busy IT decision makers. On Thursday, the company announced it was teaming with the CISO Series to share content and better support the community of chief information security officers, security practitioners, and security vendors.
“The CISO Series is one we have admired for a while because they have a very similar aim: They help security professionals become more knowledgeable and understand how their roles are changing,” said Ben Book, GigaOm founder and CEO. “We saw a clear common interest and are delighted to be working together.”
The CISO Series brand has built a formidable reputation through its podcasts, blogs, video chats, and live events for the security community. It has added the extremely popular CyberSecurity Headlines podcast to its stable this year, which joins the CISO/Security Vendor Relationship and Defense in Depth podcasts. Every Friday at 10am Pacific Time, the CISO Series hosts its highly engaging and fun weekly live CISO Series Video Chat, which viewers can register for here.
The channel partnership connects two of the strongest, fastest-growing brands in enterprise IT content production. The agreement enables the CISO Series to share exclusive GigaOm reports with its audience ahead of publication, while GigaOm is able to share insights from the CISO Series’ various publications through its social channels and newsletters. The CISO Series joins other media firms, such as The Register and SDXCentral, as official GigaOm Channel Partners.
“We are delighted to be working with GigaOm because we’re not only both addressing the same audience, but we’re also both trying to bring education and understanding to both the security vendor and practitioner communities,” said David Spark, managing editor and executive producer at the CISO Series. “GigaOm is providing some excellent reports that we’re leaning on for our discussions and reporting across all of our shows.”
Spark continued: “We are always tweaking our programming to bring the best and most up-to-date resources and we’re really impressed with both the volume and quality GigaOm is delivering. Not only are we impressed with their editorial work, but we also appreciate their business branding. It’s something we felt comfortable about aligning with the CISO Series brand as well.”
Check out the CISO Series schedule at http://crowdcast.io/cisoseries, or visit cisoseries.com for more information about the CISO Series and its weekly Video Chats.
Key Criteria for Evaluating Vulnerability Management Tools
Vulnerability management tools scan your IT estate to help identify and mitigate security risks and weaknesses. These tools can facilitate the development of a more comprehensive vulnerability management program. Leveraging people, processes, and technologies, successful initiatives effectively identify, classify, prioritize, and remediate security threats.
A security vulnerability is a weakness that can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability (CIA) of information. Attackers are constantly looking to exploit defects in software code or insecure configurations. Vulnerabilities can exist anywhere in the software stack, from web applications and databases to infrastructure components such as load balancers, firewalls, machine and container images, operating systems, and libraries. This includes code used in the CI/CD pipeline as well as the infrastructure-as-code (IAC) that defines the compute, network, and storage infrastructure.
Recent cybersecurity events have exposed widespread vulnerabilities involving the exploitation of zero-day malware and unknown weaknesses. Threat actors continually discover new exploitation tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) to take advantage of weaknesses throughout integrated systems. Moreover, identifying breach paths is increasingly complicated due to the widespread adoption of ephemeral services.
Vulnerability management solutions should provide end-to-end visibility of the protect-surface by aggregating both platform and application risks in a single pane of glass, while leveraging prioritized remediation based on business risk and threat context for efficiency. Containerized workloads deployed via DevOps pipelines have unique security requirements that demand a fully integrated vulnerability assessment to be automated into cloud platform services running containerized workloads.
The path to a mature security posture starts with the ability to identify vulnerabilities in software code, third-party libraries, and at runtime. In addition, the cloud platform used to host your applications should be scanned for misconfigurations. This requires the use of policy configuration baselines, benchmarks, and compliance standards that apply to both the infrastructure and the code used to build it. As organizations implement security guardrails early in the software development lifecycle (SDLC), they can take advantage of cloud-native culture to ensure network and security tools are used throughout all phases of the SDLC.
This GigaOm report explores the key criteria and emerging technologies that IT decision makers should evaluate when choosing a vulnerability management solution. The key criteria report, together with the GigaOm radar report that evaluates relevant products, provides a framework to help organizations assess the solutions currently available on the market and how these tools fit with their requirements.
How to Read this Report
This GigaOm report is one of a series of documents that helps IT organizations assess competing solutions in the context of well-defined features and criteria. For a fuller understanding consider reviewing the following reports:
Key Criteria report: A detailed market sector analysis that assesses the impact that key product features and criteria have on top-line solution characteristics—such as scalability, performance, and TCO—that drive purchase decisions.
GigaOm Radar report: A forward-looking analysis that plots the relative value and progression of vendor solutions along multiple axes based on strategy and execution. The Radar report includes a breakdown of each vendor’s offering in the sector.
Vendor Profile: An in-depth vendor analysis that builds on the framework developed in the Key Criteria and Radar reports to assess a company’s engagement within a technology sector. This analysis includes forward-looking guidance around both strategy and product.
2022 Mini John Cooper Works hardtop arrives with fresher styling and interior updates
The 2022 Mini John Cooper Works hardtop is arriving with a mild facelift and a host of interior upgrades. Mini...
The looming software kill-switch lurking in aging PlayStation hardware
Enlarge / These consoles could eventually be large paperweights if Sony doesn’t fix a problem looming in their firmware. Unless...
Bluetti EB70 700W Portable Power Station – power in a compact package
It shouldn’t be surprising to see more and more portable power stations, those big blocks of battery with multiple outlets,...
Galaxy Z Fold 3 S Pen won’t have a dedicated slot
Samsung will be unveiling its most powerful Galaxy in two weeks but that won’t be a smartphone as some might...
Firefox 88 disables FTP support, no new addons for Android
Despite all the magic that web apps and web browsers are able to do these days, much of the Web...
Social1 year ago
CrashPlan for Small Business Review
Gadgets3 years ago
A fictional Facebook Portal videochat with Mark Zuckerberg – TechCrunch
Mobile2 years ago
Memory raises $5M to bring AI to time tracking – TechCrunch
Social2 years ago
iPhone XS priciest yet in South Korea
Cars2 years ago
What’s the best cloud storage for you?
Security2 years ago
Google latest cloud to be Australian government certified
Social2 years ago
Apple’s new iPad Pro aims to keep enterprise momentum
Cars2 years ago
SK Telecom and Samsung to collaborate on 5G for enterprise