Telstra, Vodafone at odds over data retention As the government's new national security legislation returns to the House of Representatives to be rubber-stamped, division is emerging among Australian carriers about what metadata they might consider retaining. Data retention isn't in the current tranche of legislation, but the government intends to put its metadata …
Oddly enough, this really is about service. Understanding which sites get the most distinct users over a month can only be done with some data being retained through the month, otherwise the carrier cannot differentiate between a very small number of users with very high usage or far more distinct users occasionally accessing a site.
At the moment, in most EU countries it's against the various privacy laws to use data collected for one purpose for another purpose - without explicit user consent - hence the Phorm/BT scandal many years ago. You'll be quite surprised by the lengths most telcos go to to protect privacy data. It's the government security authorities that ride rough-shod over our privacy, and also force companies like Vodafone to collude with them and then use legal means to prevent the telcos from going public.
Vodafone takes the privacy of its customer data very seriously.
(Chief Risk Officer Kate) Hughes noted that if the carrier isn't holding the customer data, “we can't inadvertently breach a customer's privacy and we're not then required to secure it”.
Not only is she too sensible to be in management at any level, she is a positive threat to modern society according to the spy agencies, Google, Facebook and other advertising agencies.
So what happened to the "just your ISP-assigned IP address will be recorded" and "we will not be tracking your web browsing history" then? eh? Anyone who doesn't believe the agencies (I'd rather not use the word 'intelligence') want it ALL is horribly misinformed.
The gameplan? Make people unsure of the gameplan up until the last moment, at which point an opposing force cannot be mobilised in time.
Australia is a relatively small market in the grand scheme of things. If they impose too many regulations and buredbsome requirements they will find services simply won't be available anymore.
I can't see companies prioritising spending a lot of money on comtoversial, precedent setting snooping infrastructure for a relatively high cost, remote market that isn't exactly core to their business.
They jump to comply with US and EU regulations because those markets are absolutely vast and fundamental to bottom line.
Australia is a little fish attempting to throw its weight around. It's just going to mean reduced choice for Australians
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
