New Zealand Spy Agency To Vet Network Builds, Provider Staff
ggm at algebras.org
Tue May 13 14:09:35 UTC 2014
I can't speak to that Paul. I attended NZNOG as a guest, I'm from
Australia. Others will have to say how the NZ industry is approaching this,
I'd get it wrong if I tried!
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Paul Ferguson <fergdawgster at mykolab.com>wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> So is there just reluctant acceptance of this law, or is there
> push-back and plans to repeal, or...?
> I guess my question is something along the lines of "Are people just
> reluctantly accepting that government surveillance & micromanagement
> of private businesses/networks is a fact of life?"
> I am purposefully making a distinction here between the U.S. CALEA 
> and NSLs  and a NZ spy agency getting "...to decide on network
> equipment procurement and design decisions".
> The latter seems like a bit of an overreach?
> - - ferg
>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_security_letter
> On 5/13/2014 6:40 AM, George Michaelson wrote:
> > It got a pretty firefight discussion at the NZNOG. None of the ISPs
> > feel comfortable with it, but in avoiding a shoot-the-messenger
> > syndrome they tried to give good feedback to the reps from GCSB who
> > came to talk. Basically, a lot of post-act variations are expected
> > to clarify what changes do and do not have to be notified.
> > There was a lot of bitter humour about calling them at 3am to
> > report BGP failures and ask permission to remediate.
> > On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Paul Ferguson
> > <fergdawgster at mykolab.com <mailto:fergdawgster at mykolab.com>>
> > wrote:
> > I realize that New Zealand is *not* in North America (hence
> > NANOG), but I figure that some global providers might be interested
> > here.
> > This sounds rather... dire (probably not the right word).
> > "The new Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security)
> > Act of 2013 is in effect in New Zealand and brings in several
> > drastic changes for ISPs, telcos and service providers. One of the
> > country's spy agencies, the GCSB, gets to decide on network
> > equipment procurement and design decisions (PDF), plus operators
> > have to register with the police and obtain security clearance for
> > some staff. Somewhat illogically, the NZ government pushed through
> > the law combining mandated communications interception capabilities
> > for law enforcement, with undefined network security requirements
> > as decided by the GCSB. All network operators are subject to the
> > new law, including local providers as well as the likes of
> > Facebook, Google, Microsoft, who have opposed it, saying the new
> > statutes clash with overseas privacy legislation."
> > FYI,
> > - ferg
> - --
> Paul Ferguson
> VP Threat Intelligence, IID
> PGP Public Key ID: 0x54DC85B2
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the NANOG