Police to have keener listening powers in cyberspace

Legislative changes in the pipeline will move law enforcement into the internet age, reports PETER GRIFFIN.

Police have been able to tap phones for years but law changes now wending their way through the legislative process will give them access to electronic information on a much wider scale.

The final report of the Crimes Amendment Bill No 6, now before the law and order select committee, has been delayed another two months.

This bill and proposed amendments to the Telecommunications Act are expected to give police the interception powers denied them by legislation passed before the birth of the internet.

The issue of what powers the Government has to intercept communications is the subject of fresh debate internationally, following the release of a European Union report on the Echelon intelligence network, the global system that includes New Zealand's Waihopai listening station.

Government plans to make telecommunications networks more easily interceptable by police could involve extending the Telecommunications Act to cover e-mail and other "electronic messaging services."

Papers released last week by the Ministry for Economic Development recommend that the act be amended to allow police scrutiny of e-mail carried across telecommunications networks.

Such a move would fix a loophole in the act, which was drawn up in 1987, that allows for only voice messages to be intercepted by the authorities.

The Government has signalled its willingness to pick up the tab for telecommunications companies making their networks interception compatible, but new entrants to the market will be responsible for making the changes at their own cost.

Telecom has already modified its digital network to allow police easier access.

Police pay the company directly for each interception made, with the cost ranging from "hundreds to many thousands of dollars."

The country's other major cellphone network operator, Vodafone, has yet to modify its 021 service, a situation that does not sit well with police and the Security Intelligence Service.

In 1998 the company, then known as BellSouth, put the cost of modifying its network at between $200,000 and $1.1 million, with ongoing costs of $200,000 to $600,000 a year.

Vodafone spokeswoman Alison Sykora said the company was going ahead with modifications, but she would not be drawn on how much these will cost.

"Vodafone has agreed to implement the police's required solution on our network.

"The issue of the costs involved is a police issue as the lawful interception system will belong to the police," she said.

Otago University computer security expert Dr Hank Wolfe said the network modifications were not likely to encroach on existing privacy laws as police would still need to seek a warrant to gain access to a telecommunications network.

"It may involve the installation of hardware or software.

"It's not altering their networks, it's just putting a process or protocol in place. The police are just looking for a shortcut."

Dr Wolfe said a more important privacy issue was the Government listening continuously to communications traffic without needing warrants to do so.

He said the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB), which monitors communications traffic from a base at Waihopai near Blenheim, already had the capabilities to monitor digital phone networks, but officially did not share its information with police.

The Telecommunications Act changes are some way off, with a paper probably submitted to Parliament by September to kick off the legislative process.



The changes are unlikely to slip through unnoticed.

Privacy Commissioner Bruce Slane was rankled last December by Supplementary Order Paper No 85, a paper included in the Crimes Amendment Bill, which allows for specific amendments to the laws governing interception of private communications.

Changes that would make hacking and computer snooping illegal, except when carried out by police, the SIS or the GCSB, would also upset civil liberty groups.

The supplementary order paper extends the definition in the act of "private communication" to other forms of information such as faxes, e-mail and message pagers. The term "listening device" will also be modernised to "interception device."

The draft report by the European Union's Temporary Committee on the Echelon Interception System found that it "cannot be as extensive as some sections of the media have assumed."

The report refers to New Zealander Nicky Hagar as the first to detail the workings of Echelon in his 1996 book Secret Powers.

"Hagar points out that the interception of satellite communications represents only a small, albeit important part of the eavesdropping system, for there are also numerous facilities for monitoring microwave and cable links, although these are less well-documented and their existence is more difficult to prove," the report says.

The committee failed to produce firm evidence that the spying network had been used to gain commercial intelligence through the interception of e-mail, but it did recommend that countries, businesses and citizens use encryption software to protect themselves from the prying eyes of intelligence gathering units.

That call was quickly taken up locally by Green Party security and intelligence spokesman Keith Locke, who called for MPs to be given encryption software to keep the tentacles of Echelon out of the Beehive.

"The report shows the big downside of Waihopai in putting us offside with the European Union, at some cost to our diplomatic and trading relations," he said.

The GCSB is also in for some legislative change with the Government introducing a bill to give the bureau legal status, much like that of the SIS.

Hugh Wolfensohn, director of corporate services at the GCSB, said the bill would potentially allow the bureau to share some of its foreign intelligence with crime-fighting agencies.

"But the GCSB is a foreign intelligence organisation and has no role in relation to domestic crime."

In general, and laying aside the complicated privacy issues, an overhaul of the legislation is required as this will allow police to deal more effectively with a growing number of electronic crimes that now slip through legislative loopholes.

Martin Kleintjez, head of the Police Electronic Crimes Unit, said the Crimes Amendment Bill would give police access to channels of communication that criminals have grown comfortable using.

"At the moment it's like police only being allowed to breath-test people driving white cars while people in coloured cars get away.

"We are unable to capture evidence and bring it to the courts because we can't get our hands on it," said Mr Kleintjez.

The unit devotes most of its resources to serious crimes that have an electronic element.

Once the Crimes Amendment Bill is passed it is expected that a new wave of reported crimes relating to hacking, denial-of-service attacks and electronic fraud will stretch the unit's resources.

It is also thought that the legislative change will not necessarily be accompanied by a significant increase in resourcing from the Government.

The Electronic Crimes Unit is set to increase its staff from six to 17 and have its bases in the South Island, Wellington and Auckland strengthened, but these changes are coming at the expense of other police operations.

Mr Kleintjez: "Other areas of the police have had to tighten their belts to make this possible."

Links


NZ Police

Echelon watch


www.nzherald.co.nz/privacy

Privacy Commissioner (NZ)

Electronic Privacy Information Centre (USA)

Echelon Watch

Cyber Rights and Liberties (UK)

Anonymity on the Internet