[LINK] Australian Crime Commission: Only Criminals Use Encrypted Communications

Kim Holburn kim at holburn.net
Thu May 13 08:54:53 AEST 2021


https://www.zdnet.com/article/acic-believes-theres-no-legitimate-reason-to-use-an-encrypted-communication-platform/

>
>   ACIC believes there's no legitimate reason to use an encrypted communication platform
>
> The Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission has said an encrypted communication platform is not something a law-abiding member 
> of the community would use.
>
> By Asha Barbaschow <https://www.zdnet.com/meet-the-team/au/asha-barbaschow/> | May 6, 2021 -- 06:33 GMT (16:33 AEST) | Topic: 
> Security <https://www.zdnet.com/topic/security/>
>
> The Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (ACIC) believes there is no legitimate reason for a law-abiding member of the 
> community to own or use an encrypted communication platform.
>
> "These platforms are used almost exclusively by SOC [serious and organised crime] groups and are developed specifically to obscure 
> the identities of the involved criminal entities and enable avoidance of detection by law enforcement," the ACIC declared. "They 
> enable the user to communicate within closed networks to facilitate highly sophisticated criminal activity".
>
> *Consistency, at least: Cops are the only ones being lawful on the dark web, AFP declares 
> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/cops-are-the-only-ones-being-lawful-on-the-dark-web-afp-declares/>*
>
> The comments were made in a submission 
> <https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=0cfd0e34-ae76-42e4-9438-d8218c70b760&subId=706935> [PDF] to the Parliamentary Joint 
> Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) as part of its inquiry into the /Surveillance Legislation Amendment (Identify and 
> Disrupt) Bill 2020/.
>
> It told the committee it intends to use the powers extended to the ACIC under the Bill to focus efforts on understanding and 
> gathering intelligence on SOC groups who are using encrypted communication platforms to conceal their criminal activities.
>
> The Bill, if passed, would hand the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and ACIC three new computer warrants for dealing with online 
> crime.
>
> The first of the warrants is a data disruption one; the second is a network activity warrant; and the third is an account takeover 
> warrant.
>
> The ACIC said the Bill would allow it, through the collection, assessment, and dissemination of criminal intelligence and 
> information, to inform national strategies to address transnational serious and organised crime.
>
> "To deliver on this purpose, the powers and capabilities of the ACIC must keep pace with technological trends and emerging threats 
> to ensure the agency is able to adequately tackle serious cyber-enabled crime and sophisticated criminal groups using encrypted 
> platforms," it said.
>
> "The agency must be enabled to support law enforcement outcomes to protect Australians against the most sophisticated and 
> high-threat actors, who increasingly utilise advanced communications technologies to mask their criminal activities."
>
> *Elsewhere: ACIC running into jurisdictional data troubles with new national firearms database 
> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/acic-running-into-jurisdictional-data-troubles-with-new-national-firearms-database/>*
>
> According to the ACIC, the disruption, intelligence collection, and account takeover powers contained within the Bill complement 
> the agency's existing powers by providing new avenues to gather information and respond to serious crime occurring online and to 
> criminals using dedicated encrypted communication platforms.
>
> "The measures in the Bill are grounded in the principle that the powers granted by Parliament to the agencies charged with 
> enforcing the criminal law should not be eroded by advances in technology," it wrote. "The Bill is designed to provide the ACIC 
> and AFP with the ability to protect the Australian community from harms online in the same way they protect Australians in the 
> physical world."
>
> The ACIC believes the Bill addresses gaps in current electronic surveillance powers.
>
> Network activity warrants provided by the Bill will "immediately transform the ACIC's ability to discover and understand serious 
> criminal groups using the Dark Web and encrypted communication platforms to undertake and facilitate serious crimes".
>
> "Currently, while the ACIC might be able to detect criminal behaviour on a hidden website or computer network, we cannot identify 
> all the individuals participating in the criminal behaviour," it explained. "For this reason, we require the ability to target and 
> infiltrate the network, or class of computers, in which the crime is occurring so the members of the criminal group can be 
> identified and the full nature and extent of the criminality can be detected through the collection of intelligence."
>
> Data disruption warrants, meanwhile, would enable the ACIC to interfere with the data held on online criminal networks or devices, 
> in order to frustrate the commissioning of serious criminal offences.
>
> "This will be particularly powerful in the context of disrupting criminal activity which is largely occurring online," it wrote.
>
> Lastly, account takeover warrants, it said, would allow the agency to take control of an online account in conjunction with other 
> investigatory powers, labelling it an "efficient method for agencies to infiltrate online criminal networks".
>
> "This will play a crucial role in uncovering the identities of otherwise anonymous criminals, as well as gathering evidence of the 
> initiation and commissioning of serious offences online, including on the Dark Web and where encrypted communication platforms are 
> in use," it said.
>

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210509/10235546763/australian-crime-commission-only-criminals-use-encrypted-communications.shtml

>
>   Australian Crime Commission: Only Criminals Use Encrypted Communications
>
> <https://www.techdirt.com/search.php?tid=quotes&search=Search>
>
> Say That Again <https://www.techdirt.com/search.php?tid=quotes&search=Search>
>
>
>       from the /stupefying-is-the-new-anti-encryption-normal/ dept
>
> Tue, May 11th 2021 10:44am — Tim Cushing <https://www.techdirt.com/user/capitalisliontamer>
>
> Well, someone finally said the quiet part loud: some government officials actually believe the only people who need, want, or use 
> encryption are criminals. Here's Asha Barbaschow with the "encryption is for criminals" news at ZDNet 
> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/acic-believes-theres-no-legitimate-reason-to-use-an-encrypted-communication-platform/>.
>
>     /The Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (ACIC) believes there is no legitimate reason for a law-abiding member of the
>     community to own or use an encrypted communication platform./
>
>     /"These platforms are used almost exclusively by SOC [serious and organised crime] groups and are developed specifically to
>     obscure the identities of the involved criminal entities and enable avoidance of detection by law enforcement," the ACIC
>     declared. "They enable the user to communicate within closed networks to facilitate highly sophisticated criminal activity"/.
>
> This is part of the ACIC's comments <https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20701427/sub-23-acic.pdf> [PDF] on proposed 
> surveillance legislation that would grant Australian law enforcement new powers to disrupt data transmissions, surveil network 
> activity, and engage in takeovers of targeted accounts. Here's the money shot:
>
>     */ACIC observation shows there is no legitimate reason for a law-abiding member of the community to own or use an encrypted
>     communication platform./*
>
> Well... holy shit. That's a take.
>
> The ACIC believes today's criminals are too powerful and law enforcement too poorly-equipped. According to the Commission, 
> criminals are winning the tech war.
>
>     /The encryption and anonymisation that underpins the Dark Web and encrypted communications has challenged existing powers and
>     allowed serious and organised crime (SOC) groups and individuals to more effectively conceal their criminal activity. In
>     particular, the networks established on the Dark Web and via encrypted communications have provided criminals with platforms
>     to easily and more confidently communicate anonymously about, and obfuscate, their serious criminal activities/.
>
> And yet, criminals continue to be prosecuted 
> <https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20191017/20492843214/dojs-latest-child-porn-site-takedown-shows-encryption-isnt-really-stopping-feds-fighting-child-porn.shtml> 
> and criminal activities disrupted 
> <https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190507/16061142159/fbi-half-world-bust-operators-site-that-made-dark-web-searchable.shtml>. 
> But the successes aren't enough. The Commission apparently won't be happy until all criminal activity ceases.
>
>     /The electronic surveillance powers currently available to the ACIC, while relied upon for investigating many aspects of
>     criminal behaviour online and criminal use of encrypted communications, *are not sophisticated enough to identify and disrupt
>     the totality of activities SOC entities are undertaking* through the use of modern anonymising technologies to conceal their
>     identities, their associate’s identities and the illegal activities being undertaken by the network of individuals./
>
> I've got bad news for law enforcement and the Commission: no matter what steps are taken and how many innocent people are 
> victimized by expansions of government power, it will still be impossible to "disrupt the totality" of illegal activity. 
> Sophisticated criminal organizations engaged in crime long before encryption was readily available and found creative ways to hide 
> their misdeeds from investigators. It's not going to change just because no one -- not even innocent people who would like to 
> protect their data and personal information from criminals -- has access to encryption.
>
> The ACIC's broad declaration that no one has a "legitimate reason" to utilize encrypted communication platforms is at odds with 
> the paragraph directly preceding this truly baffling assertion.
>
>     /Encryption and anonymising technologies have a valuable role in protecting the privacy and data of Australians. As such, the
>     ACIC notes new powers cannot be exclusively focused on subverting encryption and anonymising technologies./
>
> I'm not sure how you reconcile these two statements. And apparently the ACIC doesn't know either, because it simply claims no 
> non-criminal would need encrypted communications and immediately moves on to the discussion of the new warrant powers being proposed.
>
> This is a horrifyingly ignorant claim for a government commission to make. The worst aspect is that someone with the power to 
> write laws is going to believe the ACIC. Those who already believe (without evidence) that encrypted communications are only used 
> by criminals are going to accept this assertion as evidence, even if the ACIC can't even be bothered to back up its own claim with 
> any data or research. "Based on observation" is meaningless if the Crime Commission does nothing but observe criminal activity. 
> This is stupid. And it would be laughable if it weren't so dangerous.
>

-- 
Kim Holburn
IT Network & Security Consultant
+61 404072753
mailto:kim at holburn.net  aim://kimholburn
skype://kholburn - PGP Public Key on request




More information about the Link mailing list