Encryption safe harbours and data breach notification laws

Data breach notification laws require organisations to notify affected persons or regulatory authorities when an unauthorised acquisition of personal data occurs. Most laws provide a safe harbour to this obligation if acquired data has been encrypted. There are three types of safe harbour: an exemption; a rebuttable presumption and factor-based analysis. We demonstrate, using three condition-based scenarios, that the broad formulation of most encryption safe harbours is based on the flawed assumption that encryption is the silver bullet for personal information protection. We then contend that reliance upon an encryption safe harbour should be dependent upon a rigorous and competent risk-based review that is required on a case-by-case basis. Finally, we recommend the use of both an encryption safe harbour and a notification trigger as our preferred choice for a data breach notification regulatory framework.

Contextualizing the tensions and weaknesses of information privacy and data breach notification laws

Data breach notification laws have detailed numerous failures relating to the protection of personal information that have blighted both corporate and governmental institutions. There are obvious parallels between data breach notification and information privacy law as they both involve the protection of personal information. However, a closer examination of both laws reveals conceptual differences that give rise to vertical tensions between each law and shared horizontal weaknesses within both laws. Tensions emanate from conflicting approaches to the implementation of information privacy law that results in different regimes and the implementation of different types of protections. Shared weaknesses arise from an overt focus on specified types of personal information which results in ‘one size fits all’ legal remedies. The author contends that a greater contextual approach which promotes the importance of social context is required and highlights the effect that contextualization could have on both laws.

The Simple Laws of Proportion

The Simple Laws of Proportion was shortlisted in the 2010 John Marsden Writing Prize for Young Australian Writers. It was subsequently published online by Express Media in December, 2010.

Carbon capture and storage laws in Australia : project facilitation or a precautionary approach?

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is considered to be an integral transitionary measure in the mitigation of the global greenhouse gas emissions from our continued use of fossil fuels. Regulatory frameworks have been developed around the world and pilot projects have been commenced. However, CCS processes are largely untested at commercial scales and there are many unknowns associated with the long terms risks from these storage projects. Governments, including Australia, are struggling to develop appropriate, yet commercially viable, regulatory approaches to manage the uncertain long term risks of CCS activities. There have been numerous CCS regimes passed at the Federal, State and Territory levels in Australia. All adopt a different approach to the delicate balance facilitating projects and managing risk. This paper will examine the relatively new onshore and offshore regimes for CCS in Australia and the legal issues arising in relation to the implementation of CCS projects. Comparisons will be made with the EU CCS Directive where appropriate.

The exemplification of governance principles within state asset management laws and policies : the case of Indonesia

Efficient state asset management is crucial for governments as they facilitate the fulfillment of their public functions, which include the provision of essential services and other public administration support. In recent times economies internationally and particularly in South east Asia, have displayed increased recognition of the importance of efficiencies across state asset management law, policies and practice. This has been exemplified by a surge in notable instances of reform in state asset management. A prominent theme in this phenomenon is the consideration of governance principles within the re-conceptualization of state asset management law and related policy, with many countries recognizing variability in the quality of asset governance and opportunities for profit as being critical factors. This issue is very current in Indonesia where a major reform process in this area has been confirmed by the establishment of a new Directorate of State Asset Management. The incumbent Director-General of State Asset Management has confirmed a re-emphasis on adherence to governance principles within applicable state asset management law and policy reform. This paper reviews aspects of the challenge of reviewing and reforming Indonesian practice within state asset management law and policy specifically related to public housing, public buildings, parklands, and vacant land. A critical issue in beginning this review is how Indonesia currently conceptualizes the notion of asset governance and how this meaning is embodied in recent changes in law and policy and importantly in options for future change. This paper discusses the potential complexities uniquely Indonesian characteristics such as decentralisation and regional autonomy regime, political history, and bureaucratic culture

The review of Australia's asylum laws and policies: a case for strengthening Parliament's role in protecting rights through post-enactment scrutiny

The central contention of this article is that there is a need for greater involvement of legislators in overseeing a systematic and rights-based scrutiny of the impact of legislation and policy. The recent operation of Australia s asylum laws and policies, in particular provides an illustration of the reforms required. Challenges to the rights of non-citizens in Australia and other jurisdictions serve as a reminder of the extent of change required before rights are firmly entrenched in the processes of government. A useful step forward would be to enhance the role of legislators in setting the criteria and agenda for post-enactment scrutiny in light of issues raised during pre-legislative scrutiny.

The conceptual and operational compatibility of data breach notification and information privacy laws

Mandatory data breach notification laws are a novel and potentially important legal instrument regarding organisational protection of personal information. These laws require organisations that have suffered a data breach involving personal information to notify those persons that may be affected, and potentially government authorities, about the breach. The Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) has proposed the creation of a mandatory data breach notification scheme, implemented via amendments to the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth). However, the conceptual differences between data breach notification law and information privacy law are such that it is questionable whether a data breach notification scheme can be solely implemented via an information privacy law. Accordingly, this thesis by publications investigated, through six journal articles, the extent to which data breach notification law was conceptually and operationally compatible with information privacy law. The assessment of compatibility began with the identification of key issues related to data breach notification law. The first article, Stakeholder Perspectives Regarding the Mandatory Notification of Australian Data Breaches started this stage of the research which concluded in the second article, The Mandatory Notification of Data Breaches: Issues Arising for Australian and EU Legal Developments (‘Mandatory Notification‘). A key issue that emerged was whether data breach notification was itself an information privacy issue. This notion guided the remaining research and focused attention towards the next stage of research, an examination of the conceptual and operational foundations of both laws. The second article, Mandatory Notification and the third article, Encryption Safe Harbours and Data Breach Notification Laws did so from the perspective of data breach notification law. The fourth article, The Conceptual Basis of Personal Information in Australian Privacy Law and the fifth article, Privacy Invasive Geo-Mashups: Privacy 2.0 and the Limits of First Generation Information Privacy Laws did so for information privacy law. The final article, Contextualizing the Tensions and Weaknesses of Information Privacy and Data Breach Notification Laws synthesised previous research findings within the framework of contextualisation, principally developed by Nissenbaum. The examination of conceptual and operational foundations revealed tensions between both laws and shared weaknesses within both laws. First, the distinction between sectoral and comprehensive information privacy legal regimes was important as it shaped the development of US data breach notification laws and their subsequent implementable scope in other jurisdictions. Second, the sectoral versus comprehensive distinction produced different emphases in relation to data breach notification thus leading to different forms of remedy. The prime example is the distinction between market-based initiatives found in US data breach notification laws compared to rights-based protections found in the EU and Australia. Third, both laws are predicated on the regulation of personal information exchange processes even though both laws regulate this process from different perspectives, namely, a context independent or context dependent approach. Fourth, both laws have limited notions of harm that is further constrained by restrictive accountability frameworks. The findings of the research suggest that data breach notification is more compatible with information privacy law in some respects than others. Apparent compatibilities clearly exist as both laws have an interest in the protection of personal information. However, this thesis revealed that ostensible similarities are founded on some significant differences. Data breach notification law is either a comprehensive facet to a sectoral approach or a sectoral adjunct to a comprehensive regime. However, whilst there are fundamental differences between both laws they are not so great to make them incompatible with each other. The similarities between both laws are sufficient to forge compatibilities but it is likely that the distinctions between them will produce anomalies particularly if both laws are applied from a perspective that negates contextualisation.

Exploring the contested role of mandatory reporting laws in the identification of severe child abuse and neglect

Significant numbers of children are severely abused and neglected by parents and caregivers. Infants and very young children are the most vulnerable and are unable to seek help. To identify these situations and enable child protection and the provision of appropriate assistance, many jurisdictions have enacted ‘mandatory reporting laws’ requiring designated professionals such as doctors, nurses, police and teachers to report suspected cases of severe child abuse and neglect. Other jurisdictions have not adopted this legislative approach, at least partly motivated by a concern that the laws produce dramatic increases in unwarranted reports, which, it is argued, lead to investigations which infringe on people’s privacy, cause trauma to innocent parents and families, and divert scarce government resources from deserving cases. The primary purpose of this paper is to explore the extent to which opposition to mandatory reporting laws is valid based on the claim that the laws produce ‘overreporting’. The first part of this paper revisits the original mandatory reporting laws, discusses their development into various current forms, explains their relationship with policy and common law reporting obligations, and situates them in the context of their place in modern child protection systems. This part of the paper shows that in general, contemporary reporting laws have expanded far beyond their original conceptualisation, but that there is also now a deeper understanding of the nature, incidence, timing and effects of different types of severe maltreatment, an awareness that the real incidence of maltreatment is far higher than that officially recorded, and that there is strong evidence showing the majority of identified cases of severe maltreatment are the result of reports by mandated reporters. The second part of this paper discusses the apparent effect of mandatory reporting laws on ‘overreporting’ by referring to Australian government data about reporting patterns and outcomes, with a particular focus on New South Wales. It will be seen that raw descriptive data about report numbers and outcomes appear to show that reporting laws produce both desirable consequences (identification of severe cases) and problematic consequences (increased numbers of unsubstantiated reports). Yet, to explore the extent to which the data supports the overreporting claim, and because numbers of unsubstantiated reports alone cannot demonstrate overreporting, this part of the paper asks further questions of the data. Who makes reports, about which maltreatment types, and what are the outcomes of those reports? What is the nature of these reports; for example, to what extent are multiple numbers of reports made about the same child? What meaning can be attached to an ‘unsubstantiated’ report, and can such reports be used to show flaws in reporting effectiveness and problems in reporting laws? It will be suggested that available evidence from Australia is not sufficiently detailed or strong to demonstrate the overreporting claim. However, it is also apparent that, whether adopting an approach based on public health and or other principles, much better evidence about reporting needs to be collected and analyzed. As well, more nuanced research needs to be conducted to identify what can reasonably be said to constitute ‘overreports’, and efforts must be made to minimize unsatisfactory reporting practice, informed by the relevant jurisdiction’s context and aims. It is also concluded that, depending on the jurisdiction, the available data may provide useful indicators of positive, negative and unanticipated effects of specific components of the laws, and of the strengths, weaknesses and needs of the child protection system.

An exploration of affine group laws for elliptic curves

Several forms of elliptic curves are suggested for an efficient implementation of Elliptic Curve Cryptography. However, a complete description of the group law has not appeared in the literature for most popular forms. This paper presents group law in affine coordinates for three forms of elliptic curves. With the existence of the proposed affine group laws, stating the projective group law for each form becomes trivial. This work also describes an automated framework for studying elliptic curve group law, which is applied internally when preparing this work.

Surrogacy laws in Queensland: one step forward and two steps back?

This short article summarises some of the proposed reforms to surrogacy laws in Queensland, suggested by the Liberal National Party in 2012. The paper outlines some of the main objections that could be voiced in response to the proposed changes to the law.

Australian laws and policies on child neglect

This chapter describes the features of different Australian State and Territory laws and policies about child neglect. It makes observations about three major domains of law and policy: laws about child neglect to enable protection of children who are suffering severe neglect (child protection laws); laws and policies about the provision of services for children and their families when experiencing neglect (support-oriented laws and policies); and criminal laws about child neglect.

The exemplification of governance principles within state asset management laws and policies : the case of Indonesia

This chapter reviews aspects of the challenge of reviewing and reforming Indonesian practice within state asset management law and policy specifically related to public housing, public buildings, parklands, and vacant land. A critical issue in beginning this review is how Indonesia currently conceptualizes the notion of asset governance and how this meaning is embodied in recent changes in law and policy and importantly in options for future change. This chapter discusses the potential complexities uniquely Indonesian characteristics such as decentralisation and regional autonomy regime, political history, and bureaucratic culture.