From Dataveillance to Überveillance and the Realpolitik of the
The Second Workshop on Social Implications of National Security
* Special Thanks: Research Network for a Secure
** To Download a Soft Copy of the Proceedings- FREE
*** To Purchase a Hard Copy of the Proceedings
Cover, Copyright, Foreword, Reviewers, Contents
Michael, K. & Michael, M.G.
Series: Research Network for a Secure Australia (RNSA)
Publication Year: 2007
ISBN: 978-1-74128-141-5 (print)
ISBN: 978-1-74128-142-2 (pdf)
IP Location-Based Services Research Program
for Transnational Crime Prevention,
2 A note on überveillance
3 Keynote address: What ‘überveillance’ is and what to do about it
4 Keynote appendix: Surveillance vignettes
5 Owning identity- one or many- do we have a choice?
7 Message in a bottle: Stored communications interception as practised in Australia
Rob Nicholls and Michelle Rowland
8 Australia and the ‘war against terrorism’: Terrorism, national security and human rights
9 Panel session: The case for detention without charge in suspected terrorism cases in
10 The benefits and concerns of public data availability in Australia: a survey of security experts
11 Re-using public sector information (PSI) for profit: Who’s data is it anyway?
Faculty of Law,
12 The Internet as a communication medium and a social space: a social constructivist approach to the use of open data
Defence Science and Technology Organisation
14 Something smart going on: the apocalyptic aesthetics of surveillance
15 Auto-ID and location-based services in national security: Social implications
16 Privacy implications of automated GPS tracking and profiling
Muhammad Usman Iqbal and Samsung Lim
17 Human tracking technology in mutual legal assistance and police inter-state cooperation in international crimes
Katina Michael and Gregory Rose
18 ePassport security under the microscope
19 Improving information security management: an Australian universities case study
Lane and Lauren
Faculty of Information Technology,
IP Location-Based Services Research Program
1. How do I reference a paper from the proceedings?
Clarke, R. (2007), “What ‘überveillance’ is and what to do about it”, in K. Michael and M.G. Michael (eds), From Dataveillance to Überveillance and the Realpolitik of the Transparent Society, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia, pp. 9-26.
2. Will updated proceedings be published in a journal(s)?
Yes. The proceedings will be published in special issue journals. Still waiting for confirmation on special issues from individual publishing houses.
4. Can I view the actual presentation schedule delivered at the workshop?
5. What were the submission guidelines for authors?
6. What was the acceptance rate of papers?
7. How many people registered for the workshop?
8. Ninety-seven percent rated the workshop proceedings as “excellent”.
9. Eighty percent rated the overall workshop as “excellent”, and twenty percent said it was “very good”.
Workshop Survey- What People Had to Say About the Workshop?
It was my pleasure to attend the workshop. Congratulations for your great work organising it.
It was an honour for me to present my work to the workshop, and receive great feedback. I had a really good time appreciating the different perspectives of researchers from various backgrounds. The conference was really very well organised.
Thank you for a very interesting conference... I was struck by how you managed, not only to be well organised and to print the papers beforehand, but to create an atmosphere of warmth and intimacy...
Thank you so much for organising such an excellent workshop. I have thoroughly enjoyed myself and was happy to be able to contribute in some small way...
Congratulations to you and Michael - yesterday was a fantastic day! We were both saying it was the best run 'conference' we had attended, as well as being
Clearly this is a topic of great current interest. There was an excellent list of speakers and I would have liked to have been able to stay for the day and listen to them all. The whole day was run very professionally and set a very high standard for any future conference organisers.
It was a great workshop & well worth the travel. I think that the
workshop is unique in the national security research field in
The things I liked about the workshop:
• Fresh focus on national security issues, away from the pure law focus
• Interrogating the relationship between technology and national security
• Inter-disciplinary perspectives
• Immediacy, validity, real world case studies and examples
• Engaging topics and speakers, generally high quality
• Diversity of topics
• The variety of topics
• Friendly atmosphere, high density of ideas, great organization
• The importance of opposing surveillance
• The widespread issues addressed by überveillance
• The balance between surveillance and security ethics
• High profile key presenters from academia
• Simple yet elegant arrangements
• Varied content, interesting
• Roger Clarke was excellent
• Impressive facilities, especially for free- remarkable
• Incredible diversity
• All presenters were very well prepared
• GPS tracking, RFID tracking, stored interception and warrants
• Variety of presentations
• Quality of presentations
• Well organized
• Free workshop on a university campus
• Speakers from a variety of perspectives (e.g. different academic disciplines, government, business, variety of countries)
• Good to have just one track with everyone together all day.
• Broader view of national security
• Difference between “academia” and real-life experiences
• A complex world made complicated
• Good quality speakers
• Interesting and broad scope of topics
• Multi-disciplinary approach
• Range of papers
• Bound volume as output
• The opportunity to hear and learn from others interested in similar issues
• Some really interesting papers, especially location ID/GPS
• Generally really nice people and organizers
• Free entry. Academia is not about profiteering
• Merges the issues of society, technology, law and policy
• I would consider submitting a paper next year
• Topics covered and interesting themes
• Proceedings were well-organised and published before the event
• Diversity of paper presentations
• Question time and breaks for interaction
• Learning what’s going on in the field
• The range of topics covered
• Varying views on certain topics
• Presentation of new/developing technologies
• Free and on campus
• Friendly and well informed
• Easily comprehensible
• Well organized and well timed, most enjoyable
• The quality of work put into presentations
• Topics were interesting
• Coffee was great!
• Wide range of academics and disciplines
• Some industry involvement
• Excellent speakers from multifaceted domains
• Themes were topical and different
• Being in the same theatre and listening to each others’ presentations the whole day
What themes would you have liked to be presented that were not?
• Role of corporations and big business in
shaping the national security framework/landscape in
• Good coverage as is. But I would be interested on pop/political aspects- how to ‘sell’ and discuss problems with surveillance
• The themes were chosen carefully and presented different aspects of the problem. Quite comprehensive as is.
• Greater detail of the Australian laws like the ASIO Act. Why is surveillance necessary today?
• The perspective of the individual and affordability of all the various security measures.
• Surveillance by international
• Needed more time for each presentation.
• More focus on Australian legal acts/legislation on areas of privacy.
• More about identity theft today and related concerns into the future.
• More coverage of data protection acts.
• Security infrastructure being developed for the future.
• More detail.
• The issue of national security vs. public safety.
• Use of data by private sector. E.g. what they are doing or permitted to do with personal information (e.g. direct marketing).
• Some legislative challenges, e.g. spam, Privacy Act.
• Information security.
• More technical aspects of privacy, security and surveillance. E.g. how it works and what is the impact on social activities.
• A good selection.
• Some topics that hit a more technical point of view to show how the theory relates to “real-life” applications.
• More security practitioners
• If possible greater involvement from intelligence community
• Longer talks.
• Seminars and discussion time.
• More on the security side.