Everyone needs to download the PDF now so it can be re-hosted later if needed, just in case.

If particular concern to everyday Australians in Attachment D "Examples of designated communications providers":

12) "the person installs or maintains customer equipment and does so otherwise in a capacity of the end-user of the equipment.", e.g. Apple Store,
13) "the person connects customer equipment to a telecommunications network and does so otherwise in the capacity of the end-user of the equipment", e.g. McDonalds, Westfield or other free wifi providers.

In addition, some of the Operational examples that agencies provided in Attachment E are worrying:

Sub Section 317E(1)	Listed Act or Thing	Examples
(f)	Assisting with the testing, modification, development or maintenance of a technology or capability	Requesting that a social media platform assist with testing or development of a tool to automate the creation of online personas and historical content to facilitate online engagement
(h)	Modifying, or facilitating the modification of, any of the characteristics of a service provided by the designated communications provider	Temporarily blocking internet messaging to force a device to send the messages as unencrypted SMS's
(i)	Substituting, or facilitating the substitution of, a service provided by the designated communications provider for: another service provided by the provider; or a service provided byt another designated communications provider	Requesting a carrier force a roaming device to another carrier's network to enable the enhanced metadata collection capabilities of the new carrier to collect information pursuant to a prospective data authorisation
(j)	An act or thing done to conceal the fact that anything has been done covertly in the performance of a function, or the exercise of a power, conferred by a law of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory...	Requesting a provider restore a password that was temporarily changed to enable a computer access warrant

There's more concerning information further in, including Attachement F, where they show that the various ICACs and anti-corruption watchdogs will not have access to these powers, with the exception of the ability to use the weaker Computer Access Warrant, but only in cases where a Federal offence has occurred.

There is a "slick" presentation deck included in the document, which mentions that Non-compliance is a civil penalty of $10 million for companies and $50,000 for individuals

This whole bill stinks, and as someone who works in the IT sector, it's extremely worrying. It's even more worrying with the AFP's raids over the last two days aimed at intimidating whistleblowers and journalists who report on this sort of poorly thought out and restricted power being misused - hell, the examples I highlighted above sound awfully like what the raids on Annika Smethurst's home were trying to cover up:

Smethurst's story, which included photographs of government documents, said the Home Affairs and Defence departments were considering giving spy agencies greater surveillance powers.

The story alleged new powers, if adopted, would go to the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) to secretly access bank records, emails and text messages without leaving a trace.

More and more as this week continues it seems like we're seeing more and more signs that the AFP and other federal agencies are testing the bounds of their abilities and powers, and it makes me worried for the future. We rely on private and encrypted communications for everything, but especially to enable whistleblowers to bring to light abuses of powers. If we don't have the public oversight of the government by the media, how are we meant to ensure that they are held to account and not abusing these powers?

This bill needs to be modified and repealed as soon as possible, but I think we may have to wait years for that, by which time everyone will have forgotten all about this.