The Federal Council today passed a request to the Federal Government, with the State Chamber calling on the Federal Government and the Bundesrat to introduce a one-month storage requirement for IP address assignments by Internet service providers. In addition, for providers that distribute one IP to multiple devices using NAT, the port number and its assignment to the subscriber must also be saved.
Advertisement
Supreme Court in Brazil rejects lifting of X ban
The country’s representatives hope that this will lead to better investigative success for law enforcement authorities, especially in cases related to the sexual exploitation of children. “Without minimum storage of IP addresses, the solution of the crime in these cases depends on the coincidence of which Internet access service the unknown criminal used and whether this Internet access service voluntarily agreed to the assignment of this IP address to the user ID. “, the countries’ draft laws state. Currently, the length of time that Internet service providers store IP addresses varies greatly – from not at all to several weeks. Additionally, the storage obligations for location data in the Telecommunications Act, which are not currently in place, are to be removed.
“Child molesters have no right to data protection”
Hesse submitted the application in April. Its Prime Minister Boris Rhine (CDU) told a Bundesrat plenary session this morning: Since September 2022, 38,000 cases against criminals have not been pursued because there was no IP address storage. Given what the European Court of Justice has declared permissible, this is an intolerable situation: “Child molesters have no right to data protection.” The horrific act was a mass incident, Rhine said, referring to the investigation against the Elysium platform, which has a total of 111,000 users. It was entirely a coincidence that Elysium was taken down by a storage provider.
“There is no substitute for legally prescribed minimum storage of IP addresses,” Rhine said. “The so-called quick-freeze process is not the lowest common denominator, but a fraudulent label. What is not stored cannot be frozen.” The Internet should not be a legal void and data security should not be a protection for criminals, Rhine said.
Saxony’s interior minister hopes for integration into security package
Saxon Interior Minister Armin Schuster, also CDU, stressed that the minimum storage period was also necessary to combat terrorism. It is about the lack of capabilities of investigators due to lack of legal basis. The planned attack in Castrop-Roxel in 2023 was prevented only by great luck: because the IP address of the suspect was transmitted to the BKA by the US authorities within less than seven days. This will be a qualitatively new level. According to Armin Schuster, he has been fighting for data retention for 15 years and he would be very happy if this proposal of the Federal Council were integrated into the security package of the federal government, which is currently being intensively discussed – otherwise it There is not one.
The application also includes another change: Instead of “publicly accessible telecommunications services” as before, states now want to require “publicly accessible Internet access services to end users.” Furthermore, the federal states want to eliminate the fees paid to providers by investigative authorities for providing information in accordance with the Judicial Compensation Act if traffic data from data retention are to be used for this purpose. There was no response to the points raised in the plenary session of the Federal Council. The State Chamber accepted the initiative with a majority vote and it will be officially forwarded to the federal government and the Bundestag.
BMJ sticks with the numbers
When asked by Heise Online, a spokesman for the Federal Justice Ministry led by Marco Buschmann (FDP) said that he saw no reason to move away from the previous position of refusing data retention: “In particular, raising questions There is no reason to decline data retention.” Mass storage of IP addresses without any reason would be a deep violation of fundamental rights and would therefore carry considerable legal risks. “It has no proven practical added value compared to the quick-freeze procedure, it would run contrary to the explicit agreement in the coalition agreement and there is no political majority for it within the federal government,” a federal ministry spokesperson said. of Justice. The Federal Government will respond in the usual manner to the proposal of the Federal Council. This means that there is no possibility for a Federal Council initiative.
(Mac)
Because of fake shops: Federal Council wants to eliminate anonymous domain registrations
