Privacy commissioner sues Optus over data breach
The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) has filed Federal Court proceedings against the telco for the September 2022 cyber attack, which resulted customers' private data - including home addresses, birth dates, phone numbers and email addresses - finding its way to the dark web.
Optus failed to take reasonable steps to protect users' data, breaching the telco's obligations under the Privacy Act, chief commissioner Elizabeth Tydd said.
"Organisations hold personal information within legal requirements and based upon trust," she said.
"The Australian community should have confidence that organisations will act accordingly, and if they don't the OAIC as regulator will act to secure those rights."
The action comes after the organisation's investigation following the attack.
Optus said it would review and consider the matters raised in the proceedings and would respond to the OAIC's claims in due course.
"Optus apologises again to our customers and the broader community that the 2022 cyber-attack occurred," a spokesman said in a statement.
"We strive every day to protect our customers' information and have been working hard to minimise any impact the cyber attack may have had."
The Federal Court can impose a civil penalty of up to $2.22 million for each contravention of the Act, and the OAIC is alleging one breach for each of the approximately 9.5 million individuals impacted.
Imposing the maximum penalty for all victims would be impossible, since Optus' Singapore-listed owner Singtel has a total market value of about $101.5 billion.
The breach highlighted some of the risks associated with external-facing websites, particularly when they interacted with internal databases holding personal information, Australian Privacy Commissioner Carly Kind said.
"All organisations holding personal information need to ensure they have strong data governance and security practices," she said.
"These need to be both thorough and embedded, to guard against vulnerabilities that threat actors will be ready to exploit."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Hollowed out of thinkers, Sussan Ley's party dreams of nothing other than opposition
As Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction, Angus Taylor attacked Labor's renewables policy as 'socialist planning' and ignored expert advice to invest in cost-effective fast batteries, instead committing $600 million of public money to a gas power plant in the Hunter Valley already rejected by the market. Costs are now reported to exceed $1 billion. Menzies led the Liberals to power for the first time in 1949 with an anti-socialist platform that attacked the Curtin Labor government's bank nationalisation plans. Now, 75 years on, the party's policy brain appears to have atrophied sometime between the Russian Revolution and the fall of the Berlin Wall. When Labor introduced legislation to bring its 'Future Made in Australia' industrial policy to fruition in April 2024, Ley referred to the government as 'radical' while Taylor dismissed the policy as a slush fund for the PM to 'pick winners'. But industrial policy is one area where government intervention makes sense. Australia sits below Botswana at 105 out of 133 on the Economic Complexity Index, reflecting overreliance on commodities and underinvestment in innovation and manufacturing compared to other advanced economies. A policy to build sovereign manufacturing capacity and high‑skill jobs in strategically important sectors reflects a 21st-century economic consensus that markets are a means to a societal goal, not an end in themselves. Socialist smears may resonate with rusted-on conservatives, but risk alienating voters the party desperately needs. A 2024 YouGov poll found 53 per cent of Australians aged 18-24 favour a more socialist direction, compared to 22 per cent preferring more capitalism. According to a June Redbridge Group poll, voters aged 65+ were the only cohort in which the Coalition won more votes than Labor at the May election. A paltry 19 per cent of 18-34 year-olds voted Coalition, less than half of those who voted for Labor – a result dubbed a 'youthquake' by Redbridge director and former Liberal Party official Tony Barry. Loading Where to now for a party that defines itself in opposition to a Labor Party that's colonised the political centre? How does the party of 'lower taxes' resonate in a social democracy where overall taxation is already well below the OECD average? Unfortunately for Ley, she has inherited a party lacking the policy hardheads to write the necessary software update. In the wake of the election result, Institute of Public Affairs Senior Fellow John Roskam bemoaned the loss of the 'serious thinkers' at the heart of the party in the 1970s and 1980s. Roskam says the party is verging on 'anti-intellectual' and is lacking the personnel to think critically about how Liberal principles can be adapted to 21st-century realities. Meanwhile, the pews of a once broad church have been gradually purged of moderates since Ian McPhee lost preselection for opposing John Howard's hard-line rhetoric on Asian immigration in the late 1980s. Others followed, among them Julia Banks, John Hewson, Fred Chaney, and former PMs Fraser and Turnbull. Loading What remains is a party with an uninspiring message about small government that airbrushes over Menzies' nation‑building legacy of universities, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, and delivering the publicly funded Snowy Mountains Scheme – the largest engineering project in our nation's history. Ley deserves some patience as she tries to rehabilitate the Liberals. She's saying all the right things about 'listening' and addressing issues that concern young people, but uncertain times call for a leader, not populist vessel. We must judge her on whether she can reignite a contest of ideas anchored in sound values and serious policy work. The outcome from her working group on energy and emissions reduction will be a test she cannot afford to fail.
The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
Hollowed out of thinkers, Sussan Ley's party dreams of nothing other than opposition
As Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction, Angus Taylor attacked Labor's renewables policy as 'socialist planning' and ignored expert advice to invest in cost-effective fast batteries, instead committing $600 million of public money to a gas power plant in the Hunter Valley already rejected by the market. Costs are now reported to exceed $1 billion. Menzies led the Liberals to power for the first time in 1949 with an anti-socialist platform that attacked the Curtin Labor government's bank nationalisation plans. Now, 75 years on, the party's policy brain appears to have atrophied sometime between the Russian Revolution and the fall of the Berlin Wall. When Labor introduced legislation to bring its 'Future Made in Australia' industrial policy to fruition in April 2024, Ley referred to the government as 'radical' while Taylor dismissed the policy as a slush fund for the PM to 'pick winners'. But industrial policy is one area where government intervention makes sense. Australia sits below Botswana at 105 out of 133 on the Economic Complexity Index, reflecting overreliance on commodities and underinvestment in innovation and manufacturing compared to other advanced economies. A policy to build sovereign manufacturing capacity and high‑skill jobs in strategically important sectors reflects a 21st-century economic consensus that markets are a means to a societal goal, not an end in themselves. Socialist smears may resonate with rusted-on conservatives, but risk alienating voters the party desperately needs. A 2024 YouGov poll found 53 per cent of Australians aged 18-24 favour a more socialist direction, compared to 22 per cent preferring more capitalism. According to a June Redbridge Group poll, voters aged 65+ were the only cohort in which the Coalition won more votes than Labor at the May election. A paltry 19 per cent of 18-34 year-olds voted Coalition, less than half of those who voted for Labor – a result dubbed a 'youthquake' by Redbridge director and former Liberal Party official Tony Barry. Loading Where to now for a party that defines itself in opposition to a Labor Party that's colonised the political centre? How does the party of 'lower taxes' resonate in a social democracy where overall taxation is already well below the OECD average? Unfortunately for Ley, she has inherited a party lacking the policy hardheads to write the necessary software update. In the wake of the election result, Institute of Public Affairs Senior Fellow John Roskam bemoaned the loss of the 'serious thinkers' at the heart of the party in the 1970s and 1980s. Roskam says the party is verging on 'anti-intellectual' and is lacking the personnel to think critically about how Liberal principles can be adapted to 21st-century realities. Meanwhile, the pews of a once broad church have been gradually purged of moderates since Ian McPhee lost preselection for opposing John Howard's hard-line rhetoric on Asian immigration in the late 1980s. Others followed, among them Julia Banks, John Hewson, Fred Chaney, and former PMs Fraser and Turnbull. Loading What remains is a party with an uninspiring message about small government that airbrushes over Menzies' nation‑building legacy of universities, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, and delivering the publicly funded Snowy Mountains Scheme – the largest engineering project in our nation's history. Ley deserves some patience as she tries to rehabilitate the Liberals. She's saying all the right things about 'listening' and addressing issues that concern young people, but uncertain times call for a leader, not populist vessel. We must judge her on whether she can reignite a contest of ideas anchored in sound values and serious policy work. The outcome from her working group on energy and emissions reduction will be a test she cannot afford to fail.
Sky News AU
2 hours ago
- Sky News AU
How a 'snowballing' $76 blockchain token trend could become the first rung on the property ladder for Australian renters
Trying to save a 20 per cent deposit now feels like running on a treadmill that keeps speeding up. A recent analysis shows the average renter would need more than eight years to scrape one together, and that's if rents stop jumping tomorrow. Many young Australians have quietly decided the old dream is broken. But a different path is opening on their phones: buy a sliver of a house for the price of a night out, collect rent the next morning, repeat. What a $50 token buys On the US platform Lofty you can tap 'buy' on a $50 USD ($76 AUD) blockchain token tied to a Detroit duplex or an Atlanta townhouse. The token records your slice on the blockchain, sends your cut of the rent every day, and lets you sell whenever another investor clicks 'buy'. The idea is snowballing. Six in ten people using fractional platforms this year are under 40, the very group priced out of full ownership. The tech that makes it possible The heavy lifting sits in code. Blockchain keeps an unchangeable ledger of who owns what. Smart contracts split the rent and push it to digital wallets while we sleep. Artificial-intelligence programs crunch vacancy data and tweak rents in real time. Paperwork, conveyancing fees and month-long settlements vanish. Proof it isn't hype There have been successful models worldwide. The 'Lofty' platform in the US has already tokenised more than 140 US properties. Investors pocket rent daily and vote online if a tenant trashes a kitchen or an offer comes in. In Britain, London House Exchange (once Property Partner) runs a regulated exchange where anyone can trade slices of single flats just like shares. Singapore's RealVantage is pulling in investors from across Asia to co-own apartments in many countries, including Australian cities. None of these ventures relies on wishful thinking; they charge modest management fees and still turn a profit. Big money is noticing. Global transaction volumes from institutional investors jumped 43 per cent in the first quarter of 2025, a vote of confidence from pension funds and private equity giants. Market researchers tip real-estate tokenisation to swell from about US $3.5 billion today to nearly US $19.4 billion by 2033. Why Australia should care right now Our wage growth lags price growth. Land is scarce. Construction firms keep collapsing. Fractional ownership can't solve everything, but it can start turning renters into owners sooner. A uni graduate could drip-feed a few hundred dollars a month into tokens spread across several cities instead of hoarding every spare dollar for a single monster deposit. Over a decade, those micro stakes have grown, paid rent along the way, and built a credit-file story banks understand. It could also unlock a new supply. When thousands of small investors pool cash through a platform, developers get cheaper equity to build mid-rise rentals or retrofit empty offices. The model is already nudging US build-to-rent projects off the drawing board. There's no reason it can't bankroll medium-density infill around Parramatta or Geelong. A simple road map for Canberra Start small. Let the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) extend its existing crowd-funding sandbox to cover blockchain property tokens. Cap how much anyone can tip in while the rules bed down. Invite super funds chasing steady, green income to co-seed the first portfolios; they provide ballast and credibility. Next, pick a patch of surplus state-owned land, think car parks near train stations, package the air-rights into tokens and sell half to retail investors on a local platform. Use the cash to build energy-efficient flats and promise a slice of the rent back to token holders. The public sees a tangible project, not another scheme stuck in consultation. Finally, borrow a lesson from London. There, fractional platforms must hold each property in a stand-alone trust. If the company dies tomorrow, the trust still owns the building, and investors still own their slices. We can replicate that safeguard, and most fears about 'crypto scams' fade fast. Honest warnings Tokens are easier to sell than whole houses, but they're less liquid than shares. Some days, nobody will want your slice. Rules will keep shifting as regulators catch up. And governance matters: if a roof leaks, someone has to vote to fix it. Smart platforms make those votes painless, but buyers still need to read the fine print. The upside for a generation locked out For Gen Z, the appeal is obvious. It's low-cost. It's quick. It lives on the same screen as banking apps and streaming queues. You can track rent in real time and brag about owning a bit of a house in Texas or Toowoomba. More importantly, it flips the story from 'wait ten years, then maybe buy' to 'start building equity today'. Australia missed the first big wave of ride-sharing and watched foreign platforms set the rules. We don't need to repeat that mistake with property tokens. The technology is mature, the consumer appetite is raging and the regulatory pieces already exist. With a light touch from Canberra and a push from super funds, a $50 blockchain token could become the first rung on the property ladder for millions of young Australians. It won't cure the housing crisis overnight, but it might give the next generation something better than hopeless spreadsheets and landlord letters: a real stake in the roof over their heads, even if they only own a few shingles to start. Dr Ehsan Noroozinejad is a senior researcher at Western Sydney University who writes about innovative housing policy, modular construction, and urban resilience. He advises governments and industry on affordable-housing strategy and has appeared on ABC News, Sky News, The Guardian, The Policymaker, The Sydney Morning Herald and The Conversation.
