AGL Vitality has questioned the federal government to don the price of any “last resort” intervention or directive from the Australian Alerts Directorate (ASD) if it were being subjected to a severe cyber assault.
The utility made the responses in reaction to legislation before parliament that, if passed, will permit Australia’s cyber spooks to insert on their own into incident reaction when “critical infrastructure” is attacked.
AGL, which is already topic to existing cyber stability procedures for important infrastructure, is anxious the ASD could order costly cyber stability enhancements and then leave.
It famous that the prices would ultimately be borne by electricity people.
“AGL queries the big difference in liabilities and immunities in the function of a cyber function or assault exclusively, the absence of any liability for the authorised company (Australian Alerts Directorate or its officers), for unintended destructive implications arising from a federal government support, and the absence of redress or price restoration for the impacted entity,” AGL’s normal manager for electricity industry regulation Elizabeth Molyneux claimed in a submission [pdf] released late Friday.
“If an afflicted entity is directed by the federal government to carried out particular actions, there should really be a price restoration mechanism in the legislation to let the afflicted entity to recuperate prices for responding to all those instructions, in particular as the instructions are aimed at preserving the broader Australian community although the prices of the instructions will be borne directly by the impacted entity and its prospects.”
In addition, AGL claimed it was anxious that ASD personnel quickly deployed by the federal government might not satisfy site basic safety criteria.
“In the function that authorised personnel are essential to go to an AGL site to conduct actions … then it would be prudent to guarantee that the authorised company comply with the occupational wellbeing and basic safety specifications of that site,” the utility claimed.
“The operator or operator of that site has a responsibility for all all those who enter the site, and the personnel of the authorised company beneath the Act would occur beneath that responsibility and it would be prudent for the personnel to abide by the tips of the operator/operator to guarantee no damage is brought about although on site.”