I'd just managed to find that code and read some of it before the below email. It's basically telling you how to interpret the privacy act for telecommunications networks. This includes the internet, not just the PSTN as "Internet Service Provider" is included under the definition of an "Agency" and communication is a phone-call or "any other telecommunication".

The underlying assumption I've picked up from previous posts to NZNOG is that "if it's on the internet you can just do whatever you want with the traffic including payload". This appears to be wrong from a quick glance of some of the rules set out in the code. This is true with or without a company policy saying you can/can't do x, y or z. This note in "Rule 1" is quite pertinent:

"
Note: Except where it is itself a party to a communication, a telecommunications agency will rarely have a lawful purpose to collect the content of any telecommunication. Indeed, it is unlawful to intercept the content of a private communication in most cases (Crimes Act 1961, Part 9A). There are some limited exceptional circumstances relevant to telecommunications agencies (e.g. where acting pursuant to an interception warrant to assist the Police or SIS). Employees of network operators can, in the course of their duties, intercept telecommunications for maintenance purposes but it is an offence for an employee of a network operator to use or disclose information so obtained for unauthorised purposes � Telecommunications Act 2001, ss.114 and 115).
"

From the small amount of reading I've done what WAND has done appears to be fine. However, capturing header + payload and disseminating it to a third party without a warrant is ILLEGAL.

I leave further reading of the code and analysis of fringe cases etc as an exercise to the reader, but previous posts leave me a bit worried about the cavalier attitude of some NZNOG posters to privacy of the internet.

Jonathan