Jump to content

Australian Gov't unveils plans to gain access to encrypted messages

WMGroomAK
 Share
Posted
3 hours ago, WMGroomAK said:

In a BBC Article, a computer science professor at Surrey University thinks that for this to work, the companies will either need to weaken their encryption or change their technical architecture.  So you probably have most of the methods covered...  

 

The problem is, unless the companies hand over their encryption keys or weaken the encryption to the point that it's pointless, then there really is no viable way to enact this kind of legislation since it is end-to-end encryption they are talking about.  You add to this that most governments have a poor track record of keeping their computer systems secure and if they do get the encryption keys, it'll probably be leaked to the public within a year.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40606493

Open Source does exist. Any anonymous individual can develop their own encryption scheme and run it on whatever they see fit.

 

Also, laws of mathematics are certainly older than Australia's existence.

My eyes see the past…

My camera lens sees the present…

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
4 hours ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

Y'all fuckin complainin' about net neutrality, but this is what we don't have to deal with here in America.

The US just lies and say they don't do this while everyone knows they do

▓ƆԀ▓ S▓₱▓Ɇ▓c▓s▓: i7 6ʇɥפᴉƎ00K (4.4ghz), Asus DeLuxe X99A II, GT҉X҉1҉0҉8҉0 Zotac Amp ExTrꍟꎭe),Si6F4Gb D???????r PlatinUm, EVGA G2 Sǝʌǝᘉ5ᙣᙍᖇᓎᙎᗅᖶt, Phanteks Enthoo Primo, 3TB WD Black, 500gb 850 Evo, H100iGeeTeeX, Windows 10, K70 R̸̢̡̭͍͕̱̭̟̩̀̀̃́̃͒̈́̈́͑̑́̆͘͜ͅG̶̦̬͊́B̸͈̝̖͗̈́, G502, HyperX Cloud 2s, Asus MX34. פN∩SW∀S 960 EVO

Just keeping this here as a backup 9̵̨̢̨̧̧̡̧̡̧̡̧̡̡̢̢̡̢̧̡̢̡̡̢̧̛̛̛̛̛̛̱̖͈̠̝̯̹͉̝̞̩̠̹̺̰̺̲̳͈̞̻̜̫̹̱̗̣͙̻̘͎̲̝͙͍͔̯̲̟̞͚̖̘͉̭̰̣͎͕̼̼̜̼͕͎̣͇͓͓͎̼̺̯͈̤̝͖̩̭͍̣̱̞̬̺̯̼̤̲͎̖̠̟͍̘̭͔̟̗̙̗̗̤̦͍̫̬͔̦̳̗̳͔̞̼̝͍̝͈̻͇̭̠͈̳͍̫̮̥̭͍͔͈̠̹̼̬̰͈̤͚̖̯͍͉͖̥̹̺͕̲̥̤̺̹̹̪̺̺̭͕͓̟̳̹͍̖͎̣̫͓͍͈͕̳̹̙̰͉͙̝̜̠̥̝̲̮̬͕̰̹̳͕̰̲̣̯̫̮͙̹̮͙̮̝̣͇̺̺͇̺̺͈̳̜̣̙̻̣̜̻̦͚̹̩͓͚̖͍̥̟͍͎̦͙̫̜͔̭̥͈̬̝̺̩͙͙͉̻̰̬̗̣͖̦͎̥̜̬̹͓͈͙̤̜̗͔̩̖̳̫̑̀̂̽̈́̈́̿͒̿̋̊͌̾̄̄̒̌͐̽̿̊͑̑̆͗̈̎̄͒̑̋͛̑͑̂͑̀͐̀͑̓͊̇͆̿͑͛͛͆́͆̓̿̇̀̓͑͆͂̓̾̏͊̀̇̍̃́̒̎̀̒̄̓̒̐̑̊̏̌̽̓͂͋̓̐̓͊̌͋̀̐̇̌̓̔͊̈̇́̏͒̋͊̓̆̋̈̀̌̔͆͑̈̐̈̍̀̉̋̈́͊̽͂̿͌͊̆̾̉͐̿̓̄̾͑̈́͗͗̂̂́̇͂̀̈́́̽̈́̓̓͂̽̓̀̄͌̐̔̄̄͒͌̈́̅̉͊̂͒̀̈́̌͂̽̀̑̏̽̀͑̐̐͋̀̀͋̓̅͋͗̍́͗̈́̆̏̇͊̌̏̔̑̐̈́͑̎͑͆̏̎́̑̍̏̒̌̊͘͘̚̕̚̕̕̚̕̚̕̕͜͜͜͜͜͝͝͠͠͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͠͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅͅ8̵̨̛̛̛̛̮͍͕̥͉̦̥̱̞̜̫̘̤̖̬͍͇͓̜̻̪̤̣̣̹̑͑̏̈́̐̐́̎͒̔͒̌̑̓̆̓͑̉̈́́͋̌͋͐͛͋̃̍̽̊͗͋͊̂̅͊͑́͋͛̉̏̓͌̾̈́̀͛͊̾͑̌̀̀̌̓̏̑́̄̉̌͂́͛̋͊̄͐͊̈́̀̌̆̎̿̓̔̍̎̀̍̚̕̕͘͘͘̕̚͝͝͠͠͠0̶̡̡̡̢̨̨͕̠̠͉̺̻̯̱̘͇̥͎͖̯͕̖̬̭͔̪̪͎̺̠̤̬̬̤̣̭̣͍̥̱̘̳̣̤͚̭̥͚̦͙̱̦͕̼͖͙͕͇̭͓͉͎̹̣̣͕̜͍͖̳̭͕̼̳̖̩͍͔̱̙̠̝̺̰̦̱̿̄̀͐͜͜ͅͅt̶̡̨̡̨̧̢̧̢̨̧̧̧̧̢̡̨̨̢̨̢̧̢̛̛̛̛̛̠͍̞̮͇̪͉̩̗̗͖̫͉͎͓̮̣̘̫͔̘̬̮̙̯̣͕͓̲̣͓͓̣̹̟͈̱͚̘̼̙̖̖̼̙̜̝͙̣̠̪̲̞̖̠̯̖̠̜̱͉̲̺͙̤̻̦̜͎̙̳̺̭̪̱͓̦̹̺͙̫̖̖̰̣͈͍̜̺̘͕̬̥͇̗̖̺̣̲̫̟̣̜̭̟̱̳̳̖͖͇̹̯̜̹͙̻̥̙͉͕̜͎͕̦͕̱͖͉̜̹̱̦͔͎̲̦͔̖̘̫̻̹̮̗̮̜̰͇̰͔̱͙̞̠͍͉͕̳͍̰̠̗̠̯̜̩͓̭̺̦̲̲͖̯̩̲̣̠͉̦̬͓̠̜̲͍̘͇̳̳͔̼̣͚̙͙͚͕̙̘̣̠͍̟̪̝̲͇͚̦̖͕̰̟̪͖̳̲͉͙̰̭̼̩̟̝̣̝̬̳͎̙̱͒̃̈͊̔͒͗̐̄̌͐͆̍͂̃̈́̾͗̅̐͒̓̆͛̂̾͋̍͂̂̄̇̿̈͌̅̈́̃̾̔̇̇̾̀͊͋̋̌̄͌͆͆̎̓̈́̾̊͊̇̌̔̈́̈́̀̐͊̊̍͑̊̈̓͑̀́̅̀̑̈́̽̃̽͛̇́̐̓̀͆̔̈̀̍̏̆̓̆͒̋́̋̍́̂̉͛̓̓̂̋̎́̒̏̈͋̃̽͆̓̀̔͑̈́̓͌͑̅̽́̐̍̉̑̓̈́͌̋̈́͂̊́͆͂̇̈́̔̃͌̅̈́͌͛̑̐̓̔̈́̀͊͛̐̾͐̔̾̈̃̈̄͑̓̋̇̉̉̚̕̚͘̕̚̚̕̕͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͝͝͠ͅͅͅͅͅi̵̢̧̢̧̡̧̢̢̧̢̢̢̡̡̡̧̧̡̡̧̛̛͈̺̲̫͕̞͓̥̖̭̜̫͉̻̗̭̖͔̮̠͇̩̹̱͈̗̭͈̤̠̮͙͇̲͙̰̳̹̲͙̜̟͚͎͓̦̫͚̻̟̰̣̲̺̦̫͓̖̯̝̬͉̯͓͈̫̭̜̱̞̹̪͔̤̜͙͓̗̗̻̟͎͇̺̘̯̲̝̫͚̰̹̫̗̳̣͙̮̱̲͕̺̠͉̫̖̟͖̦͉̟͈̭̣̹̱̖̗̺̘̦̠̯̲͔̘̱̣͙̩̻̰̠͓͙̰̺̠̖̟̗̖͉̞̣̥̝̤̫̫̜͕̻͉̺͚̣̝̥͇̭͎̖̦̙̲͈̲̠̹̼͎͕̩͓̖̥̘̱̜͙̹̝͔̭̣̮̗̞̩̣̬̯̜̻̯̩̮̩̹̻̯̬̖͂̈͂̒̇͗͑̐̌̎̑̽̑̈̈́͑̽́̊͋̿͊͋̅̐̈́͑̇̿̈́̌͌̊̅͂̎͆̏̓͂̈̿̏̃͑̏̓͆̔̋̎̕͘͘͘͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͝͝͠͠ͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅZ̴̧̢̨̢̧̢̢̡̧̢̢̢̨̨̨̡̨̧̢̧̛̛̬̖͈̮̝̭̖͖̗̹̣̼̼̘̘̫̠̭̞͙͔͙̜̠̗̪̠̼̫̻͓̳̟̲̳̻̙̼͇̺͎̘̹̼͔̺̹̬̯̤̮̟͈̭̻͚̣̲͔͙̥͕̣̻̰͈̼̱̺̤̤͉̙̦̩̗͎̞͓̭̞̗͉̳̭̭̺̹̹̮͕̘̪̞̱̥͈̹̳͇̟̹̱̙͚̯̮̳̤͍̪̞̦̳̦͍̲̥̳͇̪̬̰̠͙͕̖̝̫̩̯̱̘͓͎̪͈̤̜͎̱̹̹̱̲̻͎̖̳͚̭̪̦̗̬͍̯̘̣̩̬͖̝̹̣̗̭͖̜͕̼̼̲̭͕͔̩͓̞̝͓͍̗̙̯͔̯̞̝̳̜̜͉̖̩͇̩̘̪̥̱͓̭͎͖̱̙̩̜͎̙͉̟͎͔̝̥͕͍͓̹̮̦̫͚̠̯͓̱͖͔͓̤͉̠͙̋͐̀͌̈́͆̾͆̑̔͂͒̀̊̀͋͑̂͊̅͐̿́̈́̐̀̏̋̃̄͆͒̈́̿̎́́̈̀̀͌̔͋͊̊̉̿͗͊͑̔͐̇͆͛̂̐͊̉̄̈́̄̐͂͂͒͑͗̓͑̓̾̑͋̒͐͑̾͂̎̋̃̽̂̅̇̿̍̈́́̄̍͂͑̏̐̾̎̆̉̾͂̽̈̆̔́͋͗̓̑̕͘̕͘͜͜͜͜͜͝͝͝͝͠͠͝ͅo̶̪͆́̀͂̂́̄̅͂̿͛̈́̿͊͗́͘͝t̴̡̨̧̨̧̡̧̨̡̢̧̢̡̨̛̪͈̣̭̺̱̪̹̺̣̬̖̣̻͈̞̙͇̩̻̫͈̝̭̟͎̻̟̻̝̱͔̝̼͍̞̼̣̘̤̯͓͉̖̠̤͔̜̙͚͓̻͓̬͓̻̜̯̱̖̳̱̗̠̝̥̩͓̗̪̙͓̖̠͎̗͎̱̮̯̮͙̩̫̹̹̖͙̙͖̻͈̙̻͇͔̙̣̱͔̜̣̭̱͈͕̠̹͙̹͇̻̼͎͍̥̘͙̘̤̜͎̟͖̹̦̺̤͍̣̼̻̱̲͎̗̹͉͙̪̞̻̹͚̰̻͈͈͊̈́̽̀̎̃̊́̈́̏̃̍̉̇̑̂̇̏̀͊̑̓͛̽͋̈́͆́̊͊̍͌̈́̓͊̌̿̂̾̐͑̓̀́͒̃̋̓͆̇̀͊̆͗̂͑͐̀͗̅̆͘̕͘̕̕͜͜͝͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅḁ̶̢̡̨̧̡̡̨̨̧̨̡̡̢̧̨̡̡̛̛̛͍̱̳͚͕̩͍̺̪̻̫̙͈̬͙̖͙̬͍̬̟̣̝̲̼̜̼̺͎̥̮̝͙̪̘̙̻͖͇͚͙̣̬̖̲̲̥̯̦̗̰̙̗̪̞̗̩̻̪̤̣̜̳̩̦̻͓̞̙͍͙̫̩̹̥͚̻̦̗̰̲̙̫̬̱̺̞̟̻͓̞͚̦̘̝̤͎̤̜̜̥̗̱͈̣̻̰̮̼̙͚͚̠͚̲̤͔̰̭̙̳͍̭͎̙͚͍̟̺͎̝͓̹̰̟͈͈̖̺͙̩̯͔̙̭̟̞̟̼̮̦̜̳͕̞̼͈̜͍̮͕̜͚̝̦̞̥̜̥̗̠̦͇͖̳͈̜̮̣͚̲̟͙̎̈́́͊̔̑̽̅͐͐͆̀͐́̓̅̈͑͑̍̿̏́͆͌̋̌̃̒̽̀̋̀̃̏̌́͂̿̃̎̐͊̒̀̊̅͒̎͆̿̈́̑̐̒̀̈́̓̾͋͆̇̋͒̎̈̄̓̂͊̆͂̈́̒̎͐̇̍̆̋̅̿̔͒̄̇̂̋̈́͆̎̔̇͊̊̈́̔̏͋́̀͂̈́̊͋͂̍̾̓͛̇̔̚͘̚̕̚͘͘̕̕̕̚͘͘̚̕̚̕͜͜͜͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅç̵̧̢̨̢̢̢̧̧̡̨̡̢̧̧̧̨̡̡̨̨̢̢̢̧̨̢̨̢̛̛͉̗̠͇̹̖̝͕͚͎̟̻͓̳̰̻̺̞̣͚̤͙͍͇̗̼͖͔͕͙͖̺͙̖̹̘̘̺͓̜͍̣̰̗̖̺̗̪̘̯̘͚̲͚̲̬̞̹̹͕̭͔̳̘̝̬͉̗̪͉͕̞̫͔̭̭̜͉͔̬̫͙̖̙͚͔͙͚͍̲̘͚̪̗̞̣̞̲͎͔͖̺͍͎̝͎͍̣͍̩̟͈͕̗͉̪̯͉͎͖͍̖͎̖̯̲̘̦̟̭͍͚͓͈͙̬͖̘̱̝̜̘̹̩̝̥̜͎̬͓̬͙͍͇͚̟̫͇̬̲̥̘̞̘̟̘̝̫͈̙̻͇͎̣̪̪̠̲͓͉͙͚̭̪͇̯̠̯̠͖̞̜͓̲͎͇̼̱̦͍͉͈͕͉̗̟̖̗̱̭͚͎̘͓̬͍̱͍̖̯̜̗̹̰̲̩̪͍̞̜̫̩̠͔̻̫͍͇͕̰̰̘͚͈̠̻̮͊̐̿̏̐̀̇̑̐̈͛͑͑̍̑̔̃̈́̓̈́̇̐͑̐̊̆͂̀̏͛̊̔̍̽͗͋̊̍̓̈́̏̅͌̀̽́̑͒͒̓͗̈́̎͌͂̕̚͘͘͜͜͜͜͜͠͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅͅS̵̡̡̧̧̨̨̡̢̡̡̡̡̧̧̡̧̢̫̯͔̼̲͉͙̱̮̭̗͖̯̤͙̜͚̰̮̝͚̥̜̞̠̤̺̝͇̻̱͙̩̲̺͍̳̤̺̖̝̳̪̻̗̮̪̖̺̹̭͍͇̗̝̱̻̳̝̖̝͎̙͉̞̱̯̙̜͇̯̻̞̱̭̗͉̰̮̞͍̫̺͙͎̙̞̯̟͓͉̹̲͖͎̼̫̩̱͇̲͓̪͉̺̞̻͎̤̥̭̺̘̻̥͇̤̖̰̘̭̳̫̙̤̻͇̪̦̭̱͎̥̟͖͕̣̤̩̟̲̭̹̦̹̣͖̖͒̈́̈́̓͗̈̄͂̈́̅̐̐̿̎̂͗̎̿̕͘͜͜͜͜͝͝ͅͅt̸̡̡̧̧̨̡̢̛̥̥̭͍̗͈̩͕͔͔̞̟͍̭͇̙̺̤͚͎͈͎͕̱͈̦͍͔͓̬͚̗̰̦͓̭̰̭̎̀̂̈́̓̒̈́̈́̂̄̋́̇̂͐͒̋̋̉͐̉̏̇͋̓̈́͐̾͋̒͒͐̊̊̀̄͆̄͆̑͆̇̊̓̚̚̕̚̕͜͠͝͝ͅͅơ̵̡̨̡̡̡̨̛̺͕̼͔̼̪̳͖͓̠̘̘̳̼͚͙͙͚̰͚͚͖̥̦̥̘̖̜̰͔̠͕̦͎̞̮͚͕͍̤̠̦͍̥̝̰̖̳̫̮̪͇̤̱̜͙͔̯͙̙̼͇̹̥̜͈̲̺̝̻̮̬̼̫̞̗̣̪̱͓̺̜̠͇͚͓̳̹̥̳̠͍̫͈̟͈̘̯̬̞͔̝͍͍̥̒̐͗͒͂͆̑̀̿̏́̀͑͗̐́̀̾̓́̌̇̒̈́̌̓͐̃̈́̒̂̀̾͂̊̀̂͐̃̄̓̔̽̒̈́̇̓͌̇̂̆̒̏̊̋͊͛͌̊̇̒̅͌̄̎̔̈́͊́̽̋̈̇̈́́͊̅͂̎̃͌͊͛͂̄̽̈́̿͐̉̽̿́́̉͆̈́̒́̂̾̄̇̌̒̈̅̍̿̐͑̓͊̈́̈̋̈́̉̍̋̊̈̀̈́̾̿̌̀̈́͌̑̍́̋̒̀̂̈́́̾̏̐̅̈̑͗͐̈͂̄̾̄̈́̍̉͑͛͗͋̈́̃̄̊́́͐̀̀̽̇̓̄̓̃͋͋̂̽̔̀̎͌̈́̈́̑̓̔̀̓͐͛͆̿̋͑͛̈́͂̅̋̅͆͗̇́̀̒́̏͒̐̍͂̓͐͐̇̂̉̑̊͑̉̋̍͊̄̀͂̎͒̔͊̃̏̕̚̕̕͘͘͘̚͘̚͘̕͘̚͘̚̚̚̕͘͜͜͜͝͝͠͠͝͝͠͠͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅc̴̨̡̢̢̢̡̡̢̛̛̛̻͇̝̣͉͚͎͕̻̦͖̤̖͇̪̩̤̻̭̮̙̰̖̰̳̪̱̹̳̬͖̣͙̼̙̰̻̘͇͚̺̗̩̫̞̳̼̤͔͍͉̟͕̯̺͈̤̰̹̍̋́͆̾̆̊͆͋̀͑͒̄̿̄̀̂͋̊͆́͑̑̽͊̓́̔̽̌͊̄͑͒͐̑͗̿̃̀̓̅́̿͗̈́͌̋̀̏̂͌̓́̇̀͒͋̌̌̅͋͌̆͐̀̔̒͐̊̇̿̽̀̈́̃̒̋̀̈́̃̏̂̊͗̑̊̈̇̀̌͐̈́̉̂̏͊̄͐̈̽͒̏̒̓́̌̓̅́̓̃͐͊͒̄͑̒͌̍̈́̕͘̚͘̕͘̚̕͜͝͠͝͝͝ͅǩ̴̢̢̢̧̨̢̢̢̨̨̨̢̢̢̨̧̨̡̡̢̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̜̥̩̙͕̮̪̻͈̘̯̼̰̜͚̰͖̬̳͖̣̭̼͔̲͉̭̺͚̺̟͉̝̱̲͎͉̙̥̤͚͙̬̪̜̺͙͍̱̞̭̬̩̖̤̹̤̺̦͈̰̗̰͍͇̱̤̬̬͙̙̲̙̜͖͓̙̟̙̯̪͍̺̥͔͕̝̳̹̻͇̠̣͈̰̦͓͕̩͇͈͇̖͙͍̰̲̤̞͎̟̝̝͈͖͔͖̦̮̗̬̞̞̜̬̠̹̣̣̲̮̞̤̜̤̲̙͔͕̯͔͍̤͕̣͔͙̪̫̝̣̰̬̬̭̞͔̦̟̥̣̻͉͈̮̥̦̮̦͕̤͇̺͆͆̈͗̄̀̌̔̈́̈̉̾̊̐̆̂͛̀̋́̏̀̿͒̓̈́̈́͂̽̾͗͊̋̐̓̓̀̃̊̊͑̓̈̎̇͑̆̂̉̾̾̑͊̉̃́̑͌̀̌̐̅̃̿̆̎̈́̀̒́͛̓̀̊́̋͛͒͊̆̀̃̊͋̋̾̇̒̋͂̏͗͆̂̔́̐̀́͗̅̈̋̂̎̒͊̌̉̈̈́͌̈́̔̾̊̎́͐͒̋̽̽́̾̿̚̕͘͘̚̕̕̕̚̚̕̚̕͘͜͜͜͝͠͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅB̸̢̧̨̡̢̧̨̡̡̨̡̨̡̡̡̢̨̢̨̛̛̛̛̛̛͉̞͚̰̭̲͈͎͕͈̦͍͈̮̪̤̻̻͉̫̱͔̞̫̦̰͈̗̯̜̩̪̲̻̖̳͖̦͎͔̮̺̬̬̼̦̠̪̤͙͍͓̜̥̙̖̫̻̜͍̻̙̖̜̹͔̗̪̜̖̼̞̣̠̫͉̯̮̤͈͎̝̪͎͇͙̦̥͙̳̫̰̪̣̱̘̤̭̱͍̦͔̖͎̺̝̰̦̱̣͙̙̤͚̲͔̘̱̜̻͔̥̻͖̭͔̜͉̺͕͙͖̜͉͕̤͚̠̩̮̟͚̗͈͙̟̞̮̬̺̻̞͔̥͉͍̦̤͓̦̻̦̯̟̰̭̝̘̩̖̝͔̳͉̗̖̱̩̩̟͙͙͛̀͐̈́̂̇͛̅̒̉̏̈́̿͐́̏̃̏̓̌̽͐̈́͛̍͗͆͛̋̔̉͂̔̂̓̌͌͋̂͆̉͑̊̎́̈́̈̂͆͑́̃̍̇̿̅̾́́̿̅̾̆̅̈́̈̓͒͌͛̃͆̋͂̏̓̅̀͂̽̂̈̈́̎̾̐͋͑̅̍̈́̑̅̄͆̓̾̈́͐̎̊͐̌̌̓͊̊̔̈́̃͗̓͊͐̌͆̓͗̓̓̾̂̽͊͗́́́̽͊͆͋͊̀̑̿̔͒̏̈́́̏͆̈́͋̒͗͂̄̇̒͐̃͑̅̍͒̎̈́̌̋́̓͂̀̇͛̋͊͆̈́̋́̍̃͒̆̕̚̚̕̕̕͘̕̚̚͘̕͜͜͜͜͝͠͠͝͠͝͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅI̵̡̢̧̨̡̢̨̡̡̢̡̧̡̢̢̢̡̢̛̛͕͎͕̩̠̹̩̺̣̳̱͈̻̮̺̟̘̩̻̫͖̟͓̩̜̙͓͇̙̱̭̰̻̫̥̗̠͍͍͚̞̘̫͉̬̫̖̖̦͖͉̖̩̩̖̤̺̥̻̝͈͎̻͓̟̹͍̲͚͙̹̟̟̯͚̳̟͕̮̻̟͈͇̩̝̼̭̯͚͕̬͇̲̲̯̰̖̙̣̝͇̠̞̙͖͎̮̬̳̥̣̺̰͔̳̳̝̩̤̦̳̞̰̩̫̟͚̱̪̘͕̫̼͉̹̹̟̮̱̤̜͚̝̠̤̖̮̯̳͖̗̹̞̜̹̭̿̏͋̒͆̔̄̃̾̓͛̾̌́̅̂͆̔͌͆͋̔̾́̈̇̐̄̑̓̂̾́̄̿̓̅̆͌̉̎̏̄͛̉͆̓̎͒͘̕̕͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͝͠ͅͅƠ̷̢̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̟̰͔͔͇̲̰̮̘̭̭̖̥̟̘̠̬̺̪͇̲͋͂̅̈́̍͂̽͗̾͒̇̇̒͐̍̽͊́̑̇̑̾̉̓̈̾͒̍̌̅̒̾̈́̆͌̌̾̎̽̐̅̏́̈̔͛̀̋̃͊̒̓͗͒̑͒̃͂̌̄̇̑̇͛̆̾͛̒̇̍̒̓̀̈́̄̐͂̍͊͗̎̔͌͛̂̏̉̊̎͗͊͒̂̈̽̊́̔̊̃͑̈́̑̌̋̓̅̔́́͒̄̈́̈̂͐̈̅̈̓͌̓͊́̆͌̉͐̊̉͛̓̏̓̅̈́͂̉̒̇̉̆̀̍̄̇͆͛̏̉̑̃̓͂́͋̃̆̒͋̓͊̄́̓̕̕̕̚͘͘͘̚̕̚͘̕̕͜͜͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͝͠ͅS̷̢̨̧̢̡̨̢̨̢̨̧̧̨̧͚̱̪͇̱̮̪̮̦̝͖̜͙̘̪̘̟̱͇͎̻̪͚̩͍̠̹̮͚̦̝̤͖̙͔͚̙̺̩̥̻͈̺̦͕͈̹̳̖͓̜͚̜̭͉͇͖̟͔͕̹̯̬͍̱̫̮͓̙͇̗̙̼͚̪͇̦̗̜̼̠͈̩̠͉͉̘̱̯̪̟͕̘͖̝͇̼͕̳̻̜͖̜͇̣̠̹̬̗̝͓̖͚̺̫͛̉̅̐̕͘͜͜͜͜ͅͅͅ.̶̨̢̢̨̢̨̢̛̻͙̜̼̮̝̙̣̘̗̪̜̬̳̫̙̮̣̹̥̲̥͇͈̮̟͉̰̮̪̲̗̳̰̫̙͍̦̘̠̗̥̮̹̤̼̼̩͕͉͕͇͙̯̫̩̦̟̦̹͈͔̱̝͈̤͓̻̟̮̱͖̟̹̝͉̰͊̓̏̇͂̅̀̌͑̿͆̿̿͗̽̌̈́̉̂̀̒̊̿͆̃̄͑͆̃̇͒̀͐̍̅̃̍̈́̃̕͘͜͜͝͠͠z̴̢̢̡̧̢̢̧̢̨̡̨̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̲͚̠̜̮̠̜̞̤̺͈̘͍̻̫͖̣̥̗̙̳͓͙̫̫͖͍͇̬̲̳̭̘̮̤̬̖̼͎̬̯̼̮͔̭̠͎͓̼̖̟͈͓̦̩̦̳̙̮̗̮̩͙͓̮̰̜͎̺̞̝̪͎̯̜͈͇̪̙͎̩͖̭̟͎̲̩͔͓͈͌́̿͐̍̓͗͑̒̈́̎͂̋͂̀͂̑͂͊͆̍͛̄̃͌͗̌́̈̊́́̅͗̉͛͌͋̂̋̇̅̔̇͊͑͆̐̇͊͋̄̈́͆̍̋̏͑̓̈́̏̀͒̂̔̄̅̇̌̀̈́̿̽̋͐̾̆͆͆̈̌̿̈́̎͌̊̓̒͐̾̇̈́̍͛̅͌̽́̏͆̉́̉̓̅́͂͛̄̆͌̈́̇͐̒̿̾͌͊͗̀͑̃̊̓̈̈́̊͒̒̏̿́͑̄̑͋̀̽̀̔̀̎̄͑̌̔́̉̐͛̓̐̅́̒̎̈͆̀̍̾̀͂̄̈́̈́̈́̑̏̈́̐̽̐́̏̂̐̔̓̉̈́͂̕̚̕͘͘̚͘̚̕̚̚̚͘̕̕̕͜͜͝͠͠͝͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅī̸̧̧̧̡̨̨̢̨̛̛̘͓̼̰̰̮̗̰͚̙̥̣͍̦̺͈̣̻͇̱͔̰͈͓͖͈̻̲̫̪̲͈̜̲̬̖̻̰̦̰͙̤̘̝̦̟͈̭̱̮̠͍̖̲͉̫͔͖͔͈̻̖̝͎̖͕͔̣͈̤̗̱̀̅̃̈́͌̿̏͋̊̇̂̀̀̒̉̄̈́͋͌̽́̈́̓̑̈̀̍͗͜͜͠͠ͅp̴̢̢̧̨̡̡̨̢̨̢̢̢̨̡̛̛͕̩͕̟̫̝͈̖̟̣̲̖̭̙͇̟̗͖͎̹͇̘̰̗̝̹̤̺͉͎̙̝̟͙͚̦͚͖̜̫̰͖̼̤̥̤̹̖͉͚̺̥̮̮̫͖͍̼̰̭̤̲͔̩̯̣͖̻͇̞̳̬͉̣̖̥̣͓̤͔̪̙͎̰̬͚̣̭̞̬͎̼͉͓̮͙͕̗̦̞̥̮̘̻͎̭̼͚͎͈͇̥̗͖̫̮̤̦͙̭͎̝͖̣̰̱̩͎̩͎̘͇̟̠̱̬͈̗͍̦̘̱̰̤̱̘̫̫̮̥͕͉̥̜̯͖̖͍̮̼̲͓̤̮͈̤͓̭̝̟̲̲̳̟̠͉̙̻͕͙̞͔̖͈̱̞͓͔̬̮͎̙̭͎̩̟̖͚̆͐̅͆̿͐̄̓̀̇̂̊̃̂̄̊̀͐̍̌̅͌̆͊̆̓́̄́̃̆͗͊́̓̀͑͐̐̇͐̍́̓̈́̓̑̈̈́̽͂́̑͒͐͋̊͊̇̇̆̑̃̈́̎͛̎̓͊͛̐̾́̀͌̐̈́͛̃̂̈̿̽̇̋̍͒̍͗̈͘̚̚͘̚͘͘͜͜͜͜͜͜͠͠͝͝ͅͅͅ☻♥■∞{╚mYÄÜXτ╕○\╚Θº£¥ΘBM@Q05♠{{↨↨▬§¶‼↕◄►☼1♦  wumbo╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
20 minutes ago, Serin said:

As I understand it this is more about encryption apps and the like - programs that ASIO has evidently noticed are being used by people of interest to our security agency.
So far as I can tell the proposal is to get a court order, present that to the developer of whatever software is in question then have them provide a key or perhaps a log of on-going communications.
ASIO's stated that something like 60% of their current watch list involves encryption, so I don't consider it a terrible thought to be able ask the courts for permission to access.
Much better I think than the alternative "just build a backdoor into everything" like the yanks seem to be fond of.
The alternative of simply allowing means of communication for bastards that we really ought not be fond of is... rather odd, considering that we already have laws designed for the interception of phones et al. 

This of course coming from someone who is decidedly not a fan of Turnbull's lack of courage or indeed his party of christian fanatics.

With a well-implemented encryption scheme, the developers should not be able to access encrypted contents at all. Meaning a court order would be worthless as the developer literally cannot decrypt said information in a properly functioning encryption scheme that lacks a back-door or some master key.

My eyes see the past…

My camera lens sees the present…

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
5 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

With a well-implemented encryption scheme, the developers should not be able to access encrypted contents at all. Meaning a court order would be worthless as the developer literally cannot decrypt said information in a properly functioning encryption scheme that lacks a back-door or some master key.

Which is why I think Turnbull is saying Australian law will trump that of math, in other words make it work or make it illegal. 

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 minute ago, mr moose said:

Which is why I think Turnbull is saying Australian law will trump that of math, in other words make it work or make it illegal. 

Will probably not be a very enforceable law on the individual standpoint. When anyone with a compiler can write whatever code they desire, I would very much like to see any government fool enough to enforce this type of law to be made a laughing stock.

My eyes see the past…

My camera lens sees the present…

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
4 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Will probably not be a very enforceable law on the individual standpoint. When anyone with a compiler can write whatever code they desire, I would very much like to see any government fool enough to enforce this type of law to be made a laughing stock.

 

which is why I said earlier I don't know what they are hoping to achieve.    Maybe the terrorists they are targeting don't know how to code.  Maybe they just want blanket access to messenger services or the ability to unlock phones at will.   Either way it is not beyond the realms of reality for the Australian government to issue a warning to the big messenger providers and phone manufacturers to either make it possible or face product bans in the country.

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
5 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

1siq3d.jpg.8f6d8bcc2c64bc50f56c089dbf4b9c0d.jpg

If only those idiots would actually do that and allow natural selection remove them from our society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
3 hours ago, BuckGup said:

The US just lies and say they don't do this while everyone knows they do

Yes but if it's illegal on the books we at least can't be prosecuted for it

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

No wonder the NBN has been doing so well...

 

Doing the country proud, Malcolm.

'Fanboyism is stupid' - someone on this forum.

Be nice to each other boys and girls. And don't cheap out on a power supply.

Spoiler

CPU: Intel Core i7 4790K - 4.5 GHz | Motherboard: ASUS MAXIMUS VII HERO | RAM: 32GB Corsair Vengeance Pro DDR3 | SSD: Samsung 850 EVO - 500GB | GPU: MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming 6GB | PSU: EVGA SuperNOVA 650 G2 | Case: NZXT Phantom 530 | Cooling: CRYORIG R1 Ultimate | Monitor: ASUS ROG Swift PG279Q | Peripherals: Corsair Vengeance K70 and Razer DeathAdder

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
7 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

With a well-implemented encryption scheme, the developers should not be able to access encrypted contents at all. Meaning a court order would be worthless as the developer literally cannot decrypt said information in a properly functioning encryption scheme that lacks a back-door or some master key.


Indeed, though I'd note that its well within accepted practices here to simply demand companies that wish to operate here comply with our laws - perhaps parliament will pull a 'if you want to operate here you must have some means of accessing your own software's traffic' deal.
Of course the actual real-world results of this are yet to be seen.
One assumes that not all of the providers of encrypted comm's actually have zero means of accessing stuff - one also assumes that few of said companies actually want the aforementioned bastards using their services.

If ASIO is poking around with this I have to make the assumption that they actually have some vague notion of what they're talking about. As much as an appear to authority as it is... still, so long as they're not losing their HQ plans on the laptops of tradies they seem to be pretty good at their role. 

In any case I am rather happy to see our laws dragged into the 21st century.

 

"The wheel?" "No thanks, I'll walk, its more natural" - thus was the beginning of the doom of the Human race.
Cheese monger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
18 minutes ago, Serin said:


 As much as an appear to authority as it is...
 

 

I think it is a pretty acceptable appeal, it's not like you are appealing to the opinion of one asio member but instead the whole of asio as an organization of professionals.

Also, I don't want to contemplate what it means if our chief intelligence agency has less clout than a bunch of forum nerds.  :(

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Threadly reminder that a lot of the large attacks recently, such as WannaCry were only possible because of governmental backdoors.

Australia is basically saying "we thing computers these days are too safe, and would like to make them vulnerable by design".

 

By the way, one of the reasons why they want to backdoor encryption is because Australian attorney-general George Brandis claims that GCHQ can crack E2E.

If that's true then they basically are saying "yeah we can totally break encryption so please let's pass this law which makes it so that we can see what's inside encrypted traffic". If what he claimed was true then they would not need a law for it.

 

Also, Brandis is a fucking idiot and a slimy cunt. Here he is in an interview talking about when the Australian government wanted to track (among other things) the browsing history of their citizens.

 

 

I wish the person who came up with this would test test of Australia's anti-suicide law is stronger than the law of gravity by jumping off a bridge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
8 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Will probably not be a very enforceable law on the individual standpoint. When anyone with a compiler can write whatever code they desire, I would very much like to see any government fool enough to enforce this type of law to be made a laughing stock.

8 hours ago, mr moose said:

which is why I said earlier I don't know what they are hoping to achieve.    Maybe the terrorists they are targeting don't know how to code.  Maybe they just want blanket access to messenger services or the ability to unlock phones at will.   Either way it is not beyond the realms of reality for the Australian government to issue a warning to the big messenger providers and phone manufacturers to either make it possible or face product bans in the country.

You two are making the assumption that the government actually has well intentions for trying to pass this law. To me it seems like they just want to be able to spy on their population in a more efficient and accurate manner.

 

Time and time again it has actually been shown that more surveillance is not the answer to stopping terrorist attacks. In fact, in the majority of terrorist attacks the terrorist was already known but because of a lack of resources was not monitored as thoroughly as he should have been.

 

IN 2015 France had about 20,000 people on their national security watch list, with 11,000 had been confirmed to be Islamist extremists. But on top of those 20K known threats they also have about 67 million lawful citizens that are being monitored (although to a lesser degree). Why try and add more noise to the already very overstressed and noisy surveillance?

 

 

One of the things GCHQ and other agencies are developing is methods to predict who will become a criminal before they even do it. By analyzing essentially everything about you, they hope to be able to predict who will commit crimes and which people will commit several crimes. Encryption throws a big stick in the wheels of this by limiting the data they can collect.

This is not a wild conspiracy theory by the way. It has been confirmed to be in the works and for example Durham police has publicly said they will soon start using it. Durham's system is quite primitive compared to that of other, larger agencies though. For example it only use data they have collected between 2008 and 2013, and they will use it for determining if someone should be kept in custody or released on bail.

 

There are a lot of other behaviors you can predict if you got enough data, and the room for abuse is massive. Imagine if we in 100 years can predict who is going to vote for which party, and on top of that we are trusting a  computer that only the government has access to to detect criminals.

"Wait, this person is going to vote for party X? Let's just pretend like the computer detected that he is a criminal so he can't vote".

Might sound silly but it's just an example of how this type of absolute power can be very corruptive and harmful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

if you look at other silly laws that have been passed and the lack of information regarding these laws, it will give you an idea.

 

however this law is also silly, as most encrypted communications are outside the range of service providers. Some service providers like online services can outright refuse to host any content in australia and still operate while not having to do what the laws ask.

 

The encryption is end to end, so unless you have a quantum computer or a super computer to brute force, its really not going to happen not to mention the costs of a CPU+GPGPU super computer or quantum computer and the amount of data storage you need.

 

A lot of parties do silly things, this law is impossible (similar to trump's impossible wall) so its to ease the minds of the dumb which are plenty. The main question if you want to play politics is to look at the actual goals of the party and not what they say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Up next: Australian government to tell the laws of gravity to rack off!!

Please quote my post, or put @paddy-stone if you want me to respond to you.

Spoiler
  • PCs:- 
  • Main PC build  https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/2K6Q7X
  • ASUS x53e  - i7 2670QM / Sony BD writer x8 / Win 10, Elemetary OS, Ubuntu/ Samsung 830 SSD
  • Lenovo G50 - 8Gb RAM - Samsung 860 Evo 250GB SSD - DVD writer
  •  
  • Displays:-
  • Philips 55 OLED 754 model
  • Panasonic 55" 4k TV
  • LG 29" Ultrawide
  • Philips 24" 1080p monitor as backup
  •  
  • Storage/NAS/Servers:-
  • ESXI/test build  https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/4wyR9G
  • Main Server https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/3Qftyk
  • Backup server - HP Proliant Gen 8 4 bay NAS running FreeNAS ZFS striped 3x3TiB WD reds
  • HP ProLiant G6 Server SE316M1 Twin Hex Core Intel Xeon E5645 2.40GHz 48GB RAM
  •  
  • Gaming/Tablets etc:-
  • Xbox One S 500GB + 2TB HDD
  • PS4
  • Nvidia Shield TV
  • Xiaomi/Pocafone F2 pro 8GB/256GB
  • Xiaomi Redmi Note 4

 

  • Unused Hardware currently :-
  • 4670K MSI mobo 16GB ram
  • i7 6700K  b250 mobo
  • Zotac GTX 1060 6GB Amp! edition
  • Zotac GTX 1050 mini

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Threadly reminder that a lot of the large attacks recently, such as WannaCry were only possible because of governmental backdoors.

Australia is basically saying "we thing computers these days are too safe, and would like to make them vulnerable by design".

 

By the way, one of the reasons why they want to backdoor encryption is because Australian attorney-general George Brandis claims that GCHQ can crack E2E.

If that's true then they basically are saying "yeah we can totally break encryption so please let's pass this law which makes it so that we can see what's inside encrypted traffic". If what he claimed was true then they would not need a law for it.

 

Also, Brandis is a fucking idiot and a slimy cunt. Here he is in an interview talking about when the Australian government wanted to track (among other things) the browsing history of their citizens.

 

 

I wish the person who came up with this would test test of Australia's anti-suicide law is stronger than the law of gravity by jumping off a bridge.

That's incredible...

 

So you're storing what sites I visited?

Nope, we're only storing the web address

 

Lmao, doesn't know what meta data is? More like doesn't know how the internet works fullstop.

Main Rig:-

Ryzen 7 3800X | Asus ROG Strix X570-F Gaming | 16GB Team Group Dark Pro 3600Mhz | Corsair MP600 1TB PCIe Gen 4 | Sapphire 5700 XT Pulse | Corsair H115i Platinum | WD Black 1TB | WD Green 4TB | EVGA SuperNOVA G3 650W | Asus TUF GT501 | Samsung C27HG70 1440p 144hz HDR FreeSync 2 | Ubuntu 20.04.2 LTS |

 

Server:-

Intel NUC running Server 2019 + Synology DSM218+ with 2 x 4TB Toshiba NAS Ready HDDs (RAID0)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
13 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

That's incredible...

 

So you're storing what sites I visited?

Nope, we're only storing the web address

 

Lmao, doesn't know what meta data is? More like doesn't know how the internet works fullstop.

Well he is not wrong. It's just that he is trying to make it sound like less than it really is.

 

They were not storing the HTML code your browser fetched, which is why he kept saying "what they are viewing is not going to be caught". They did however collect the URL you visited (among other things), which is that "electronic address" he keeps referring to.

Basically, he did not lie, but he was trying to mislead people by saying the content they viewed would not be logged in an attempt to make people think that the addresses would not be stored (which they would).

That's why I called him a slimy cunt. He is deliberately trying to mislead people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
4 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Well he is not wrong. It's just that he is trying to make it sound like less than it really is.

 

They were not storing the HTML code your browser fetched, which is why he kept saying "what they are viewing is not going to be caught". They did however collect the URL you visited (among other things), which is that "electronic address" he keeps referring to.

Basically, he did not lie, but he was trying to mislead people by saying the content they viewed would not be logged in an attempt to make people think that the addresses would not be stored (which they would).

That's why I called him a slimy cunt. He is deliberately trying to mislead people.

thats because they want people to accept the law and not protest. If enough people protest the streets peacefully it should work. Should you ever decide to be violent in protest in australia make sure only to wreck government property and not other peoples stuff. During the race protest before which got violent, peoples houses were broken into, stuff was stolen and peoples stuff were vandalised making the protest to end colour discrimination not mean a damn thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

While you are at it, why not change the laws of physics too? A perpetum mobile would be handy. /s

 

This is a bad move. While software bugs can be a disaster (wannacry anyone?), backdoors are even worse. When the decription key gets into the wrong hands (and you know the system that protect them have bugs too), it will cause billion and billions of (take whatever currency you want). And terrorists are often using unencriped channels but on places you don't expect them, so you miss them.

Mineral oil and 40 kg aluminium heat sinks are a perfect combination: 73 cores and a Titan X, Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Oil

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
17 hours ago, mr moose said:

 

which is why I said earlier I don't know what they are hoping to achieve.    Maybe the terrorists they are targeting don't know how to code.  Maybe they just want blanket access to messenger services or the ability to unlock phones at will.   Either way it is not beyond the realms of reality for the Australian government to issue a warning to the big messenger providers and phone manufacturers to either make it possible or face product bans in the country.

Actually it's very difficult to make an ecription service that is really secure. Man in the middle and side channel attaks are not so easy to avoid even if the encription sheme used it theoretically 100% save.

Mineral oil and 40 kg aluminium heat sinks are a perfect combination: 73 cores and a Titan X, Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Oil

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
10 hours ago, LAwLz said:

You two are making the assumption that the government actually has well intentions for trying to pass this law. To me it seems like they just want to be able to spy on their population in a more efficient and accurate manner.

 

Time and time again it has actually been shown that more surveillance is not the answer to stopping terrorist attacks. In fact, in the majority of terrorist attacks the terrorist was already known but because of a lack of resources was not monitored as thoroughly as he should have been.

 

IN 2015 France had about 20,000 people on their national security watch list, with 11,000 had been confirmed to be Islamist extremists. But on top of those 20K known threats they also have about 67 million lawful citizens that are being monitored (although to a lesser degree). Why try and add more noise to the already very overstressed and noisy surveillance?

 

 

One of the things GCHQ and other agencies are developing is methods to predict who will become a criminal before they even do it. By analyzing essentially everything about you, they hope to be able to predict who will commit crimes and which people will commit several crimes. Encryption throws a big stick in the wheels of this by limiting the data they can collect.

This is not a wild conspiracy theory by the way. It has been confirmed to be in the works and for example Durham police has publicly said they will soon start using it. Durham's system is quite primitive compared to that of other, larger agencies though. For example it only use data they have collected between 2008 and 2013, and they will use it for determining if someone should be kept in custody or released on bail.

 

There are a lot of other behaviors you can predict if you got enough data, and the room for abuse is massive. Imagine if we in 100 years can predict who is going to vote for which party, and on top of that we are trusting a  computer that only the government has access to to detect criminals.

"Wait, this person is going to vote for party X? Let's just pretend like the computer detected that he is a criminal so he can't vote".

Might sound silly but it's just an example of how this type of absolute power can be very corruptive and harmful.

I haven't made any assumptions.  In fact I have done the opposite given I used the qualify "maybe" before every suggestion as to why they might be doing this. The only real assumption I made was that such an endeavour would be futile on the governments part.

 

Interesting though that you accuse me of making assumptions then go and make whole lot yourself regarding the governments intentions/motivations,  Some might be true, however I'll address a few with information I know to be relevant:

 

We have had good results with surveillance stopping terrorists attacks in Aus.  Have they stopped all of them? no, will they? probably not. But we know current surveillance has stopped a few so to blanket claim it is not the answer is a little bit erroneous. Especially if the cause is genuine and a court warrant is required.

 

Here's a somewhat fuzzy list. some of these were uncovered due to public dobbing them in while others where stopped becasue they were under surveillance.

http://www.news.com.au/national/crime/the-11-imminent-terror-attacks-australia-narrowly-escaped/news-story/86fc734df0963e21fe038c0eecce7d80

 

 

Also yes, Brandis is a slimy cunt, you'll get no argument from me, he is an embarrassment in many ways, however I will forgive all politicians for not being absolute experts in every field, they can't be and have to rely on advice and work within government as a whole, and our government (both sides) as a whole isn't quite as bad as the US or UK when it comes to such policy.  Why do I believe this? I've been following politics in Australia since 1992 and educated myself about the politics during the 2 decades leading up to that point.   Our politics has entered a very delicate stage of being a social media driven government running the country.  And in keeping with the topic,  we have the added issues that modern communications cannot be treated the way old communications were. But if we are not careful all we are going to do is give criminals the tools they need to fuck everybody over unchecked becasue our paranoia won't let us discuss and work through to a solution.   I think the thing the Australian people deserve here is more transparency and guarantees regarding the reach any government agency has without a court warrant.  

 

I have taken the liberty of bolding the important qualifiers and if-clauses because someone is bound to respond "that list is people dobbing them in not surveillance" and other things that I have already expressly accounted for. 

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
On ‎7‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 4:50 PM, Teddy07 said:

Every country has its own stupid laws.

 

My country Germany for example recently passed anti free speech law.

maybe its time to move from germany then they abolish that stupid law as no faster way to end kings reign then king suppressing the population

look at european history of monarchys and main reason for democracy to be created

dictatorships become parliaments

then history repeats

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 hours ago, mr moose said:

I haven't made any assumptions.  In fact I have done the opposite given I used the qualify "maybe" before every suggestion as to why they might be doing this. The only real assumption I made was that such an endeavour would be futile on the governments part.

 

Interesting though that you accuse me of making assumptions then go and make whole lot yourself regarding the governments intentions/motivations,  Some might be true, however I'll address a few with information I know to be relevant:

I'm sorry if I offended you. I read your post and got the impression that you were thinking of ways the government would want to do this to combat terrorism, while I think they are doing it just because they want more spying power. I don't think making assumptions is wrong in and of itself so I did not mean it as an insult to you in any way.

 

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

We have had good results with surveillance stopping terrorists attacks in Aus.  Have they stopped all of them? no, will they? probably not. But we know current surveillance has stopped a few so to blanket claim it is not the answer is a little bit erroneous. Especially if the cause is genuine and a court warrant is required.

 

Here's a somewhat fuzzy list. some of these were uncovered due to public dobbing them in while others where stopped becasue they were under surveillance.

http://www.news.com.au/national/crime/the-11-imminent-terror-attacks-australia-narrowly-escaped/news-story/86fc734df0963e21fe038c0eecce7d80

I can not find any evidence in that article which indicates that this type of blanket surveillance, like for example logging every single website every single person in Australia visits, contributed to stopping any of those planned terrorist attacks.

There is a massive difference between targeted surveillance and mass surveillance. I am all for targeted surveillance but strictly against mass surveillance. That's why I said we should not add more noise.

 

"This person is a known Islamic extremist. Let's monitor him" = Good idea.

"This person is a known Islamic extremist. Let's monitor him, plus let's build a system where we collect private information about about 24 million lawful citizens too" = Bad idea.

 

You're putting 24 million people at risk of massive damages (again, look at WannaCry which the NSA were responsible for) just because you don't feel like using the tools you claim to already have access to.

My guess is that Australia is either lying about GCHQ being able to crack E2E (doesn't tell us which implementation of it) or they can do it but they want to apply it to all citizens and not just the people they want to do targeted surveillance on, but their current method is too complex to do it on a grand scale.

My bet is that it's a bit of both but mostly the latter.

 

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

Also yes, Brandis is a slimy cunt, you'll get no argument from me, he is an embarrassment in many ways, however I will forgive all politicians for not being absolute experts in every field, they can't be and have to rely on advice and work within government as a whole, and our government (both sides) as a whole isn't quite as bad as the US or UK when it comes to such policy.

To me it seems like he knows what he is talking about. The way he worded his answers indicates that he knows exactly what is happening, but tried to present it in a way that would mislead the people listening to him. Being uneducated about some subject is fine, and relying on advice is necessary. I will however not be forgiving to people trying to deliberately mislead others.

 

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

And in keeping with the topic,  we have the added issues that modern communications cannot be treated the way old communications were. But if we are not careful all we are going to do is give criminals the tools they need to fuck everybody over unchecked becasue our paranoia won't let us discuss and work through to a solution.

It is impossible to make something that is backdoored by the government, and safe for the average person to use. It is as illogical as saying "yes I know a lot of people need kitchen knives, but if we are not careful we will give criminals the tools they need to stab someone. Therefore all knives should be banned".

Security is something people need. It is not something you can compromise on just because you are worried criminals can misuse it.

 

Also, how can you possibly call it paranoia when we have several times over a short period of time seem massive attacks that has damaged both companies and people, all because of governments wanting to have their own backdoors into products? It's only paranoia if you are delusional and irrational. In this case there is absolutely not delusional or irrational to be worried about the implications of backing extremely important software have known defects which can be exploited by criminals at any moment. It has already happened several times.

 

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

I think the thing the Australian people deserve here is more transparency and guarantees regarding the reach any government agency has without a court warrant.  

I think the Australian people deserve security. Backdooring all their products is the exact opposite of that. A backdoor is a deliberate security hole.

 

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

someone is bound to respond "that list is people dobbing them in not surveillance"

Too late!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
27 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

 

I can not find any evidence in that article which indicates that this type of blanket surveillance, like for example logging every single website every single person in Australia visits, contributed to stopping any of those planned terrorist attacks.

There is a massive difference between targeted surveillance and mass surveillance. I am all for targeted surveillance but strictly against mass surveillance. That's why I said we should not add more noise.

 

"This person is a known Islamic extremist. Let's monitor him" = Good idea.

"This person is a known Islamic extremist. Let's monitor him, plus let's build a system where we collect private information about about 24 million lawful citizens too" = Bad idea.

 

 

Not blanket surveillance, just surveillance.  The question then becomes, should the proposed new measures actually work, would it stop more?  I don't think we can know until it happened (ASIO are not going to just handout their operating MO just to prove this).

27 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

 

 

 

You're putting 24 million people at risk of massive damages (again, look at WannaCry which the NSA were responsible for) just because you don't feel like using the tools you claim to already have access to.

My guess is that Australia is either lying about GCHQ being able to crack E2E (doesn't tell us which implementation of it) or they can do it but they want to apply it to all citizens and not just the people they want to do targeted surveillance on, but their current method is too complex to do it on a grand scale.

My bet is that it's a bit of both but mostly the latter.

 

I'm not, But this of course is still hangs on the assumption that they just want the ability to spy on everyone without question or appeal.

 

27 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

To me it seems like he knows what he is talking about. The way he worded his answers indicates that he knows exactly what is happening, but tried to present it in a way that would mislead the people listening to him. Being uneducated about some subject is fine, and relying on advice is necessary. I will however not be forgiving to people trying to deliberately mislead others.

 

Nah, he's a politician, and to be as bigoted as him and still get voted in you have to be a good one.  He knows nothing of the technology.  His job is to get the measures through.  This makes it hard for average citizens like us to properly understand how the measures will effect us.  That is another reason why I said we deserve transparency.

 

27 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

 

Also, how can you possibly call it paranoia when we have several times over a short period of time seem massive attacks that has damaged both companies and people, all because of governments wanting to have their own backdoors into products? It's only paranoia if you are delusional and irrational. In this case there is absolutely not delusional or irrational to be worried about the implications of backing extremely important software have known defects which can be exploited by criminals at any moment. It has already happened several times.

 

 

I call it paranoia because concluding the government has alternate motives that are actually only founded on a fear and not really evidenced is by definition paranoia.  When people make this a concrete one or the other argument, they essentially force the issue into taking one of only two options:

 

1. Ensure everyone has the right to privacy without the possibility of decryption in any circumstance - handing criminals a tool to continue with their activities.

 

or

 

2. Provide a backdoor that might get breached like wannacry, in which case you are trading potential losses for companies that don't want to implement basic security measures for the potential to stop deadly terror attacks.  

 

It really is that black and white when it boils down to it.  Maybe there is a middle ground compromise, but we will never know while people outright refuse to discuss it and lobby against/for it.  And by this I mean all sides of the debate. As I said before, the internet has brought a whole new realm of issues for fighting crime and the old laws don't work anymore.  New laws can be (and have been) exploited so discussion needs to happen, not outright dismissal.

 

 

EDIT: I should also add that while we should be cautious of what other things can be done with these new measures,  The possibility to do other things is not evidence of motive. 

 

 

 

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

the tech industry should just give the middle finger and let Australia go back to SMS and see how they like it

One day I will be able to play Monster Hunter Frontier in French/Italian/English on my PC, it's just a matter of time... 4 5 6 7 8 9 years later: It's finally coming!!!

Phones: iPhone 4S/SE | LG V10 | Lumia 920 | Samsung S24 Ultra

Laptops: Macbook Pro 15" (mid-2012) | Compaq Presario V6000

Other: Steam Deck

<>EVs are bad, they kill the planet and remove freedoms too some/<>

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing Tech News

×