Australian Government Proposing Laws to enable the police to gain access to encrypted mobile phones.

[suicidalfranco]

don't know, still thinks the UK takes the cake for worst western government by a long shot.

[overlord360]

4 minutes ago, asus killer said:

like them getting a search warrant to your house and even knowing the color of your underwear, of reading someones diary?

It's not just searching a house, you can throw away a 5 year old newspaper clipping that you stored in a shoebox. You can't delete messages on certain platforms. And Tom Scott put ir quite well in his video where he pointed out that it's not just what laws exist now but what laws will exist in the future

 

source: 

 

[LAwLz]

11 minutes ago, Arika S said:

Agreed

 

I put safety above privacy

If you do, then you should be against mandatory backdoors, because it is a MASSIVE safety issue.

How many more WannaCry attacks do we need before people realize that keeping security issues hidden, or having mandatory security holes in products is a bad idea from a security and safety standpoint?

 

 

9 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Monitoring activity =/=backdoor into devices. Scanning traffic over one's servers is just that. It's not scanning the contents of a device. It's not forcing someone to decrypt their device arbitrarily.

Yes, that is a backdoor.

And I recommend you read the article a bit more carefully. They are explicitly asking for ways to scan the content of devices. Not the content of messages during transmission, but rather when the content is on the device.

 

Also, the suggestion is that someone could have their device forcefully decrypted.

 

Did you not read the article? Because you are literally saying the exact opposite of what is outlined in the article.

[asus killer]

1 minute ago, overlord360 said:

It's not just searching a house, you can throw away a 5 year old newspaper clipping that you stored in a shoebox. You can't delete messages on certain platforms. And Tom Scott put ir quite well in his video

what does that have to do with this discussion? i saw nowhere the Australian government asking anyone to keep messages forever. Don't use a service that keeps your shit forever.

Shouldn't you be complainant about the companies that do that?

 

 

[overlord360]

1 minute ago, asus killer said:

i saw nowhere the Australian government asking anyone to keep messages forever.

The government may not directly be asking for your entire message history, however if there is a backdoor that enables you decrypt one message you can decrypt all the messages from every conversation with everyone you've ever had a conversation with. It's not about whether they say they will or not, but that they can read all the messages if they want to.

[suicidalfranco]

Also companies who could end up affected should just close shop for a month or two and see how they'll like it.

Can already see the populace walking like zombies on the streets wondering why their tweets won't post.

What a beautiful sight that would be. A man can only dream of such fantasies.

[Trik'Stari]

45 minutes ago, Arika S said:

Agreed

 

I put safety above privacy

Doing so gives you neither in the end. History has shown this time and time again.

 

If you have nothing to hide, they have no reason to look.

[Arika]

3 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

If you have nothing to hide, they have no reason to look.

Last time I said something along these lines I got crucified

[LAwLz]

1 minute ago, Arika S said:

Last time I said something along these lines I got crucified

Chances are you said "you got nothing to fear if you got nothing to hide", which is basically the opposite of what Trik'Stari said.

[Trik'Stari]

5 minutes ago, Arika S said:

Last time I said something along these lines I got crucified

Whomever did so is flat out wrong. In the US, you are assumed innocent until proven guilty. Unless they have some valid reason to look, they don't get to. They don't get to say "well if you don't want us looking you must have something to hide", that's not how it works. That's not how it should EVER work.

 

Privacy is the glue that holds society together. Giving the government unfettered access to violate anyone and everyones privacy without due process and measures in place to ensure accountability, is just asking for that power to be abused.

 

Nevermind that even with measures in place to ensure accountability, there would be nothing stopping them from attempting to blackmail whoever is supposed to oversee them. Just look at the shit the FBI has done recently and in the past with them trying to manipulate Martin Luther King into committing suicide or ruining his marriage by fabricating evidence.

 

And that last bit isn't "nutjob conspiracy theory", it's actual confirmed and declassified information.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2017/12/13/an-old-letter-sheds-light-on-fbis-malice-toward-martin-luther-king-jr/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1e5bb4127e50

 

Some say "attribute to stupidity before malice", I agree, until that party has higher levels of authority and power. The more power they have, the more you must attribute to malice rather than stupidity.

[Dabombinable]

Anyone thinking along the lines of "you got nothing to fear if you got nothing to hide", read this article, stop being naive, and realise how bad that actually is for everyone:
https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/the-fallacy-of-you-have-nothing-to-fear-if-you-have-nothing-to-hide/

[Arika]

50 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

If you do, then you should be against mandatory backdoors

Oh I am, but I'm more against criminals having free reign to do what ever they like and the police essentially being told "fuck off, no evidence for you"

[LAwLz]

3 minutes ago, Arika S said:

Oh I am, but I'm more against criminals having free reign to do what ever they like and the police essentially being told "fuck off, no evidence for you"

What do you think will happen if backdoors become mandatory?

What do you think the positive effects will be, and what do you think the negative effects will be, if any?

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

This is the same government that said that the laws of mathematics don't apply to them, and only the laws they make apply, right?  When I read that headline I legitimately thought they were just mandating that it would now be breakable as if it was a magical incantation

Nope, Turnbull said the laws of the land trump the laws of math, what he meant was if the law of math dictates the encryption can't be broken then we'll ban encryption.  It was a threat to those who wish to intently prevent the course of justice.

 

1 hour ago, Vode said:

Australia seems like the worst country to live in.

 

Can't have guns, can't have free speech, social justice galore and now this.

 

Those liberals need to learn from history and not try to further strenghten their deluded agendas.

Melbourne ranked most livable city 7 years running and only yesterday ranked 2nd due to a slight increase in terrorist threats and similar crime.  Poo poo Australia all you want but it is the one of the safest and easiest places in the world to live like a king.

[Vode]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

Melbourne ranked most livable city 7 years running and only yesterday ranked 2nd due to a slight increase in terrorist threats and similar crime.  Poo poo Australia all you want but it is the one of the safest and easiest places in the world to live like a king.

Maybe for now. If they keep up with this stuff only matter of time until it goes wrong. IMO.

 

You can make the same argument for Vienna. Politics tend to act in a very short sighted manner and one pays the price down the line.

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, Vode said:

Maybe for now. If they keep up with this stuff only matter of time until it goes wrong. IMO.

 

You can make the same argument for Vienna. Politics tend to act in a very short sighted manner and one pays the price down the line.

Having been an active political observer for 20+ years I can assure you everything tends for the better over time.   Bad policies come and go, good policies tend to stay.  

[asus killer]

3 hours ago, overlord360 said:

The government may not directly be asking for your entire message history, however if there is a backdoor that enables you decrypt one message you can decrypt all the messages from every conversation with everyone you've ever had a conversation with. It's not about whether they say they will or not, but that they can read all the messages if they want to.

you do not know how search warrants work. There are always limits to what you can search.

 

i think you are confusing this with America craziness and FBI's/NSA's no warrant listening to all the calls, doing whatever the f* they want. There is a judge where.

[Amazonsucks]

8 hours ago, pinksnowbirdie said:

Seems perfectly fine to me /s

It still seems too much like a back door to me even if it's not.
I dont know enough of cryptography and cyber security to know if there's any way that could make LEAs able to conduct real investigations and not spy and still respect the privacy of everyone.

It is a backdoor.

 

The NSA, GCHQ and the ASD have been breaking into encrypted devices for decades. They dont need backdoors either. They just use malware to compromise the endpoint.

 

Keep in mind that China has basically bought and infiltrated Australia and NZ. Its not a big surprise that Australia is turning into an Orwellian police state filled with disarmed sheeple just like the UK.

 

 

With that level of influencing, politicians who claim that the laws of Australia trump math...

 

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/techtank/2017/07/17/no-the-laws-of-australia-dont-override-the-laws-of-mathematics/
 

Is it really a surprise that theyre moving toward a UK/China(funny how similar they are when it comes to being a police state) like model where encryption or other legitimate security tech, which is essential for businesses of all kinds are subject to idiotic backdoors?

 

China, Russia and the UK already have mandatory backdoor access to just about everything. Its what happens when you have a totalitarian police state run by incompetents and the corrupt scum that floats to the top.

[samcool55]

6 hours ago, Arika S said:

Agreed

 

I put safety above privacy

Information is neutral, it's how it will be used that will matter if it will be used for good or bad.

Let's say you like anime, perfectly legal, nothing wrong with that. Govs know that because well you don't care about privacy and they also know your address, name, number, everything.

 

10 years from know a big twat will rule your country and will say "kill all those weebs!" at that point you are 1 SQL query away from death. They will come after you and kill you, so all the time you thought telling the "good people" about yourself is what ended up being your death.

[PlayStation 2]

To me, this is a double edged sword.

On one end, I understand why they want to make it easier to get into a criminal's phone.

On another end, it's inevitable as fuck that this would be a huge security scandal and would result in very large lawsuits.

 

Basically, allow the government to access phones in criminal investigations vs. risk huge security loopholes for the purpose of "investigations". That's not even mentioning the corrupt uses of a backdoor like that would inevitably bring.

[Amazonsucks]

2 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

To me, this is a double edged sword.

On one end, I understand why they want to make it easier to get into a criminal's phone.

On another end, it's inevitable as fuck that this would be a huge security scandal and would result in very large lawsuits.

 

Basically, allow the government to access phones in criminal investigations vs. risk huge security loopholes for the purpose of "investigations". That's not even mentioning the corrupt uses of a backdoor like that would inevitably bring.

If the government has access, so does every criminal and foreign government.

[PlayStation 2]

1 minute ago, Amazonsucks said:

If the government has access, so does every criminal and foreign government.

And that's exactly what I fear.

It's not going to end well in the slightest.

[wasab]

I hate governments. We should go back to the stone age when the most sophisticated society is that of a family unit and no government exists whatsoever to lord over you. 

[LAwLz]

16 hours ago, samcool55 said:

10 years from know a big twat will rule your country and will say "kill all those weebs!" at that point you are 1 SQL query away from death. They will come after you and kill you, so all the time you thought telling the "good people" about yourself is what ended up being your death.

And anyone who think that is crazy and will never happen should pick up a history book, or if you don't think crazy politicians can get into power, maybe a newspaper would be a more enlightening read... Or just remember that the nazi party was in fact democratically elected, which lead to WW2.

[SansVarnic]

-= Moved to Tech News =-