Australians who won't unlock their phones could face ten years in jail • Hacker News Board

Re: Australians who won't unlock their phones could face ten years in jail

#141

Post by BLKNSLVR » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 1:19 AM UTC

ShorsHammer wrote: post #53

kodablah wrote: post #6

Also concerning is what they are doing towards companies (pardon the tangent): > It covers [...] device vendors [...] as long as they have "a nexus to Australia" > But what if the suspect stores the keys themselves? In that case, the government would pull out the big guns with a second kind of order called a technical capability notice. It forces communications providers to build new capabilities that would help the…

The article mentions both child abusers and terrorists yet the laws will rarely be used for that. Mandatory metadata retention was also bought in for the same reasons and has barely appeared as evidence in any subsequent cases, despite >300,000 warrantless metadata requests last year, overseen by a handful of public servants behind closed doors, in a country of 25 million people. Another very concerning law is about…

That's fucking scary. Never heard that story, will be looking into it.

Process for any whistleblowers:

- Don't go to your boss

- Don't go to the authorities

- Don't go to anyone who may be remotely suspected of having any involvement or benefit from the activities

- Research how to protect your identity online (this is a bit recursive, as researching how to protect your identity online may set off flags if you are suspected as the whistleblower)

- Burner phone

- Burner laptop

- Burner email address(es)

- Tor

- public wifi (know where the cameras are in the area and make sure you're unrecognisable on them, stake it out in winter when it's more acceptable to have your face covered with a scarf or something)

- Contact a respected journalist that's NOT in your local area

- Try to make sure the journalist has the facility to allow documents to be transferred by a SecureDrop system or similar

Australia's federal political-class appear to be deep in the pockets of mining companies given the extent of the resistance to renewable energy. I'd almost consider it naive to go to a politician about any kind of mining-related corruption in Australia.

Edit: Just noticed CPAHem's post saying it was QFTAC that got Fiona Wilson 'committed'. The Q stands for Queensland. To give you an idea of how protective the Queensland political class is of the mining and energy status quo, they're trying to get a NEW Coal Power Plant built in Queensland, and they have enough power behind them that the Federal Government is not flat-out saying no. There are no banks, Australian or otherwise, willing to fund the building of a new coal power plant because it's so far from financial viability that even existing coal power plants are shutting down because they can't compete on power prices.

Re: Australians who won't unlock their phones could face ten years in jail

#142

Post by techdragon » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 2:50 AM UTC

homonculus1 wrote: post #99

remoteorbust wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> she was then deemed a "fixated person", which involved incarceration without charge, being taken to a mental institution and forcibly injected with anti-psychotic drugs for months. Eventually a judge decided she could go home. All media coverage of it is banned in Australia until the trial is finished, which has been postponed at every hearing for over a year now Holy shit. Maybe I'll stop complaining about the US…

Yep, that's the entire point. It would be horrifying to have your name broadcast in connection to some heinous crime you didn't commit, but the alternative to broadcasting that is effectively secret trials. People should be able to view due process, they just need to withhold judgement until the facts come out in court.

The problem is that the average passer by, John/Jane Doe, doesn’t on average care enough about the abstract reasons why they should withhold judgment, they instead react along the line of “well if they are being investigated they are probably guilty” which is results in the public typically judging anyone dragged into the judicial process.

So it’s actually inverted outcomes from what you described, secret is normally good, (with obvious exceptions, such as the case in point) and public is normally bad.

Re: Australians who won't unlock their phones could face ten years in jail

#143

Post by jpindar » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 3:01 AM UTC

kazinator wrote: post #81

jpindar wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd pay extra for Android apps that have an option to force me to enter a password EVERY SINGLE TIME. Or at least provide a way to log out. There are a few that do, but not many.

Doesn't help if you're asked for the password, or else face prison.

There are other contexts for this than being in government custody.

Re: Australians who won't unlock their phones could face ten years in jail

#144

Post by locusm » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 3:20 AM UTC

CPAhem wrote: post #133

ShorsHammer wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article mentions both child abusers and terrorists yet the laws will rarely be used for that. Mandatory metadata retention was also bought in for the same reasons and has barely appeared as evidence in any subsequent cases, despite >300,000 warrantless metadata requests last year, overseen by a handful of public servants behind closed doors, in a country of 25 million people. Another very concerning law is about…

Former Origin Energy executive and whistleblower Fiona Wilson was detained by the new Queensland Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (QFTAC) and injected against her will and without any charges laid against her. Fiona has since been released but must report for her monthly injections otherwise she will be detained again. https://www.gofundme.com/barrister-needed-for-fiona-wilson

Live in Queensland, thats multiple levels of fucked up and never heard of it.

Re: Australians who won't unlock their phones could face ten years in jail

#145

Post by ShorsHammer » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 3:43 AM UTC

locusm wrote: post #144

CPAhem wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Former Origin Energy executive and whistleblower Fiona Wilson was detained by the new Queensland Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (QFTAC) and injected against her will and without any charges laid against her. Fiona has since been released but must report for her monthly injections otherwise she will be detained again. https://www.gofundme.com/barrister-needed-for-fiona-wilson

Live in Queensland, thats multiple levels of fucked up and never heard of it.

Media outlets often have to censor themselves, legal notices to pull articles in Australia are routine. The problem with this case is how it's been dragged out, silenced and the defendant slowly bled dry with legal fees, by the time it sees the light of day it will be old news.

A while ago the name of a senior state politician was pending trial on child pornography charges, there was a massive undertaking to ensure his name never got mentioned in print for the few months before trial.

Re: Australians who won't unlock their phones could face ten years in jail

#146

Post by ShorsHammer » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 3:48 AM UTC

kirrent wrote: post #103

d0lph wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did a search for "Fiona Wilson Australia fixated" and got back a few articles, not familiar enough with AU news to determine what is tabloids and what is not. Please post if anyone finds something reputable.

Did the same search. Everything is a tabloid or worse. Nothing reliable.

Wow that's a scary argument from authority, but you are right, only dubious blogs currently write about it.

The mainstream media are highly aware of the case, they are all legally blocked from mentioning it until the trial is finished.

A good article on the fixated persons unit by a QLD lawyer: https://independentaustralia.net/life/life-display/queenslan...

Re: Australians who won't unlock their phones could face ten years in jail

#147

Post by Bendingo » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 4:21 AM UTC

d0lph wrote: post #98

josephagoss wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding your example of this person being forced into a mental institution, are you able to provide a source? I'm interested in learning more especially as I'm living in Australia, this is quite terrifying indeed.

I did a search for "Fiona Wilson Australia fixated" and got back a few articles, not familiar enough with AU news to determine what is tabloids and what is not. Please post if anyone finds something reputable.

This source [1] is not tabloid and has conducted thorough investigations of other stories [2][3] that MSM ignores.

[1] https://independentaustralia.net/life/life-display/queenslan...

[2] https://independentaustralia.net/jacksonville

[3] https://independentaustralia.net/ashbygate

Re: Australians who won't unlock their phones could face ten years in jail

#148

Post by stale2002 » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 5:28 AM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #105

stale2002 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, then you give them your second password, and it is fine, because you actually have 3 passwords. The police can't just keep saying "we didn't find anything, therefore you MUST have ANOTHER double secret password!". At that point you are indistinguishable from someone who is innocent.

> The police can't just keep saying "we didn't find anything, therefore you MUST have ANOTHER double secret password!" You might want to watch "Making a Murderer". Or, for the UK equivalent, have a look at the Cleveland Child Abuse Scandal (where social workers were asking children questions like "Tell us the truth, you're not going home until you tell us what Daddy did to you"). The police can, and do, subject peopl…

Sure, but are that point you are already screwed, and it doesn't matter what you do.

Even if you ARE innocent, it doesn't matter.

The point of security measures is to make you indistinguishable from someone who's innocent.

Yes, you can counter this by saying "well they'll jail you anyway, even if you ARE innocent". But that's a different discussion entirely.

Re: Australians who won't unlock their phones could face ten years in jail

#149

Post by ShorsHammer » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 6:55 AM UTC

techdragon wrote: post #142

homonculus1 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, that's the entire point. It would be horrifying to have your name broadcast in connection to some heinous crime you didn't commit, but the alternative to broadcasting that is effectively secret trials. People should be able to view due process, they just need to withhold judgement until the facts come out in court.

The problem is that the average passer by, John/Jane Doe, doesn’t on average care enough about the abstract reasons why they should withhold judgment, they instead react along the line of “well if they are being investigated they are probably guilty” which is results in the public typically judging anyone dragged into the judicial process. So it’s actually inverted outcomes from what you described, secret is normally…

Completely agree, most trials should be reported fearlessly after completion and not have speculation or the court of public opinion loom over the judge/jury beforehand.

Yet it seems to be abused here in order to protect cozy relationships between a certain big business and the government. Whistleblowers proven correct should be held up on a pedestal and highly respected, not thrown to the wolves with little chance of future employment.

Re: Australians who won't unlock their phones could face ten years in jail

#150

Post by ajuc » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 7:02 AM UTC

grosjona wrote: post #93

ajuc wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free speech in a country that goes authoritarian is very harmful for your career. People in power have connections, they can make it hard for you to make a living without even breaking the law, just asking the right people for a favor. Anonymity is one of the things that make people more likely to say what's need to be said. Without protection of privacy - very few people will exercise their free speech when things g…

Maybe these types of people would not have power if everyone knew who they really where. That said I understand people who are afraid that loss of privacy would be asymmetric but I don't think that would happen. Celebrities and public figures will always have less privacy than everyone else.

> I understand people who are afraid that loss of privacy would be asymmetric but I don't think that would happen

If Trump wants to know your tax returns - he will. You don't know his, no matter how much you want to.

And anyway, Trump insist he could murder someone and give himself a pardon. You can't. So, even if the information flow is symetric - the consequences aren't.