Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of storing data in Australia

abc.net.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 294 posts

Re: Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of storing data in Australia

#21

Post by kdtsh »

dreamcompiler wrote: post #6

I was about ready to move all my email over to Fastmail before this happened. But not now.

For what it’s worth, email is not a private protocol/platform - some degree of encryption-at-rest and privacy-respecting SOPs can give services like Fastmail a fairly good screen against private malicious actors, but you should never count on email as a means of communication to have any decent way of protecting you from state surveillance, especially when you live under the jurisdiction of the state surveilling you.

Though that’s not to say that we should accept these laws as they apply to email services lying down. Any reason to refuse to use the services of Australian companies when foreign services of similar quality exist gives those Australian companies all the more reason to press the government to reform these laws on the grounds that they’re losing valuable business for negligible gain to national interest. If the government doesn’t listen to individual constituents, it might listen to companies which are hurting in their back pockets.

Re: Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of storing data in Australia

#22

Post by spydum »

ausd123 wrote: post #18
kdtsh wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have a legal right to both personal and private property under Australian law. I’m not sure where you got that idea.

I'm interested to know what the farmers whose properties get taken by mining companies have to say about that. Though genuinely unsure and curious as to whether that's a separate legal (or perhaps media reporting) issue.

To be fair this isn’t solved via constitutional rights in the US either - look up eminent domain law.

Re: Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of storing data in Australia

#24

Post by tracker1 »

jaza wrote: post #13
dgzl wrote: post #3

From what I understand, Australia (and other nations) don't give their citizens explicit rights, such as to personal and property privacy.

Australians have very few constitutionally guaranteed rights (compared to countries such as the US). The Constitution only gives us the right to vote, the right to a trial by jury, and freedom of religion (and a few others). But many more rights, including extensive privacy rights, exist in statute law and elsewhere. The main argument against adding more rights to the Constitution, is: "we don't want to end up with o…

The U.S. actually goes a step further... the only rights the constitution actually spells out are the rights of government. Most encroachments have been under the guise of "interstate commerce" or "taxation" in general...

> The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

As to the bill of rights, so long as the police are armed and can act with impunity... imho, the populace should be able to be armed. I don't personally own a firearm... I also don't spew racist rhetoric. I am a strong believer in all civil rights.

Re: Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of storing data in Australia

#25

Post by kdtsh »

C14L wrote: post #12
doorbellguy wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a thread I made about ProtonMail v FastMail and this one point came up at the top. However ProtonMail’s inability to support standard clients without an awkward bridge app seems to take edge off it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19372882

> ProtonMail’s inability to support standard clients without an awkward bridge app Isn't that one of the pros of Protonmail? All the data is encrypted and decrypted on the client. There is no way to have mail apps access the data without a piece of software that handles the encryption.

I guess it’s just the way you look at it, and maybe even what your priorities are in choosing an email service. To me at least, I’m thoroughly disinterested in an email service which doesn’t implement IMAPS.

Re: Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of storing data in Australia

#26

Post by tracker1 »

judge2020 wrote: post #20
jaza wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Australians have very few constitutionally guaranteed rights (compared to countries such as the US). The Constitution only gives us the right to vote, the right to a trial by jury, and freedom of religion (and a few others). But many more rights, including extensive privacy rights, exist in statute law and elsewhere. The main argument against adding more rights to the Constitution, is: "we don't want to end up with o…

> like the US with its right to bear arms I find this funny because the SCOTUS basically can change the Constitution whenever they want. The second amendment only states that the United States itself has a right to bear arms in order to defend itself (have a Militia)[0]. It didn't provide citizens the right to personal protection by guns until a 2008 Supreme Court case [1]. 0: https://www.constituteproject.org/consti…

"... shall not be infringed" because of the need for a "well regulated militia," not for said militia.

It's an example of why the right is needed. Especially given the people raised a violent coup against their own government. These people were not in favor of disarming the public in general... to interpret it otherwise would be effectively changing the law.

Re: Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of storing data in Australia

#27

Post by zaphirplane »

kdtsh wrote: post #8
dgzl wrote: post #3

From what I understand, Australia (and other nations) don't give their citizens explicit rights, such as to personal and property privacy.

People have a legal right to both personal and private property under Australian law. I’m not sure where you got that idea.

The comment was referring to privacy presumably search and enter

On an aside it appears Australia has done away with the self incrimination protection laws Is that a right in most democratic countries?

Re: Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of storing data in Australia

#28

Post by kdtsh »

ausd123 wrote: post #18
kdtsh wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have a legal right to both personal and private property under Australian law. I’m not sure where you got that idea.

I'm interested to know what the farmers whose properties get taken by mining companies have to say about that. Though genuinely unsure and curious as to whether that's a separate legal (or perhaps media reporting) issue.

This happens in a lot of countries and is a problem. That doesn’t mean that rights to private/personal property aren’t guaranteed by law in Australia, just that the law is skirted by monied interests. The farmers you talk about would likely be able to fight this in court if they had means - but such is the nature of late capitalism, money buys you political power and legal clout.

Re: Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of storing data in Australia

#29

Post by tacticus »

AndrewGaspar wrote: post #17
jaza wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Australians have very few constitutionally guaranteed rights (compared to countries such as the US). The Constitution only gives us the right to vote, the right to a trial by jury, and freedom of religion (and a few others). But many more rights, including extensive privacy rights, exist in statute law and elsewhere. The main argument against adding more rights to the Constitution, is: "we don't want to end up with o…

> the right to vote Yeah, but they mess even that up by making it obligatory. :)

You have to go. you don't have to pick. Makes it difficult for states to disenfranchise people through budget cuts.

Re: Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of storing data in Australia

#30

Post by mastazi »

I have migrated to Australia many years ago and I have recently become eligible to become a citizen. However I’ve heard stories of tech companies refusing to hire Australians because of the AA Bill, so I’m holding it off for now. The problem seems to be the provision that a tech worker can be coerced by the Australian Government into creating a backdoor, and they are not authorised to disclose it to their employer. I don’t want to hurt my future employability. On the one hand, if I had my citizenship then I could vote at the next elections, but on the other hand the AA Bill has been supported by all major Australian parties so I feel powerless.
Post reply on HN