Can't wait untill they install obligatory mind readers in 8 years. What a joke of country has Australia gotten to?
Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
11–20 of 363 posts
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#12I don't see how such a law even makes the phone/laptop itself safe to use, literally everything employs encryption now, it's built right in to the CPU and most websites you visit. Would obfuscation be considered encryption? And what about remote access? Is ssh or remote desktop considered off-limits? How could such usage even be policed when it's their own device with no tracking software installed?
Goodbye to https too.
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#13I just checked that the right against self-incrimination exists in Australia, too. Isn't it a violation of this law to require someone to tell their passwords?
IMO, this is a key difference between AU and USA. In Australia the government gives you rights. But that means they can also revoke them in some situations since the rights are derived from the government itself. In the US, our rights are innate and inalienable. We possess them because we exist. Our constitution says the government cannot violate these innate rights, not that the document/government gives us the rights. It is a subtle yet very important difference.
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#14Can't wait untill they install obligatory mind readers in 8 years. What a joke of country has Australia gotten to?
[deleted]
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#15After a discussion with a lawyer friend (not australia, canada, so tangentially related), the "presumption of innocence" that would not obligate this person to have or produce a key for whatever gibberish someone sends to their devices, is what's known in legal circles as a "principle of fundamental justice," and it is not a right that is either absolute or inaliable the way that american rights are set up. One doesn…
It's pretty clear CAN/AUS/NZ have dispensed with notions of fundamental justice, and have a "so sue me," approach to legislation and governance, as this stuff is just too stupid to be reasoned with. The language means nothing, the principles mean nothing. It's no longer about tech, it's about what our options are when the state has demonstrated official contempt for the people it ostensibly serves.
Well articulated. Exhibit A: Successive Australian governments allowing Assange's imprisonment. Exhibit B: Australia not allowing its own citizens to leave the country during COVID without first requesting permission. Exhibit C: Steadily increasing internet and mobile surveillance and censorship.
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#16Exactly what happens when ignorant fools who are politicians and lawyers who are every bit as arrogant as they are ignorant.
"..with a computer" just makes so many powerful peoples' brains fall out of their ears.
"Skip all established market regulation, with a computer." Ok, I don't know how to think about this because computer.
"Act like the stasi spying on people in ways they never agreed to with a the most massive bait and switch ever see, with a computer." Ok I don't know how to think about this because computer.
"Organise a peaceful protest with a computer." Hold up, no computer for you.
There needs to be an established technique for people to explain and understand what is going on by describing how precisely the same thing could be done with an infinite army of paper pushers. [1]
You've just banned this guy from taking out pen and paper and writing a letter to his kids substituting A with N, B with O, and so on in what is known as a Caesar Cipher named after the late Roman emperor who used it a couple of thousand years ago and is now commonly used by children.
If you believe this guy to be doing something illegal, like organising an illegal peaceful protest you GET A WARRANT and then require him to provide the passwords. It's that simple. Really. If you can't get a warrant then you shouldn't be looking at all.
[1] Would also work for describing what facebook, google, air bnb do so we don't go from zero regulation any illegal conduct goes swinging back right to overregulation that destroys all their competition. Just applying the normal antitrust, tax, consumer protection laws etc and throws into stark relief where there is actually a need for expanding the coverage of the law (or contracting it).
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#17Sounds like Australia to me.
Technically it is not Australia but New South Wales, the most populous state in Australia. Australia is a federation of states, with the federal government only having legislative power in certain areas. The result is a mish-mash of different layers [1].
Hopefully these laws won't survive a journey though the NSW courts, but even so they will have achieved their goal of disrupting protests. If there is a glimmer of hope it is that the government that passed these laws is mired in a corruption scandal and probably won't survive elections early next year [2].
State governments in Australia, particularly NSW, kowtow to real estate developer / economic interests. Despite there being an official ban on political donations from real estate developers, the landed gentry seem to maintain their sway [3]. For example the koala is now an endangered species in NSW [4], as proposed koala protection laws for the then vulnerable species were gutted after pressure from land holders [5].
[1] https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-...
[2] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07-29/dominic-perrottet-bac...
[3] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-15/nsw-history-of-corrup...
[4] https://www.npr.org/2022/02/11/1080081190/koalas-endangered-...
[5] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-08/nsw-coalition-strikes...
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#18Note these are bail conditions (so presumably an alternative to a much more constrained existence in prison) for a charge that indicates potential for inflicting severe economic damage after organization via communication devices.
When compared to bail conditions for other charged crimes which may also be strict and context-related (eg. trackers or keeping distance from a victim of violence) it sounds tough (and right to be strictly monitored under rights laws) but not necessarily unreasonable.
Is it wrong/excessive/draconian? Possibly. But I don't think a knee-jerk assumption that it is any of those things is appropriate.
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#19Not unexpected from the state that banned encryption, gives the police the right to modifiy, add and remove files from your devices.
And can also force its citizens to implement backdoors and basically be spies even in foreign countries and companies.
Re: Australian activist can't use encrypted apps, must let police access phone
#20As soon as I saw the headline, figured it was Australia. It's a real stretch to call it a liberal democracy at this point.