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

161–170 of 294 posts

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

#161

Post by xxpor »

adventured wrote: post #47
xxpor wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US there's no explicit right to vote.

To add to dragonwriter's post, there is also the 17th amendment: "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures." It's exceptionally clear that it's an explicit righ…

Why couldn't women vote for Senators then?

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

#162

Post by viraptor »

int_19h wrote: post #142
maldeh wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming it could be proven, surely? And there have to be limitations as to how far an individual could go as to subterfuge, so if your company enforces a 2-person code review and there aren't other authorized Australian nationals at hand, you could point at process preventing you from doing so without others' knowledge (how naive this defense is, I have no idea)

You opt into participating that process by accepting the job, though. So from Australia's perspective, the way to comply with their law is to not take such jobs, and to leave if the process changes prevent you from complying.

I think you're inventing scenarios here that are too unlikely even for a pretty corrupt country. There probably exist laws in a number of countries which would technically jail you for taking some not-explicitly-illegal job. But this is absurd. Unless you're an actual lawyer giving opinion here?

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

#163

Post by crawrey »

ggm wrote: post #156
mastazi wrote: post #30

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…

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. As I read it, the law requires warrants and court enforcement. I don't think you can be required to backdoor code in secret or held to account by the security agencies not to inform your employer. I would be very surprised if tat w…

> I don't think you can be required to backdoor code in secret or held to account by the security agencies not to inform your employer.

This law gave the government the power to do just that. Details of implementing a backdoor in secret is close to impossible, as any developer would know. There was a post[1] made by "Alfie John" (alfiedotwtf) that outlines a scenario in which a developer is presented with a Technical Capability Notice (TCN).

> I do not expect you can have an extra-territorial obligation placed on your work conducted outside Australia. If you are working inside australia remotely I think its complex.

Australian citizens, regardless of their location are obliged to comply with these requests.

If you are presented with a TAR, TAN or TCN, you have the option to seek legal council in private or risk fines of up to AUD$7.3 million.

You risk imprisonment if you reveal details about the notice to anyone other than those who are included in the notice or to seek legal council (this is an exception within the law).

[1] https://twitter.com/alfiedotwtf/status/1070047303275175936

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

#164

Post by [deleted] »

philliphaydon wrote: post #96
mastazi wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"For example, Australia’s law enforcement could compel Apple to provide access to a customer’s iPhone and all communications made on it without the user’s awareness or consent. An engineer involved would, in theory, be unable to tell their boss about this, or risk a jail sentence." Source: Sydney Morning Herald https://www.smh.com.au/business/consumer-affairs/dangerous-o... That would be a 5-year jail sentence appare…

So developer discusses with his boss. Developer A adds back door. Developer B then patches back door. Boss fires developer A. Developer A then uses this TAR crap to sue government for forcing him to do something and lose his job. I can’t see the government being able to defend itself. We elect the government to serve the people and the decisions of the government are negatively impacting the people no matter which wa…

[deleted]

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

#165

Post by viraptor »

opportune wrote: post #68
mastazi wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for providing a better source - reality is more nuanced than what most news outlets want you to believe, but unfortunately hiring practices are influenced by public discourse, and unfortunately the prevalent message out there is "don't hire Australians"

It might be cheaper foor a business to just not hire Australians than to hire a lawyer and dedicate bizdev time to figuring out the intricacies and nuance

It is not cheaper than getting sued for discrimination. Which would be easily proven in many cases, seeing how many people are more afraid of a potential issue with another country's intelligence agencies then of publicly posting about their plans to violate their own employment laws.

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

#166

Post by Jedi72 »

mastazi wrote: post #76
jacques_chester wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look. It's a stupid bill. So garishly stupid that it can blind a boulder. So vapidly moronic that bits of ooze collected by clams are more intelligent. It's so bad that astronauts on the ISS passing over Canberra need to shield their heads with lead so the radioactive idiocy doesn't fry them. But don't kid yourself: Australian citizenship is profoundly valuable. I would not pass it up lightly. I was born to it and I…

> Australian citizenship is profoundly valuable. Getting where I am now (Australian permanent resident) has been the hardest thing I have ever done in my life. It included working casual night-shift jobs while studying to get a uni degree during the day (having an Australian degree improves your score towards a skilled visa). For a long period I have been separated from my wife and daughter due to visa complications,…

One more piece of Anecdata, Im an Australian who has decided to go for US citizenship, for several reasons but all basically due to a continuous disregard for personal liberties by our government. Australians love being told what to do, seems like 90% of the population are very satisfied to be servants of the ruling class and aspire to nothing else.

Edit: I replied to the wrong comment, meant to reply to the one above this one.

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

#167

Post by chii »

Benjamin_Dobell wrote: post #94
chii wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that is an incorrect interpretation of the law. The govt can compell an entity to assist in making encrypted information available. But the entity in question is not the individual employee, but the company who owns the product or service. If you're under the employment (i.e., not a contractor), you can't be an entity, and the employer will definitely know if they've been compelled. But I do agree the law i…

IANAL, but sadly, the law does seem to target people rather than (or in addition to) corporations. https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bi... > 317C: > For the purposes of this Part, the following table defines: > (a) designated communications provider; > (b) the eligible activitiesof a designated communications provider > A person is a designated communications provider if... ... Actually, there…

in the definition part of the law:

> contracted service provider, in relation to a designated

> communications provider, means a person who performs services

> for or on behalf of the provider, but does not include a person who

> performs such services in the capacity of an employee of the

> provider.

The statute here is always talking about a contracted service provider who has to comply with the compelled "assistance". So as an employee, you do not have to worry about being jailed for non-compliance, as an employee cannot be a "contracted service provider". But you may be fired for non-compliance by your employer (if they choose to fire you because of it), but that's between you and your employer.

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

#168

Post by bryanrasmussen »

int_19h wrote: post #142
maldeh wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming it could be proven, surely? And there have to be limitations as to how far an individual could go as to subterfuge, so if your company enforces a 2-person code review and there aren't other authorized Australian nationals at hand, you could point at process preventing you from doing so without others' knowledge (how naive this defense is, I have no idea)

You opt into participating that process by accepting the job, though. So from Australia's perspective, the way to comply with their law is to not take such jobs, and to leave if the process changes prevent you from complying.

Unless you're an Australian lawyer I'm going to think this interpretation is a little far out by most Western legal traditions.

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

#169

Post by bad_user »

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.

No, most of the email you’ll send and receive will be seen unencrypted by ProtonMail’s servers because that’s just how the email protocol works, which means an intelligence agency like the NSA can still see most if not all of your communication.

In other words ProtonMail is not actually end-to-end encrypted which makes it snake oil.

It’s interesting that this point has to be explained on HN time and time again, as HN’s audience should understand end to end encryption.

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

#170

Post by incompatible »

mastazi wrote: post #30

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…

Australian law generally affects residents of Australia, not citizens. Are you sure they couldn't coerce you already?
Post reply on HN