Live data from Hacker News

Advocating for privacy in Australia

fastmail.blog

21–30 of 112 posts

Re: Advocating for privacy in Australia

#21

This completely erodes the point of end-to-end encryption.

You've got that backwards.

End to End encryption defeats the purpose of the "server-side" component of any government request/demand to decrypt messages/data.

Any server-side email platform that 'integrates' email encryption (that is, envelope encryption, not encrypted transports) is effectively not "end to end" because your computer is not the server, and thus it's decrypted before "the end".

Re: Advocating for privacy in Australia

#22
post #15

Their "Actions we are taking" section is almost entirely composed of a political lobbying strategy. Given the outcome of the vote, 44 votes for and only 12 against, their plan doesn't exude much confidence. I would have expected plans to move data and key technologists out of Australia at the very least. The company I work for uses Fastmail but our CEO has already decided to switch mail providers sometime in 2019. I…

The data hasn't ever been stored in Australia. All our data is currently stored in the USA and Netherlands.

Of course the "people are planning to leave us because of the hamhanded way you introduced this legislation" is a major part of all our feedback to legislators.

The AABill happened the way it did in Australia because our politics is particularly broken right now (seriously, we have a minority government which has change leaders twice and lost multiple members to scandals). We call it "wedge politics" and Labor were forced into supporting it because otherwise they'd look soft on terrorism going into the holiday period, and anything at all which happened would be blamed on them not supporting the bill.

Re: Advocating for privacy in Australia

#24
post #15

Their "Actions we are taking" section is almost entirely composed of a political lobbying strategy. Given the outcome of the vote, 44 votes for and only 12 against, their plan doesn't exude much confidence. I would have expected plans to move data and key technologists out of Australia at the very least. The company I work for uses Fastmail but our CEO has already decided to switch mail providers sometime in 2019. I…

The data hasn't ever been stored in Australia. All our data is currently stored in the USA and Netherlands. Of course the "people are planning to leave us because of the hamhanded way you introduced this legislation" is a major part of all our feedback to legislators. The AABill happened the way it did in Australia because our politics is particularly broken right now (seriously, we have a minority government which h…

>anything at all which happened would be blamed on them not supporting the bill.

Which is idiotic, since the LNP would blame Labor either way, as they do for every single other failure they (the LNP) are responsible for. I wish Labor had some fucking guts once in a while.

Re: Advocating for privacy in Australia

#25
post #13

So the article's tl;dr is basically: "We're advocating for privacy, but we aren't going to try to offer you any. We never did, and we certainly won't now that this law passed. You're on your own." Is this supposed to be a PR-positive announcement from FastMail, because I can't quite tell?!

> "We're advocating for privacy, but we aren't going to try to offer you any."

Your tl;dr is not quite accurate.

All companies, including FastMail, have to cooperate with local law enforcement. But there are different levels of cooperation. FastMail's level of cooperation, according to TFA, is, "Show us a valid warrant, and we'll show you exactly what you asked for, nothing more".

Certain other companies might be more cooperative, handing over user information in response to informal (warrantless) police queries, or handing over information to copyright-enforcement lawyers who write threatening (but not legally enforceable) letters, or handing over more information than is specified in a warrant. (I can't remember specific examples, but they get mentioned on HN now and then).

So FastMail is stating it will try to limit privacy violations as much as it can, without violating Australian law. This is not total privacy, but neither is it the same as "we aren't going to try to offer you any".

(Not affiliated in any way with FastMail, not even as a user)

Re: Advocating for privacy in Australia

#26
post #13

So the article's tl;dr is basically: "We're advocating for privacy, but we aren't going to try to offer you any. We never did, and we certainly won't now that this law passed. You're on your own." Is this supposed to be a PR-positive announcement from FastMail, because I can't quite tell?!

The problem is simply that you expect the impossible.

Either you give the factual power to access your emails to some party, then whoever you give that power to can as a matter of fact access your emails, and in particular that means that they can be coerced into accessing your emails, or you don't give them the power, then they can't.

You are demanding that they offer a product where they have the power to access your emails (as an unavoidable technical necessity for what you expect from the product) while they at the same time can truthfully state that they can not access your emails. That is simply a logial contradiction that cannot exist, and any PR that pretends that it did would be simply marketing bullshit.

Re: Advocating for privacy in Australia

#27
post #13

So the article's tl;dr is basically: "We're advocating for privacy, but we aren't going to try to offer you any. We never did, and we certainly won't now that this law passed. You're on your own." Is this supposed to be a PR-positive announcement from FastMail, because I can't quite tell?!

We never offered, and never claimed to offer, a safe haven for people who have broken the law in both Australia and their own country to hide from the police. We don't place ourselves above law enforcement. We don't have data trading agreements with anybody, and we don't sell or provide backdoor channels - we only provide data in response to lawful warrants. That's the right amount of privacy and the right tradeoff w…

>That's the right amount of privacy and the right tradeoff with usability for just about everyone.

Just about everyone who agrees with Australian laws you mean?

Re: Advocating for privacy in Australia

#28
post #2

Fastmail should relocate to Canada. Just throwing suggestions out there.

Damn, I just lost $100. Thanks. We had a bet on how long it would take for somebody to say "just relocate your entire company and all your staff's lives to another jurisdiction".

...and obviously someone who doesn't live in Melbourne.

--

John Noble

Happy Fastmail customer of, I dunno, 5+ years?

Melbourne, Australia :-)

Re: Advocating for privacy in Australia

#29
post #2

Fastmail should relocate to Canada. Just throwing suggestions out there.

Damn, I just lost $100. Thanks. We had a bet on how long it would take for somebody to say "just relocate your entire company and all your staff's lives to another jurisdiction".

Maybe jammygit is on the other side of that bet... :)

Re: Advocating for privacy in Australia

#30
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Damn, I just lost $100. Thanks. We had a bet on how long it would take for somebody to say "just relocate your entire company and all your staff's lives to another jurisdiction".

...and obviously someone who doesn't live in Melbourne. -- John Noble Happy Fastmail customer of, I dunno, 5+ years? Melbourne, Australia :-)

I dunno, I stepped out of the office at 5:45pm to head home and got drenched. 4 seasons in 1 day and all that.
Post reply on HN