8 ms·

> Australia first, your country next. Absolutely, specifically if you're living in a country that is a member of the Five Eyes. They've actually been surprisi

> Australia first, your country next. Absolutely, specifically if you're living in a country that is a member of the Five Eyes. They've actually been surprisingly transparent that this is a coordinated effort. The Official Communiqué opens with: > We, the Homeland Security, Public Safety, and Immigration Ministers of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States met on the Gold Coast, Australia, on August 28-29 2018, to discuss how we can better collaborate to meet our common security challenges. Full read: https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about/national-security/five-country-ministerial-2018 https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about/national-security/five-...

fit2rule 8y ago
The 5 eyes nations are a true New World Order. This is terrifying, and we should not be allowing our sovereignty to be so easily usurped for the purpose of building this new order.
- myrryr 8y ago
  The others maybe, but new Zealand is no one's new world order :). Aus + UK + US are the real drivers.
  - ta2354235235 8y ago
    Aus the primary driver? A 25m population country with an economy smaller than California, and we're driving things. Dutton is being fed from defense dollars, from the US.
    - SamReidHughes 8y ago
      Australia is kind of an entire continent, with big territorial national security concerns, so they might be a bit more independently interested than Canada.
    - adiusmus 8y ago
      Driving under the influence. UK and Australia are the test beds. US is the target. From there it flows onwards and outwards. Like raw sewage over the Niagara Falls. The AU my.health opt-out debacle[1] is similar. UK got in first, promised they wouldn’t sell the data then did so. AU then started by copying the UK’s best practice. So... fun times ahead. They’re still trying to get the gun laws fit for size in the US but the political climate and history is too different. And the attempt on the health system via Obamacare didn’t quite take either. More time needed apparently. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/jul/22/my-health-record-identical-to-failed-uk-scheme-privacy-expert-says https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/jul/22/my-he...
      - Benjamin_Dobell 8y ago
        Putting this bill in the same basket as gun control seems a bit rich. However, comparing it to public health care is well off the mark. Medicare was first introduced in Australia way back in 1975, 35 years before the US. Access to affordable health-care is widely considered a basic human right, and Medicare in Australia widely considered a smashing success. Actually, so are our gun control laws, and they were motivated by mass shootings on our own soil, namely the Port Arthur massacre, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australi..., this wasn't some ploy by the US or the Five Eyes. The Australian public wanted this, and absolutely still do, myself very much included.
        adiusmus 8y ago
        Actually my point was that the US gets changes after they are tested elsewhere. You didn’t address that. So by omission you’re saying that the US won’t be getting these encryption laws. And that Australian style gun laws won’t arrive in the US either. Ok then.
        Benjamin_Dobell 8y ago
        > So by omission you’re saying that the US won’t be getting these encryption laws. Wait... what? Do you always structure your arguments by putting words in other people's mouths then argue against things they never said. In doing so you're wasting your's and everyone else's time. Not only are you wrong in you assertion. If you'd paid even the smallest amount of attention to the context in which you're posting you'd realise this. I'm the OP for this sub-thread, I suggest you read what I wrote. Now that we've got that aside... > And that Australian style gun laws won’t arrive in the US either. Just stop. We're talking about the Assistance and Access Bill. Stop trying to validate some totally unrelated belief you hold by loosely latching on to valid arguments that myself and others have made here. The reason I responded to you is that I want to make it perfectly clear to anybody reading this... I do not hold your views. These are not related issues.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - fit2rule 8y ago
      6th largest 'defence' budget in the world. SIXTH...
      - Benjamin_Dobell 8y ago
        Reference please. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute ranks Australia as 13th, at 2% of Australia's GDP[1][2]. Which is below the worldwide average of 2.2%, although given our geographic remoteness and relative security, I absolutely agree that it's too much. The International Institute for Strategic Studies places Australia at 12th. [1] https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/1_Data%20for%20all%20countries%20from%201988%E2%80%932017%20in%20constant%20%282016%29%20USD.pdf https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/1_Data%20for%20all... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_...
TheForumTroll 8y ago
Five eyes? At least they all have a say in what happens even though they don't listen to anyone but their friends. How about the 14 lapdogs?
- jessaustin 8y ago
  14 lapdogs Help us out! When I google this term I just get "best breeds" lists.
throwaway59229 8y ago
Additionally, it doesn't seem that there's anything in the bill that would prevent any of the information gained by a TCN/TAN from being shared with Five Eyes or other governments. While this might seem reasonable in the face of an international criminal/terrorist adversary, it is fundamentally security-breaking if private root signing keys that are requested as part of a TCN/TAN can just be shared with every Five Eyes government. That means that the Australian government could just order a company to hand over their PKI/signing infrastructure (which is generally a global system) and then forward all of this information to the US or whoever else, completely outside of any judicial oversight. I'm sure that the governments in question will deny this, and likely state that this is not their policy, but it doesn't seem to be specifically prohibited by the law and the intelligence community doesn't have a great reputation when it comes to respecting traditional legal values and due process (e.g. the FISA court in the US)

fit2rule 8y ago

The 5 eyes nations are a true New World Order. This is terrifying, and we should not be allowing our sovereignty to be so easily usurped for the purpose of building this new order.

myrryr 8y ago
The others maybe, but new Zealand is no one's new world order :). Aus + UK + US are the real drivers.
- ta2354235235 8y ago
  Aus the primary driver? A 25m population country with an economy smaller than California, and we're driving things. Dutton is being fed from defense dollars, from the US.
  - SamReidHughes 8y ago
    Australia is kind of an entire continent, with big territorial national security concerns, so they might be a bit more independently interested than Canada.
  - adiusmus 8y ago
    Driving under the influence. UK and Australia are the test beds. US is the target. From there it flows onwards and outwards. Like raw sewage over the Niagara Falls. The AU my.health opt-out debacle[1] is similar. UK got in first, promised they wouldn’t sell the data then did so. AU then started by copying the UK’s best practice. So... fun times ahead. They’re still trying to get the gun laws fit for size in the US but the political climate and history is too different. And the attempt on the health system via Obamacare didn’t quite take either. More time needed apparently. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/jul/22/my-health-record-identical-to-failed-uk-scheme-privacy-expert-says https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/jul/22/my-he...
    - Benjamin_Dobell 8y ago
      Putting this bill in the same basket as gun control seems a bit rich. However, comparing it to public health care is well off the mark. Medicare was first introduced in Australia way back in 1975, 35 years before the US. Access to affordable health-care is widely considered a basic human right, and Medicare in Australia widely considered a smashing success. Actually, so are our gun control laws, and they were motivated by mass shootings on our own soil, namely the Port Arthur massacre, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australi..., this wasn't some ploy by the US or the Five Eyes. The Australian public wanted this, and absolutely still do, myself very much included.
      - adiusmus 8y ago
        Actually my point was that the US gets changes after they are tested elsewhere. You didn’t address that. So by omission you’re saying that the US won’t be getting these encryption laws. And that Australian style gun laws won’t arrive in the US either. Ok then.
        Benjamin_Dobell 8y ago
        > So by omission you’re saying that the US won’t be getting these encryption laws. Wait... what? Do you always structure your arguments by putting words in other people's mouths then argue against things they never said. In doing so you're wasting your's and everyone else's time. Not only are you wrong in you assertion. If you'd paid even the smallest amount of attention to the context in which you're posting you'd realise this. I'm the OP for this sub-thread, I suggest you read what I wrote. Now that we've got that aside... > And that Australian style gun laws won’t arrive in the US either. Just stop. We're talking about the Assistance and Access Bill. Stop trying to validate some totally unrelated belief you hold by loosely latching on to valid arguments that myself and others have made here. The reason I responded to you is that I want to make it perfectly clear to anybody reading this... I do not hold your views. These are not related issues.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - fit2rule 8y ago
    6th largest 'defence' budget in the world. SIXTH...
    - Benjamin_Dobell 8y ago
      Reference please. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute ranks Australia as 13th, at 2% of Australia's GDP[1][2]. Which is below the worldwide average of 2.2%, although given our geographic remoteness and relative security, I absolutely agree that it's too much. The International Institute for Strategic Studies places Australia at 12th. [1] https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/1_Data%20for%20all%20countries%20from%201988%E2%80%932017%20in%20constant%20%282016%29%20USD.pdf https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/1_Data%20for%20all... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_...

TheForumTroll 8y ago

Five eyes? At least they all have a say in what happens even though they don't listen to anyone but their friends. How about the 14 lapdogs?

jessaustin 8y ago
14 lapdogs Help us out! When I google this term I just get "best breeds" lists.

throwaway59229 8y ago

Additionally, it doesn't seem that there's anything in the bill that would prevent any of the information gained by a TCN/TAN from being shared with Five Eyes or other governments. While this might seem reasonable in the face of an international criminal/terrorist adversary, it is fundamentally security-breaking if private root signing keys that are requested as part of a TCN/TAN can just be shared with every Five Eyes government. That means that the Australian government could just order a company to hand over their PKI/signing infrastructure (which is generally a global system) and then forward all of this information to the US or whoever else, completely outside of any judicial oversight. I'm sure that the governments in question will deny this, and likely state that this is not their policy, but it doesn't seem to be specifically prohibited by the law and the intelligence community doesn't have a great reputation when it comes to respecting traditional legal values and due process (e.g. the FISA court in the US)