5 ms·

It's over. I may as well not be a programmer anymore. The government has effectively made it possible that anyone and everyone who develops software or hardwar

by shakna 8y ago

It's over. I may as well not be a programmer anymore. The government has effectively made it possible that anyone and everyone who develops software or hardware used by anyone in the country, or where they feel national security comes into play, must compromise their software, and tell no one. They can ask any intern to break the software, and not tell their employer. It's bad enough to have a gaping hole in your security, but now they can ask people who have no idea what they're doing to create a backdoor. All Australian software has now been rendered completely untrustworthy, and when those compromises in security are found, by the nation states who now know that Australian software will have holes in it, it will result in the very thing that this bill claims to prevent. Our infrastructure has been opened up for attack, by any of our neighbours who have a reason to do so, whilst simultaneously gutting the economy of IT in Australia. Who wants to buy shitty backdoored Chinese software? It's the same now for Australia. Australia's government has now opened the door for widescale cyberterrorism to have a chance at wreaking destruction.

daemin 8y ago
Remember that the Australian Government (whatever party happens to be in power at the time, it doesn't matter which) doesn't want technology or innovation in this country. They only want the value of dirt to remain high. So that buildings remain valuable and that we can export more natural resources.
stonith 8y ago
Isn't this pretty much the same as the US and their National Security Letters? They can compel engineers/companies to do pretty much anything, and the veil of secrecy is the same.
- shakna 8y ago
  As far as I'm aware, an NSL can't compel you to create a new architecture. This can.
- tssva 8y ago
  National Security Letters can't compel engineers/companies to do pretty much anything. National Security Letters can only request non-content information. A NSL also can't compel the gathering of additional non-content information beyond that already being gathered. So a NSL could request the records for who you are sending encrypted messages to but not the content of the messages and if your messaging provider can't or doesn't already gather that information they can't be compelled to start gathering such information. If a NSL requests information which the recipient believes violates that guidelines of information which can be requested they can disclose the NSL to legal counsel and challenge the NSL in court.

by shakna 8y ago

daemin 8y ago

Remember that the Australian Government (whatever party happens to be in power at the time, it doesn't matter which) doesn't want technology or innovation in this country. They only want the value of dirt to remain high. So that buildings remain valuable and that we can export more natural resources.

stonith 8y ago

Isn't this pretty much the same as the US and their National Security Letters? They can compel engineers/companies to do pretty much anything, and the veil of secrecy is the same.

shakna 8y ago
As far as I'm aware, an NSL can't compel you to create a new architecture. This can.
tssva 8y ago
National Security Letters can't compel engineers/companies to do pretty much anything. National Security Letters can only request non-content information. A NSL also can't compel the gathering of additional non-content information beyond that already being gathered. So a NSL could request the records for who you are sending encrypted messages to but not the content of the messages and if your messaging provider can't or doesn't already gather that information they can't be compelled to start gathering such information. If a NSL requests information which the recipient believes violates that guidelines of information which can be requested they can disclose the NSL to legal counsel and challenge the NSL in court.