3 ms·

You must build a custom made back door. eg. Something like ProtonMail would need to inject some extra javascript so that the government could obtain a copy befo

You must build a custom made back door. eg. Something like ProtonMail would need to inject some extra javascript so that the government could obtain a copy before encryption, I expect. If I were to write some software of this nature these days, I'd make sure that the client would be aware of any changes in the api - sort of like a personal warrant canary. (Note that a warrant canary is legal in this legislation).

cyphar 8y ago
Warrant canaries are illegal in Australia, at least in the case of other kinds of secret warrants. I would be very surprised that a judge would (given the existing laws that have similar properties) consider a warrant canary legal. (For those wondering how they can be illegal, in Australia it's illegal to state the existence or non-existence of certain kinds of secret warrants. So a statement of a canary is, itself, illegal.)
- cmroanirgo 8y ago
  There are allowances (from what I understand) in this bill. From "Section 6 - Unauthorised disclosure of information": - A person who is: ... ...may, in the person’s capacity as such a provider or employee, disclose: (e) the total number of technical assistance notices given to the provider during a period of at least 6 months; or (f) the total number of technical capability notices given to the provider during a period of at least 6 months; or (g) the total number of technical assistance requests given to the provider during a period of at least 6 months. Note: This subsection authorises the disclosure of aggregate statistical information. That information cannot be broken down: (a) by agency; or (b) in any other way. " [0] [0] pp50-51, http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bills/r6195_first-reps/toc_pdf/18204b01.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bil...
  - cyphar 8y ago
    Right, I forgot to mention the statistics. Yes, you can publish statistics in 6-month windows -- which is kind of what warrant canaries are supposed to provide information about -- but I'd be surprised if the "cannot be broken down" might be used to restrict the usefulness of statistics... I mean, a literal reading would allow you to provide minute-by-minute 6-month windows (or a new 6-month window each time you get a request) which could be used to get very detailed alerts each time a new request was given but obviously you'd get into hot water by doing that.
- BLKNSLVR 8y ago
  So if I was an Australian citizen, I'd be committing a crime by saying: I have not had any communications requesting investigative cooperation from any Australian law enforcement or intelligence agency.
  - cyphar 8y ago
    No, it would be an offense to make a statement about the existence or nonexistence of a journalistic information warrant. But I believe the bill which passed actually includes the ability to publish aggregated statistics about how many notices you've received. Removing the need for warrant canaries. (And you wouldn't have to be a citizen, just a subject of Australian law which means that you are either a citizen, are a constitutional corporation, or physically present within Australia. Same as any other nation's laws.)
    - brokenmachine 8y ago
      >I believe the bill which passed actually includes the ability to publish aggregated statistics about how many notices you've received. But those stats would be useless as each notice can target an arbitrary number of people. The law as written can literally ask for the data of every one of your users. As I understand it, there can be no stats about the number of individuals targeted, only the number of notices received.

cyphar 8y ago

Warrant canaries are illegal in Australia, at least in the case of other kinds of secret warrants. I would be very surprised that a judge would (given the existing laws that have similar properties) consider a warrant canary legal. (For those wondering how they can be illegal, in Australia it's illegal to state the existence or non-existence of certain kinds of secret warrants. So a statement of a canary is, itself, illegal.)

cmroanirgo 8y ago
There are allowances (from what I understand) in this bill. From "Section 6 - Unauthorised disclosure of information": - A person who is: ... ...may, in the person’s capacity as such a provider or employee, disclose: (e) the total number of technical assistance notices given to the provider during a period of at least 6 months; or (f) the total number of technical capability notices given to the provider during a period of at least 6 months; or (g) the total number of technical assistance requests given to the provider during a period of at least 6 months. Note: This subsection authorises the disclosure of aggregate statistical information. That information cannot be broken down: (a) by agency; or (b) in any other way. " [0] [0] pp50-51, http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bills/r6195_first-reps/toc_pdf/18204b01.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bil...
- cyphar 8y ago
  Right, I forgot to mention the statistics. Yes, you can publish statistics in 6-month windows -- which is kind of what warrant canaries are supposed to provide information about -- but I'd be surprised if the "cannot be broken down" might be used to restrict the usefulness of statistics... I mean, a literal reading would allow you to provide minute-by-minute 6-month windows (or a new 6-month window each time you get a request) which could be used to get very detailed alerts each time a new request was given but obviously you'd get into hot water by doing that.
BLKNSLVR 8y ago
So if I was an Australian citizen, I'd be committing a crime by saying: I have not had any communications requesting investigative cooperation from any Australian law enforcement or intelligence agency.
- cyphar 8y ago
  No, it would be an offense to make a statement about the existence or nonexistence of a journalistic information warrant. But I believe the bill which passed actually includes the ability to publish aggregated statistics about how many notices you've received. Removing the need for warrant canaries. (And you wouldn't have to be a citizen, just a subject of Australian law which means that you are either a citizen, are a constitutional corporation, or physically present within Australia. Same as any other nation's laws.)
  - brokenmachine 8y ago
    >I believe the bill which passed actually includes the ability to publish aggregated statistics about how many notices you've received. But those stats would be useless as each notice can target an arbitrary number of people. The law as written can literally ask for the data of every one of your users. As I understand it, there can be no stats about the number of individuals targeted, only the number of notices received.