There's one itsy bitsy issue with that whole "systemic weakness" thing. It's not defined in the law. You'd think something like that would not be carelessly om

There's one itsy bitsy issue with that whole "systemic weakness" thing. It's not defined in the law. You'd think something like that would not be carelessly omitted by accident, no? What this means in practice is that virtually nothing they do will ever amount to that being a "systemic weakness", just like Obama kept saying post-Snowden revelations that there have been "no abuses" of intelligence powers and that nobody in the NSA did anything wrong (even after revelations of LOVEINT, etc came out). An Australian government order for decryption could turn into another EternalBlue-type exploit affecting millions of PCs, and the government will likely still claim that wasn't a systemic issue because they "didn't intended it to be one" (as if spy agencies ever intend their backdoors to be used by rival nations - and yet that happens every time). https://www.computerworld.com.au/article/648483/encryption-bill-what-systemic-weakness-it-depends-government-says/ https://www.computerworld.com.au/article/648483/encryption-b... https://www.itnews.com.au/news/govts-decryption-bill-can-only-lead-to-systemic-weaknesses-512390 https://www.itnews.com.au/news/govts-decryption-bill-can-onl...