3 ms·
It’s not the same thing. Don’t know Australian law, but for a warrant you need to demonstrate probable cause in front of a judge. And that’s a pretty high bar.
by bad_user 8y ago
It’s not the same thing.
Don’t know Australian law, but for a warrant you need to demonstrate probable cause in front of a judge. And that’s a pretty high bar.
- cyphar 8y agoI didn't say it was the same thing, and I agree that the lack of judicial oversight makes it incredibly rife for abuse as well as much easier to get. I said that to you (a user who wouldn't be the target of a warrant) there isn't a practical difference if you're targeted. You wouldn't be able to mount a defence in court anyway. But of course, it being easier is a very serious problem from a societal perspective.
- bad_user 8y agoIt depends. Australia is part of the 5 eyes countries. So now via cooperation between security agencies and due to no judicial oversight, I think more people are affected, whereas before this you would have to convince an Australian judge to give you a warrant. IANAL.
- briandear 8y agoThe problem is that if a back door exists for government, it necessarily exists for anyone. Here’s Tim Cook making that point: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rQebmygKq7A https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rQebmygKq7A
- bad_user 8y agoWe aren't talking of back doors here. With an email provider you don't need a back door to get somebody's emails.
- cyphar 8y agoI'm aware of that, but in the case of email service providers there is no need for a backdoor. They have access to your emails on-disk since emails are plaintext (in general).