6 ms·

If the idea was for Australia to lead by example on all the ways to NOT regulate an increasingly digital world, we're doing a bloody good job. I worked for Atl

If the idea was for Australia to lead by example on all the ways to NOT regulate an increasingly digital world, we're doing a bloody good job. I worked for Atlassian in Sydney. I know there's a pretty decent tech culture that is thriving in Sydney + Melbourne (and elsewhere, I'm sure). I really hope more of my colleagues find a passion for politics and get to a position where they can steer our clearly incompetent government in governance issues pertaining to technology. In the meantime, does anyone have a clear idea of how this Act will even work? Lets talk in specific terms for something like Signal. I'm assuming Signal has no legal footprint in Australia. How/can Australia compel Signal to allow Australian enforcement agencies to snoop on conversations? If they can't, won't one of the worst outcomes of this legislation be that any kind of technology company that needs to deal with encryption (which these days should be basically 100% of them) be forced to move overseas? How could a single Australian-based tech company have even the slightest scrap of credibility for data security when a law like this exists? Final note - is anyone from Fastmail around here? I'm a Fastmail customer and this has me extremely concerned.

nicwilson 8y ago
>I'm a Fastmail customer and this has me extremely concerned. IIRC Jeremy said its a swiss company with swiss servers, so, no problem.
- daurnimator 8y ago
  Are you thinking of Protonmail? Fastmail is an Australian company with US based servers.
- ardy42 8y ago
  > IIRC Jeremy said its a swiss company with swiss servers, so, no problem. Do you have a link for that statement?
  - braddeicide 8y ago
    Doesn't matter, if they have an Australian employee they're compromised.
- jph00 8y ago
  Nope I didn't say that - and I haven't been involved with fm for years.
callahad 8y ago
Fastmail discussed the bill on their blog at https://fastmail.blog/2018/09/10/access-and-assistance-bill/ https://fastmail.blog/2018/09/10/access-and-assistance-bill/
- bscphil 8y ago
  Seems like a fair summary would be that since they don't offer any truly secure services (e.g. e2e encryption), there's nothing that this law could require them to subvert. Turning over an individual's account data pursuant to an Australian issued warrant was something they were already doing, and nothing about that has changed under the new law.
kevin_b_er 8y ago
Signal: The employee is required to intentionally alter the app to no longer provide security, such that some communication may be intercepted. They are not permitted to publicly disclose that they have done this. Unfortunately, this goes deeper. The law may be capable of compelling Google or Apple of Australia to force deploy to your phone a malicious version of the Signal app with the "technical assistance notice".
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- akvadrako 8y ago
  If they are ever forced to do that and it becomes public knowledge, I think it will finally be enough for a critical mass of security-conscious people to buy phones with user-controlled platforms where it becomes impossible. In a way this might be a blessing.
  - WrtCdEvrydy 8y ago
    No, they won't. They'll buy the newest Apple phone because it's 10 nanometers thinner and it's a status symbol. Apple Cloud was hacked and celebrity pictures were stolen and noone batted an eye.
    - lotsofpulp 8y ago
      Figuring out people's easy passwords and password recovery methods isn't a weakness in iCloud, and shouldn't be counted as hacking iCloud. And if you were concerned with security, and had to buy a smartphone, what device is better than an iPhone?
      - WrtCdEvrydy 8y ago
        > We didn't give random people loans in your name, your identity was stolen. When you shift responsibility from the provider to the customer, you play right into the security blame game.
guitarbill 8y ago
Meta-question: Obviously, the whole thing is rotten because of the secrecy. But is is better to do what Australia is doing, by making it a law which can at least be talked about, or doing it anyway, but covertly, like certain other five eyes countries (and beyond)? I don't really have an opinion or answer, just curious.
- zepto 8y ago
  What Australia is doing is worse, because the actions can’t be talked about. What the five eyes do is normal espionage. They often get away with it, but when they are uncovered their illegal actions aren’t covered by gag orders.
braddeicide 8y ago
There's no reason to be concerned about fastmail like there's any kind of uncertainty, your account is comprised and you were given warning it was going to happen.

nicwilson 8y ago

>I'm a Fastmail customer and this has me extremely concerned. IIRC Jeremy said its a swiss company with swiss servers, so, no problem.

daurnimator 8y ago
Are you thinking of Protonmail? Fastmail is an Australian company with US based servers.
ardy42 8y ago
> IIRC Jeremy said its a swiss company with swiss servers, so, no problem. Do you have a link for that statement?
- braddeicide 8y ago
  Doesn't matter, if they have an Australian employee they're compromised.
jph00 8y ago
Nope I didn't say that - and I haven't been involved with fm for years.

callahad 8y ago

Fastmail discussed the bill on their blog at https://fastmail.blog/2018/09/10/access-and-assistance-bill/ https://fastmail.blog/2018/09/10/access-and-assistance-bill/

bscphil 8y ago
Seems like a fair summary would be that since they don't offer any truly secure services (e.g. e2e encryption), there's nothing that this law could require them to subvert. Turning over an individual's account data pursuant to an Australian issued warrant was something they were already doing, and nothing about that has changed under the new law.

kevin_b_er 8y ago

Signal: The employee is required to intentionally alter the app to no longer provide security, such that some communication may be intercepted. They are not permitted to publicly disclose that they have done this. Unfortunately, this goes deeper. The law may be capable of compelling Google or Apple of Australia to force deploy to your phone a malicious version of the Signal app with the "technical assistance notice".

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
akvadrako 8y ago
If they are ever forced to do that and it becomes public knowledge, I think it will finally be enough for a critical mass of security-conscious people to buy phones with user-controlled platforms where it becomes impossible. In a way this might be a blessing.
- WrtCdEvrydy 8y ago
  No, they won't. They'll buy the newest Apple phone because it's 10 nanometers thinner and it's a status symbol. Apple Cloud was hacked and celebrity pictures were stolen and noone batted an eye.
  - lotsofpulp 8y ago
    Figuring out people's easy passwords and password recovery methods isn't a weakness in iCloud, and shouldn't be counted as hacking iCloud. And if you were concerned with security, and had to buy a smartphone, what device is better than an iPhone?
    - WrtCdEvrydy 8y ago
      > We didn't give random people loans in your name, your identity was stolen. When you shift responsibility from the provider to the customer, you play right into the security blame game.

guitarbill 8y ago

Meta-question: Obviously, the whole thing is rotten because of the secrecy. But is is better to do what Australia is doing, by making it a law which can at least be talked about, or doing it anyway, but covertly, like certain other five eyes countries (and beyond)? I don't really have an opinion or answer, just curious.

zepto 8y ago
What Australia is doing is worse, because the actions can’t be talked about. What the five eyes do is normal espionage. They often get away with it, but when they are uncovered their illegal actions aren’t covered by gag orders.

braddeicide 8y ago

There's no reason to be concerned about fastmail like there's any kind of uncertainty, your account is comprised and you were given warning it was going to happen.