4 ms·
> Australia seems quite aggressive in this regard; also openly banning encryption. Australian here, talking to you over an encrypted HTTP connection, because w
by ajdlinux 7y ago
> Australia seems quite aggressive in this regard; also openly banning encryption.
Australian here, talking to you over an encrypted HTTP connection, because we didn't ban encryption. Mandating certain measures which sometimes can be used to circumvent the privacy guarantees of encryption doesn't mean encryption is banned... (yeah, it's still a bad law.)
As for transaction privacy - I am concerned about small transactions, not large ones. Small transactions reveal your personal preferences and day-to-day dealings, large transactions reveal aspects of your financial situation that almost certainly have an impact on your tax obligations (and therefore that government has more reason to want to track) without revealing as much about your personal affairs.
So this bill, on its own, seems alright to me. Though I do fear that it's the start of a slippery slope down to abolishing cash - not that the free market needs any help with doing that. We'll see.
- RHSeeger 7y ago> Mandating certain measures which sometimes can be used to circumvent the privacy guarantees of encryption doesn't mean encryption is banned. If there's a way around encryption for someone, then there's a way around encryption for everyone (because it will get out) If there's a way around the encryption, then it's not really encrypted. If the Australian government has mandated that there must be a known way to circumvent encryption, then yes, they have effectively banned encryption.