24 ms·

Dissection of COVIDSafe (Android): Australian government's contact tracing app

173 points by ghuntley 7y ago

hyperpallium 7y ago
They said they would release source, but they've distributed the app first, so are in breach. They also said location would not be used, but android.permission.ACCESS_FINE_LOCATION Can't trust them on things that can be checked; therefore can't trust them on the things that that can't be checked.
- maxden 7y ago
  Yes, I thought they said a few days ago that the source code will be made available for scrutiny but this now how its being reported: "Some, if not all, of the app’s source code will be made public."
  - pmontra 7y ago
    Will Australians be able to build from source, install and connect to the central server (if any)? Or at least build and verify that what comes from the stores is what they built? If not, having the source code doesn't really matter much.
    - barbs 7y ago
      I think it would go a long way in establishing trust if they release the source code, even if you can't perfectly prove that the binaries are built from it. They would have to be outright lying if that wasn't the case.
- speedgoose 7y ago
  If you want to use Bluetooth on Android, you must ask for this permission. Bluetooth can be used to get high quality locations, also indoor. https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/connectivity/bluetooth#Permissions https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/connectivity/blue...
- lukevdp 7y ago
  I don’t know if it’s true or not, but in the app it states it needs location access for Bluetooth.
  - barbs 7y ago
    Yeah it's true https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/connectivity/bluetooth#Permissions https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/connectivity/blue...
- 2muchcoffeeman 7y ago
  On iOS it does not request location services. In fact it doesn’t even appear on the list of apps when you go to Privacy -> Location services. So appears to be an Android thing.
tastroder 7y ago
It's interesting to see these tracing app discussions crop up all over the world at the moment. In Germany it quite literally took dozens of public interest groups, two weeks of media attention, EU guidance and an open letter by hundreds of scientists to make the government switch from central data collection to an acceptable decentralised approach. The amount of misinformation put out by lobby groups in the process was frankly astonishing, is that similar in Australia or is this app primarily driven by the government itself?
- lukevdp 7y ago
  This app has been released by the government.
- temac 7y ago
  > In Germany it quite literally took dozens of public interest groups, two weeks of media attention, EU guidance and an open letter by hundreds of scientists to make the government switch from central data collection to an acceptable decentralised approach. Interesting. Do you have any pointer on the current German approach? I've been looking at the Robert protocol from Inria+Fraunhofer, and I'm not sure I like the central secret DB it requires.
  - def_true_false 7y ago
    I guess they meant the DP-3T. See https://github.com/DP-3T/documents https://github.com/DP-3T/documents
    - temac 7y ago
      I think so, and it seems this is very recent; I found that: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-europe-tech/germany-flips-on-smartphone-contact-tracing-backs-apple-and-google-idUSKCN22807J https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-europe... I hope France will follow.
  - tastroder 7y ago
    This happened over the weekend so details are pretty vague and mostly available in German. I'd expect more to follow in the next few days, official statements didn't yet talk about who will take over implementation I believe. But w.r.t. the Robert protocol, that's the PEPP-PT one that was pushed against. Differences between Robert and the proposal for Germany were minimal. While there are a few at the moment I expect the solution to work with DP3T / integration of the Gapple APIs. Future travel in mind it wouldn't make much sense to develop something else at this point imho.
timkam 7y ago
I would assume many GPL-licensed applications are GPL non-compliant. From a user's perspective, what are the most relevant problems when this is the case? (Excluding problems of philosophical nature that only free software geeks care about. No intention to be disrespectful; but the more practical the problems, the more likely it is that ordinary users can relate to them.)
- toyg 7y ago
  Without source code, you cannot trust what the app does. This is particularly bad for an app that will supposedly track your every move. Also, non-compliance with a copyright license effectively means “stealing”. So the government is effectively buying stolen goods from Amazon and Boston Group.
  - mcqueenjordan 7y ago
    > Also, non-compliance with a copyright license effectively means “stealing”. So the government is effectively buying stolen goods from Amazon and Boston Group. Do you have a good source for that? (No, a random tweet isn't a good source.)
    - toyg 7y ago
      Source for what? It’s in TFA...?
- cycloptic 7y ago
  The requirement of the GPL is that the user must be able to get the source code if they ask for it, potentially for a small fee to cover the cost of distribution. Contrary to what the document seems to imply, it doesn't mean the source needs to be up on Github. But that is a common method of complying. The document is not really clear if anyone asked them or not or what their response was. I'm not sure what you mean by philosophical vs practical. The problem is past that point and is really is not related to either of those, it's a legal problem: a user wants the source code, the license says they're entitled to receive it, but the distributor is violating the license by refusing to provide it to the user. Or at least that was my read anyway.
aaron695 7y ago
I saw this coming BUT I thought if they were clever they might get the code from the Singapore government (Who I think developed OpenTrace) direct? You can release you code as GPL. But you can also release you code however, separately if you want. Also it depends on OpenTrace's libraries and if it's been contributed to.
- toyg 7y ago
  Uhm, no. Once your code contains GPL code that is not yours, it has to be GPL. Particularly in v3, where a number of loopholes were closed. You are free to attach further non-conflicting clauses to it, but the GPL of the original code must be respected. That’s the entire point of the GPL. Double-licensing requires you to have ownership of the entire codebase. At that point, you are licensing everything, so you’re free to pick any license that suits you.
  - hyperpallium 7y ago
    >> You can release you code as GPL. But you can also release you code however, separately if you want. OP meant Singapore can dual license.
  - cyphar 7y ago
    You're agreeing with the OP. The point they were making was that the Australian government could've gotten the source code under an alternative license by asking the sole copyright holder (which I believe is either the Singaporean government, or a contractor of the Singaporean government). But to be honest, as an Aussie I don't think our government is remotely competent enough to have considered the copyright license of the code they were using. There were initial reports they would provide the source code of the application, but these promises were quickly revoked for reasons of "national security" or some other such rubbish. EDIT: I meant to say that it was a bullshit reason such as "national security", not that it was a direct quote. The actual reason they claimed was that it was easier to hack if the source code was public.
    - crispinb 7y ago
ferros 7y ago
It was interesting to hear a lead story on the nightly news talking about data privacy issues related to where the data was stored, saying that the data would be stored on “American company Amazon’s Servers”. No mention of Australian regions or GovCloud etc.
- maxden 7y ago
  The ABC is reporting that the server must store data in Australia and the data cannot be transferred overseas.
  - crispinb 7y ago
    Unless they've done some independent investigation, that's just federal government speak. The feds have been at pains to present COVIDSafe as having stringent privacy safeguards, but they have such an appalling record that few will believe them without trustworthy independent scrutiny. I can't see how that can be possible until (at a bare minimum) the app's source code is released. I really hope they do, and that they make any necessary improvements subsequently recommended. Contact tracing is a fantastic potential use of mobile technology. It would be a pity for it to be undermined by the usual impulse towards contemptuous patrician secrecy.
    - sjy 7y ago
      A “privacy impact assessment” was performed by an independent law firm, reviewed by an independent statutory authority responsible for privacy protection, and published before the app was released. https://www.oaic.gov.au/updates/news-and-media/privacy-protections-in-covidsafe-contact-tracing-app/ https://www.oaic.gov.au/updates/news-and-media/privacy-prote...
  - justinclift 7y ago
    Except if it's stored on AWS, then the US "CLOUD" act means US federal - eg the three letter ones, probably others too - have access to the data anyway: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act
  - 7y ago
em10fan 7y ago
> Non-compliant. The CovidSAFE application heavily uses source code from https://github.com/opentrace-community/opentrace-android https://github.com/opentrace-community/opentrace-android which was released under GPL v3 That's not to say its non-compliant, they could have reached out to the (one) contributor and licenced it separately.
- gumby 7y ago
  By not doing so they are by definition non-compliant. Or they could have GPLed the entire app; no reason not to have.
  - MaxBarraclough 7y ago
    > By not doing so they are by definition non-compliant. Pedantry. If you agree a separate licence and are no longer bound by the terms of the GPL, you cannot be in breach of the GPL. That's the point. > they could have GPLed the entire app; no reason not to have. They haven't released the source.
- ajdlinux 7y ago
  And they've been in talks with the Singapore Government for weeks now, so quite possibly they have gotten that licence separately. We'll see.
- zelphirkalt 7y ago
  For this specific case, it would be a grave mistake to license under anything, which does not contain a copyleft to make sure they release the source code as well and grant the 4 freedoms.
  - tzs 7y ago
    If I'm understanding this right, this app was written by the Australian government. Does the license for any libraries or other outside code they have included even matter? Generally, governments have what is called "sovereign immunity" when it comes to civil lawsuits. They can only be sued if they decide to allow it. Some countries waive their sovereign immunity for specific laws. For example US copyright law waives it for the Federal government, and so if the US government used your library without permission you could sue them for copyright infringement. It does not waive it in regard to the US states, however, and so if individual states used your library without permission you would probably not be able to do anything about it. I have no idea if Australia has sovereign immunity from Australian copyright law. Google, Bing, and Duck Duck Go are all insisting on just returning results about the recent US Supreme Court case that said the waiver of sovereign immunity in US copyright just covers the Federal government, not the state government.
henvic 7y ago
In my opinion, GPL is just another flavor of proprietary software and they should stop calling it free software or even opensource. Something like "Copyleft shared source" would make more sense to what it really is. https://medium.com/@henvic/opensource-and-go-what-license-f6b36c201854 https://medium.com/@henvic/opensource-and-go-what-license-f6...
- MaxBarraclough 7y ago
  As terms-of-art in the software world, 'Free software' and 'Open Source software' have clear accepted definitions. There's nothing wrong with being an advocate for 'copycenter' licences, but please don't muddy the waters.
- dathinab 7y ago
  It's free software which tried to enforce freedom about itself. I.e. the only freedom it lacks is the freedom to lose it's freedom. Which is generally a good idea even wrt. law in general as you elsewise tend to end up in a situation where theoretically everything is free but practically nothing is. Still GPL is quite a mixed pack but never hurts when used in (close to) end-user products. (It can hurt send used in tooling like a database.)
mcannon 7y ago
I believe the government, PM and various ministers have said the code will be released. My sources also say exactly the same. They’re obviously operating with extreme urgency to get the app out. For you. Give them a few weeks to clean up code and release it (which is very normal) - but in the meantime, here are some tips: - Turn the HN angry mob mode off - it’s not helpful. We’re all in this together. - Commend the government on some smart privacy and security choices (data deleted after 21 days, open source code, AWS in Australia, sensible sec practices etc). They won’t get it all right - and we as a tech community can help them. Find a bug & help get them closed. - When asked by non technical people “Should I install this app? Is my data / privacy safe? Is it true it doesn’t track my location?” - say “Yes” and help them understand. Fight the misinformation. Remind them how little time they think before they download dozens of free, adware crap games that are likely far worse for their data & privacy than this ever would be! Thank you
- bad_user 7y ago
  You can easily deny location data to games and people that are concerned about these apps will not share their location lightly. I have no app on my iPhone with the ability to use my location in the background, not even Waze or Google Maps. Also I don't care about deletion policies. That data should not be collected in the first place. I don't know about any specifics, but if the data isn't anonymized somehow, on the client side, such that the government can never trace it back to you, then I'd rather catch the virus personally. I agree about turning the angry mob mode off, but in times of crisis we would do well to remember that our freedoms are being traded for a little security and in many cases it isn't temporary. And Australia in particular doesn't have a good track record in preserving those freedoms. Therefore it isn't unreasonable to ask for source code. This isn't even about the GPL, people need the ability to review the code, especially if it's a public service paid by taxpayers. In my opinion such projects should be developed in the open, always.
  - mcannon 7y ago
    Did you know that on iOS it doesn’t even ask for location, and on Android that’s required for Bluetooth? The source code will show you what is done with that (as others who have decompiled it already have shown it doesn’t use the location anywhere). You can choose to get the virus - but that’s a pretty silly choice IMHO. And if you do, please stay home and don’t give it to anyone else.
lukevdp 7y ago
In the Privacy Impact assessment that was released here https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/04/covidsafe-application-privacy-impact-assessment-agency-response.pdf https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020... The government is planning to release the source code “subject to consultation with the Australian Signals Directorate’s Australian Cyber Security Centre.” Take that for what you will. I suspect some people will take this to mean they won’t be releasing the source, however at this point I think it’s reasonable to believe it is still going through this process.
- ggm 7y ago
  On national radio this morning they implied a belief in security-by-obscurity regarding things. I can't even. (I suspect the journalists mangled what the ASD said)
aapeli 7y ago
It's called dual licensing. The Au Gov got the code for TraceTogether (what OpenTrace, the open source implementation of BlueTrace is based on) weeks before the source was publicly released as GPL.
- hyperpallium 7y ago
  Not disputing, but do you have a link for when they got source? Opentrace was open sourced 16 days ago https://github.com/opentrace-community/opentrace-android https://github.com/opentrace-community/opentrace-android
  - aapeli 7y ago
    Don't have a public source, sorry.
discordance 7y ago
@Dang - there are a suspicious number of new users on this thread leaving positive comments about the about the Australian governments new surveillance app
- processing 7y ago
  Yes, don't think they were aware of news profile names being green for first <2 weeks. In this instance for the 5 hours they signed up to astroturf.
  - dang 7y ago
    Please don't do this here. The site guidelines ask you not to: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- dang 7y ago
  Most likely they saw https://twitter.com/mcannonbrookes/status/1254376884332228609 https://twitter.com/mcannonbrookes/status/125437688433222860.... They're not all positive: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22986688 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22986688. Currently split about equally, in fact. In the future, if you'd please follow the site guidelines and email hn@ycombinator.com such suspicions so we can investigate, I'd appreciate it. I only saw this comment randomly. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
enturn 7y ago
Are there concerns that unpatched Android devices could be vulnerable to the Bluetooth bug discovered in February this year? https://www.welivesecurity.com/2020/02/07/google-critical-android-bluetooth-flaw-attack/ https://www.welivesecurity.com/2020/02/07/google-critical-an...
- gruez 7y ago
  Exploit details were released a few days ago[1]. Some essential bits were removed, so not any script kiddie can use it, but it's only a matter of time before a full exploit available publicly. As for how it relates to the app, I don't think it matters much. I'd imagine most people already have bluetooth enabled, so using this app or not won't change their vulnerability status. [1] https://insinuator.net/2020/04/cve-2020-0022-an-android-8-0-9-0-bluetooth-zero-click-rce-bluefrag/ https://insinuator.net/2020/04/cve-2020-0022-an-android-8-0-...
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
SyneRyder 7y ago
I've been running COVIDSafe on Android for most of today, Samsung's Battery monitor is showing 3% battery use by COVIDSafe after 6 hours. I guess that's about a 10-12% battery hit over a full day, but at least it's using less battery than Spotify or TuneIn or Pocket Casts when they were in use with the screen off. So we're not talking Pokemon Go levels of battery drain here. It works fine in the background on Android. Much like the Pebble smartwatch app does for its Bluetooth connection, you get a permanent notification, and you have to disable battery saver to stop the app sleeping. But you can still use your phone for other things. Battery monitor regards the app as in "Active" use the whole time, not in "background" use.
- rstuart4133 7y ago
  The battery problem seems to be an Apple thing. iOS can shut the app down if it is in the background, and will do so if the battery is getting low. One solution is to keep it in the foreground - but that does chew power.
bfgeek 7y ago
https://docs.google.com/document/d/17GuApb1fG3Bn0_DVgDQgrtnd_QO3foBl7NVb8vaWeKc/preview https://docs.google.com/document/d/17GuApb1fG3Bn0_DVgDQgrtnd... (preview link might be more useful).
jay_kyburz 7y ago
Here is how I think the app should have worked. Instead of requesting codes from a central government server to be distributed to people you come into contact with, your phone could have generated its own codes for distribution. Then when a COVID infection is found, the gov could simply publish a list of all codes collected by the infected person. Your phone could request this public list daily and you could choose to get a COVID test if your code is in the public list. The government would have no way to link any codes to a particular phone or person. A lot less data would need to collected, stored, and managed. This app is designed to allow the government to find and collect anybody they think needs testing. It can also be used to find and punish anybody breaking social distancing laws. (Updated for clarity)
- jessriedel 7y ago
  If I understand you correctly, this is exactly the procedure that Stanford's CovidWatch is implementing. https://www.covid-watch.org/article#contactTracing https://www.covid-watch.org/article#contactTracing They are pushing for a standard protocol that incorporates this mechanism. It may or may not be compatible with the joint effort of Google and Apple, and with Singapore's under-development BlueTrace standard. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlueTrace https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlueTrace
contingencies 7y ago
Almost makes you want to write a dystopian travel advisory. Sydney, 2020. Foreign business people are advised to avoid all non-essential travel to Australia. Local authorities are known to seize devices, force self-isolation, force the installation of applications on mobile devices, inspect luggage and monitor the private telecommunications of travelers. Best practice is not to bring critical information to Australia and to use temporary or 'burner' devices where possible. Recent incidents[0][1][2] show a rise in anti-foreign sentiment, particularly for visitors of Asian appearance. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/04/australian-doctors-warn-of-rise-in-racist-abuse-over-coronavirus https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/04/australian-doc... [1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-03/racism-covid-19-coronavirus-outbreak-commissioner-discrimination/12117738 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-03/racism-covid-19-coron... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0cYJkGk7gI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0cYJkGk7gI
- ImaCake 7y ago
  I'm not sure what you are saying adds to this discussion. In fact I think it mis-directs a useful debate. All the things you are complaining about are true literally anywhere else in the developed world right now. In fact, Australia probably has more cause for them then most because self-iso and aggressive contact tracing have done so much to keep us safe so that we can be free sooner rather than later.
  - contingencies 7y ago
    Sometimes zoom-out perspective, "right now the whole western world [your point] is like a dystopian Gibson novel" is deeply meaningful.
    - ImaCake 7y ago
      Yes, but that can be considered assumed knowledge. The specialities of people here lend themselves well to discussing the gritty details of how dystopian surveillance systems are implemented. Which is a far more interesting discussion once you have exhausted your broader perspectives. I worry that the parent comment has a strong emotive hook which will distract from a more useful conversation that hasn't be had yet.
tgsovlerkhgsel 7y ago
Does this randomize the Bluetooth address too? I saw the README (from the dissection) mention a function that hides the name "so the other side only gets the address", which would defeat the entire purpose of rotating identifiers. If it does randomize the Bluetooth address, does it use a separate identifier, and if so, does it rotate both at the same time? Otherwise, you can use an identifier that changes at time 1 to link the other identifier with its new version when it changes at a different time.
- rstuart4133 7y ago
  It's OpenTrace [0]. OpenTrace is GPLv3, and is based on a published specification that's not too difficult understand. The fact that it is dervived from OpenTrace and they haven't published the source is the whole basis of this story. To answer your direct questions: - randomize Bluetooth addresses: I expect not, as that would screw any existing bluetooth connections, like headsets. - does it use a separate randomised identifier: yes. On Android at least you would be foolish to trust it without a verifiable chain of trust from the source to the binary you are running. It has two things that matter greatly: your true name, and your precise location. There is nothing physically preventing them from uploading your whereabouts every 10 minutes to a server - so you have to trust the binary doesn't do that. Right now we only have their word [1]. Whether you care enough above the sort of information it could leak to need to trust it is a different question. But if you do care, you would be a fool to do so without a verifiable chain. A verifiable chain of trust means: - source starts from a trusted origin. (It does: opentrace) - there is a cryptographically signed audit trail showing how they change it to get to its current state. (The original is in github, so that's possible). - they publish the source before deployment. (The two points above means someone inspecting the result only has to look at the changes, not the entire thing). - they use a reproducible build. [0] https://github.com/opentrace-community https://github.com/opentrace-community [1] Right now I'm sure they are good for their word. Move on 24 months and if you still have it installed, then based on their past history I would not trust them as far as I could kick them.
  - angry_octet 7y ago
    It would be obvious if they tried to get precise location (GPS) as that requires a discrete permission. However, precision location is a red herring -- it isn't needed for intelligence purposes. They are much much more interested in the social graph. From that they can likely back track to calculate approximate location (using cell positioning information and other sources). Last I looked the OpenTrace was exchanging an encrypted binary blob generated by the government, likely a unique identifier key and timestamp, which could be updated on demand by the server/app owner. Basically there is no anonymity for the user versus the Govt, only somewhat against other users.
ggm 7y ago
I'd love to know where 15 minutes exposed came from. Feels like a value imputed from a join over battery drain and usefulness. I thought five minutes made more sense. If you are 15 min within 1.5m of a stranger in most Australian states you're probably mildly in beach of social distancing.
- aiham 7y ago
  15 minutes was part of the definition for a casual contact 2 months ago, a lot earlier than the app and the social distancing rules. https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/03/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-casual-contacts-of-a-confirmed-case.pdf https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020...
  - ggm 7y ago
    You will notice in that guidance that if you subsequently fall ill as a casual (sub 15 min) contact they will need to talk to you for contacts tracing.. So that implies there is a health risk burden under 15 which needs to incur costs of contact tracing at which time this app cannot help.
alfiedotwtf 7y ago
Would anybody be interested in setting up a bounty? I'm thinking first team to show a major break in privacy wins the pool. I'll put in $100, and I hope others do too. Edit: to be explicit, I'm talking about REing the app locally, nothing server side
bamboozled 7y ago
I'm wondering how the application protects against people running malicious clients works? If the point of this app is to broadcast identifiable information into the public domain, what is stopping others from snooping this information and creating their own tracing DB?
- mkj 7y ago
  Legally it's probably disallowed by https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00480 https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00480 section 6(1)
- mickotron 7y ago
  Cool go ahead, you're only gonna get my device identifier, phone model, some encrypted temporary ID that identifies me for 15 minutes, which health agency the app is affiliated with (the same as the attacker given we are in range), etc. Seriously my Facebook app and the underlying Android OS is sucking way more sensitive data than this is broadcasting. And only to the restricted physical range of Bluetooth. And if you did happen to get my device identifier, TempId etc, you still have to map those to my personal identity. Decrypt my TempId and what do you get, my app UserId. Not even my phone number. Try harder. My bigger concern is a malicious client that can exploit a weakness in mine by sending a specially crafted json payload and gaining remote code execution. The data on its own is pretty worthless for location tracking. It needs enrichment or correlation with other data to be used for that purpose.
Sophistifunk 7y ago
The Australian government is not to be trusted, they (both parties) have been trying to take control of the internet for decades now, and even when they're not trying to do something nefarious, government IT projects have a long history of incompetence. Even recently (but before CV19) they've been drastically increasing the reach of the state to spy on people and force backdoors into software.
stephen_g 7y ago
My biggest worry (apart from the fact that any Australian law enforcement agency or intelligence service could serve the department that released the app with a notice under the TOLA Act (AA bill) to add a backdoor, and they would be compelled to do it and then deny its existence), is that it probably just won't be extremely effective, but people will see it as a magic bullet out of lockdown. There is a lot of pressure from the right wing and business lobbies to re-open everything, but the only reason that we have had such low numbers is because we locked down early and hard. People are saying "Install the app so we can go back to normal quicker" already - this is dangerous. With commercial grade hardware and software not designed for this, we can't assume the app will be reliable all (or even most) of the time. The period of time somebody is infectious seems to be quite long. So using the app as an excuse to ease lockdown will not work and would probably just result in unrestrained community transmission. Especially as we are coming into winter, we really don't want a second wave!
scoot_718 7y ago
> Remind them how little time they think before they download dozens of free, adware crap games that are likely far worse for their data & privacy than this ever would be!” Not a convincing argument for anything.
thisrod 7y ago
I think this discussion is putting the cart before the horse. If there is no alternative to this app, what protections should it have? That's the second question to ask. The first one, which hardly anyone is asking, is whether the thing is necessary to start with. There is one very strong reason to suspect Australians don't need this: the app has only been here 3 days, but the novel coronavirus has been around for 3 months, and it has never looked like getting out of control. Turns out that telephones and old-school contact tracing still work, and they work even better with some help from DNA manipulating virus detection robots. Who would have thunk it? Plus, at this point, each app user has a 1 in a million chance of being exposed to the virus. Talk about number needed to treat! Australia should focus on prisons, aged care facilities and concentration camps, where the risks are still meaningful. And we should rack our brains to imagine other ways that the virus could rapidly spread beyond our capacity to contain it. If things keep going right, we won't need this app. If something goes wrong, it will be an unexpected thing that the app can't fix.

173 points by ghuntley 7y ago

They said they would release source, but they've distributed the app first, so are in breach. They also said location would not be used, but android.permission.ACCESS_FINE_LOCATION Can't trust them on things that can be checked; therefore can't trust them on the things that that can't be checked.

maxden 7y ago
Yes, I thought they said a few days ago that the source code will be made available for scrutiny but this now how its being reported: "Some, if not all, of the app’s source code will be made public."
- pmontra 7y ago
  Will Australians be able to build from source, install and connect to the central server (if any)? Or at least build and verify that what comes from the stores is what they built? If not, having the source code doesn't really matter much.
  - barbs 7y ago
    I think it would go a long way in establishing trust if they release the source code, even if you can't perfectly prove that the binaries are built from it. They would have to be outright lying if that wasn't the case.
speedgoose 7y ago
If you want to use Bluetooth on Android, you must ask for this permission. Bluetooth can be used to get high quality locations, also indoor. https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/connectivity/bluetooth#Permissions https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/connectivity/blue...
lukevdp 7y ago
I don’t know if it’s true or not, but in the app it states it needs location access for Bluetooth.
- barbs 7y ago
  Yeah it's true https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/connectivity/bluetooth#Permissions https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/connectivity/blue...
2muchcoffeeman 7y ago
On iOS it does not request location services. In fact it doesn’t even appear on the list of apps when you go to Privacy -> Location services. So appears to be an Android thing.

tastroder 7y ago

It's interesting to see these tracing app discussions crop up all over the world at the moment. In Germany it quite literally took dozens of public interest groups, two weeks of media attention, EU guidance and an open letter by hundreds of scientists to make the government switch from central data collection to an acceptable decentralised approach. The amount of misinformation put out by lobby groups in the process was frankly astonishing, is that similar in Australia or is this app primarily driven by the government itself?

lukevdp 7y ago
This app has been released by the government.
temac 7y ago
> In Germany it quite literally took dozens of public interest groups, two weeks of media attention, EU guidance and an open letter by hundreds of scientists to make the government switch from central data collection to an acceptable decentralised approach. Interesting. Do you have any pointer on the current German approach? I've been looking at the Robert protocol from Inria+Fraunhofer, and I'm not sure I like the central secret DB it requires.
- def_true_false 7y ago
  I guess they meant the DP-3T. See https://github.com/DP-3T/documents https://github.com/DP-3T/documents
  - temac 7y ago
    I think so, and it seems this is very recent; I found that: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-europe-tech/germany-flips-on-smartphone-contact-tracing-backs-apple-and-google-idUSKCN22807J https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-europe... I hope France will follow.
- tastroder 7y ago
  This happened over the weekend so details are pretty vague and mostly available in German. I'd expect more to follow in the next few days, official statements didn't yet talk about who will take over implementation I believe. But w.r.t. the Robert protocol, that's the PEPP-PT one that was pushed against. Differences between Robert and the proposal for Germany were minimal. While there are a few at the moment I expect the solution to work with DP3T / integration of the Gapple APIs. Future travel in mind it wouldn't make much sense to develop something else at this point imho.

timkam 7y ago

I would assume many GPL-licensed applications are GPL non-compliant. From a user's perspective, what are the most relevant problems when this is the case? (Excluding problems of philosophical nature that only free software geeks care about. No intention to be disrespectful; but the more practical the problems, the more likely it is that ordinary users can relate to them.)

toyg 7y ago
Without source code, you cannot trust what the app does. This is particularly bad for an app that will supposedly track your every move. Also, non-compliance with a copyright license effectively means “stealing”. So the government is effectively buying stolen goods from Amazon and Boston Group.
- mcqueenjordan 7y ago
  > Also, non-compliance with a copyright license effectively means “stealing”. So the government is effectively buying stolen goods from Amazon and Boston Group. Do you have a good source for that? (No, a random tweet isn't a good source.)
  - toyg 7y ago
    Source for what? It’s in TFA...?
cycloptic 7y ago
The requirement of the GPL is that the user must be able to get the source code if they ask for it, potentially for a small fee to cover the cost of distribution. Contrary to what the document seems to imply, it doesn't mean the source needs to be up on Github. But that is a common method of complying. The document is not really clear if anyone asked them or not or what their response was. I'm not sure what you mean by philosophical vs practical. The problem is past that point and is really is not related to either of those, it's a legal problem: a user wants the source code, the license says they're entitled to receive it, but the distributor is violating the license by refusing to provide it to the user. Or at least that was my read anyway.

aaron695 7y ago

I saw this coming BUT I thought if they were clever they might get the code from the Singapore government (Who I think developed OpenTrace) direct? You can release you code as GPL. But you can also release you code however, separately if you want. Also it depends on OpenTrace's libraries and if it's been contributed to.

toyg 7y ago
Uhm, no. Once your code contains GPL code that is not yours, it has to be GPL. Particularly in v3, where a number of loopholes were closed. You are free to attach further non-conflicting clauses to it, but the GPL of the original code must be respected. That’s the entire point of the GPL. Double-licensing requires you to have ownership of the entire codebase. At that point, you are licensing everything, so you’re free to pick any license that suits you.
- hyperpallium 7y ago
  >> You can release you code as GPL. But you can also release you code however, separately if you want. OP meant Singapore can dual license.
- cyphar 7y ago
  You're agreeing with the OP. The point they were making was that the Australian government could've gotten the source code under an alternative license by asking the sole copyright holder (which I believe is either the Singaporean government, or a contractor of the Singaporean government). But to be honest, as an Aussie I don't think our government is remotely competent enough to have considered the copyright license of the code they were using. There were initial reports they would provide the source code of the application, but these promises were quickly revoked for reasons of "national security" or some other such rubbish. EDIT: I meant to say that it was a bullshit reason such as "national security", not that it was a direct quote. The actual reason they claimed was that it was easier to hack if the source code was public.
  - crispinb 7y ago

ferros 7y ago

It was interesting to hear a lead story on the nightly news talking about data privacy issues related to where the data was stored, saying that the data would be stored on “American company Amazon’s Servers”. No mention of Australian regions or GovCloud etc.

maxden 7y ago
The ABC is reporting that the server must store data in Australia and the data cannot be transferred overseas.
- crispinb 7y ago
  Unless they've done some independent investigation, that's just federal government speak. The feds have been at pains to present COVIDSafe as having stringent privacy safeguards, but they have such an appalling record that few will believe them without trustworthy independent scrutiny. I can't see how that can be possible until (at a bare minimum) the app's source code is released. I really hope they do, and that they make any necessary improvements subsequently recommended. Contact tracing is a fantastic potential use of mobile technology. It would be a pity for it to be undermined by the usual impulse towards contemptuous patrician secrecy.
  - sjy 7y ago
    A “privacy impact assessment” was performed by an independent law firm, reviewed by an independent statutory authority responsible for privacy protection, and published before the app was released. https://www.oaic.gov.au/updates/news-and-media/privacy-protections-in-covidsafe-contact-tracing-app/ https://www.oaic.gov.au/updates/news-and-media/privacy-prote...
- justinclift 7y ago
  Except if it's stored on AWS, then the US "CLOUD" act means US federal - eg the three letter ones, probably others too - have access to the data anyway: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act
- 7y ago

em10fan 7y ago

> Non-compliant. The CovidSAFE application heavily uses source code from https://github.com/opentrace-community/opentrace-android https://github.com/opentrace-community/opentrace-android which was released under GPL v3 That's not to say its non-compliant, they could have reached out to the (one) contributor and licenced it separately.

gumby 7y ago
By not doing so they are by definition non-compliant. Or they could have GPLed the entire app; no reason not to have.
- MaxBarraclough 7y ago
  > By not doing so they are by definition non-compliant. Pedantry. If you agree a separate licence and are no longer bound by the terms of the GPL, you cannot be in breach of the GPL. That's the point. > they could have GPLed the entire app; no reason not to have. They haven't released the source.
ajdlinux 7y ago
And they've been in talks with the Singapore Government for weeks now, so quite possibly they have gotten that licence separately. We'll see.
zelphirkalt 7y ago
For this specific case, it would be a grave mistake to license under anything, which does not contain a copyleft to make sure they release the source code as well and grant the 4 freedoms.
- tzs 7y ago
  If I'm understanding this right, this app was written by the Australian government. Does the license for any libraries or other outside code they have included even matter? Generally, governments have what is called "sovereign immunity" when it comes to civil lawsuits. They can only be sued if they decide to allow it. Some countries waive their sovereign immunity for specific laws. For example US copyright law waives it for the Federal government, and so if the US government used your library without permission you could sue them for copyright infringement. It does not waive it in regard to the US states, however, and so if individual states used your library without permission you would probably not be able to do anything about it. I have no idea if Australia has sovereign immunity from Australian copyright law. Google, Bing, and Duck Duck Go are all insisting on just returning results about the recent US Supreme Court case that said the waiver of sovereign immunity in US copyright just covers the Federal government, not the state government.

henvic 7y ago

In my opinion, GPL is just another flavor of proprietary software and they should stop calling it free software or even opensource. Something like "Copyleft shared source" would make more sense to what it really is. https://medium.com/@henvic/opensource-and-go-what-license-f6b36c201854 https://medium.com/@henvic/opensource-and-go-what-license-f6...

MaxBarraclough 7y ago
As terms-of-art in the software world, 'Free software' and 'Open Source software' have clear accepted definitions. There's nothing wrong with being an advocate for 'copycenter' licences, but please don't muddy the waters.
dathinab 7y ago
It's free software which tried to enforce freedom about itself. I.e. the only freedom it lacks is the freedom to lose it's freedom. Which is generally a good idea even wrt. law in general as you elsewise tend to end up in a situation where theoretically everything is free but practically nothing is. Still GPL is quite a mixed pack but never hurts when used in (close to) end-user products. (It can hurt send used in tooling like a database.)

mcannon 7y ago

I believe the government, PM and various ministers have said the code will be released. My sources also say exactly the same. They’re obviously operating with extreme urgency to get the app out. For you. Give them a few weeks to clean up code and release it (which is very normal) - but in the meantime, here are some tips: - Turn the HN angry mob mode off - it’s not helpful. We’re all in this together. - Commend the government on some smart privacy and security choices (data deleted after 21 days, open source code, AWS in Australia, sensible sec practices etc). They won’t get it all right - and we as a tech community can help them. Find a bug & help get them closed. - When asked by non technical people “Should I install this app? Is my data / privacy safe? Is it true it doesn’t track my location?” - say “Yes” and help them understand. Fight the misinformation. Remind them how little time they think before they download dozens of free, adware crap games that are likely far worse for their data & privacy than this ever would be! Thank you

bad_user 7y ago
You can easily deny location data to games and people that are concerned about these apps will not share their location lightly. I have no app on my iPhone with the ability to use my location in the background, not even Waze or Google Maps. Also I don't care about deletion policies. That data should not be collected in the first place. I don't know about any specifics, but if the data isn't anonymized somehow, on the client side, such that the government can never trace it back to you, then I'd rather catch the virus personally. I agree about turning the angry mob mode off, but in times of crisis we would do well to remember that our freedoms are being traded for a little security and in many cases it isn't temporary. And Australia in particular doesn't have a good track record in preserving those freedoms. Therefore it isn't unreasonable to ask for source code. This isn't even about the GPL, people need the ability to review the code, especially if it's a public service paid by taxpayers. In my opinion such projects should be developed in the open, always.
- mcannon 7y ago
  Did you know that on iOS it doesn’t even ask for location, and on Android that’s required for Bluetooth? The source code will show you what is done with that (as others who have decompiled it already have shown it doesn’t use the location anywhere). You can choose to get the virus - but that’s a pretty silly choice IMHO. And if you do, please stay home and don’t give it to anyone else.

lukevdp 7y ago

In the Privacy Impact assessment that was released here https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/04/covidsafe-application-privacy-impact-assessment-agency-response.pdf https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020... The government is planning to release the source code “subject to consultation with the Australian Signals Directorate’s Australian Cyber Security Centre.” Take that for what you will. I suspect some people will take this to mean they won’t be releasing the source, however at this point I think it’s reasonable to believe it is still going through this process.

ggm 7y ago
On national radio this morning they implied a belief in security-by-obscurity regarding things. I can't even. (I suspect the journalists mangled what the ASD said)

aapeli 7y ago

It's called dual licensing. The Au Gov got the code for TraceTogether (what OpenTrace, the open source implementation of BlueTrace is based on) weeks before the source was publicly released as GPL.

hyperpallium 7y ago
Not disputing, but do you have a link for when they got source? Opentrace was open sourced 16 days ago https://github.com/opentrace-community/opentrace-android https://github.com/opentrace-community/opentrace-android
- aapeli 7y ago
  Don't have a public source, sorry.

discordance 7y ago

@Dang - there are a suspicious number of new users on this thread leaving positive comments about the about the Australian governments new surveillance app

processing 7y ago
Yes, don't think they were aware of news profile names being green for first <2 weeks. In this instance for the 5 hours they signed up to astroturf.
- dang 7y ago
  Please don't do this here. The site guidelines ask you not to: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
dang 7y ago
Most likely they saw https://twitter.com/mcannonbrookes/status/1254376884332228609 https://twitter.com/mcannonbrookes/status/125437688433222860.... They're not all positive: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22986688 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22986688. Currently split about equally, in fact. In the future, if you'd please follow the site guidelines and email hn@ycombinator.com such suspicions so we can investigate, I'd appreciate it. I only saw this comment randomly. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

enturn 7y ago

Are there concerns that unpatched Android devices could be vulnerable to the Bluetooth bug discovered in February this year? https://www.welivesecurity.com/2020/02/07/google-critical-android-bluetooth-flaw-attack/ https://www.welivesecurity.com/2020/02/07/google-critical-an...

gruez 7y ago
Exploit details were released a few days ago[1]. Some essential bits were removed, so not any script kiddie can use it, but it's only a matter of time before a full exploit available publicly. As for how it relates to the app, I don't think it matters much. I'd imagine most people already have bluetooth enabled, so using this app or not won't change their vulnerability status. [1] https://insinuator.net/2020/04/cve-2020-0022-an-android-8-0-9-0-bluetooth-zero-click-rce-bluefrag/ https://insinuator.net/2020/04/cve-2020-0022-an-android-8-0-...

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

SyneRyder 7y ago

I've been running COVIDSafe on Android for most of today, Samsung's Battery monitor is showing 3% battery use by COVIDSafe after 6 hours. I guess that's about a 10-12% battery hit over a full day, but at least it's using less battery than Spotify or TuneIn or Pocket Casts when they were in use with the screen off. So we're not talking Pokemon Go levels of battery drain here. It works fine in the background on Android. Much like the Pebble smartwatch app does for its Bluetooth connection, you get a permanent notification, and you have to disable battery saver to stop the app sleeping. But you can still use your phone for other things. Battery monitor regards the app as in "Active" use the whole time, not in "background" use.

rstuart4133 7y ago
The battery problem seems to be an Apple thing. iOS can shut the app down if it is in the background, and will do so if the battery is getting low. One solution is to keep it in the foreground - but that does chew power.

bfgeek 7y ago

https://docs.google.com/document/d/17GuApb1fG3Bn0_DVgDQgrtnd_QO3foBl7NVb8vaWeKc/preview https://docs.google.com/document/d/17GuApb1fG3Bn0_DVgDQgrtnd... (preview link might be more useful).

jay_kyburz 7y ago

Here is how I think the app should have worked. Instead of requesting codes from a central government server to be distributed to people you come into contact with, your phone could have generated its own codes for distribution. Then when a COVID infection is found, the gov could simply publish a list of all codes collected by the infected person. Your phone could request this public list daily and you could choose to get a COVID test if your code is in the public list. The government would have no way to link any codes to a particular phone or person. A lot less data would need to collected, stored, and managed. This app is designed to allow the government to find and collect anybody they think needs testing. It can also be used to find and punish anybody breaking social distancing laws. (Updated for clarity)

jessriedel 7y ago
If I understand you correctly, this is exactly the procedure that Stanford's CovidWatch is implementing. https://www.covid-watch.org/article#contactTracing https://www.covid-watch.org/article#contactTracing They are pushing for a standard protocol that incorporates this mechanism. It may or may not be compatible with the joint effort of Google and Apple, and with Singapore's under-development BlueTrace standard. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlueTrace https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlueTrace

contingencies 7y ago

Almost makes you want to write a dystopian travel advisory. Sydney, 2020. Foreign business people are advised to avoid all non-essential travel to Australia. Local authorities are known to seize devices, force self-isolation, force the installation of applications on mobile devices, inspect luggage and monitor the private telecommunications of travelers. Best practice is not to bring critical information to Australia and to use temporary or 'burner' devices where possible. Recent incidents[0][1][2] show a rise in anti-foreign sentiment, particularly for visitors of Asian appearance. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/04/australian-doctors-warn-of-rise-in-racist-abuse-over-coronavirus https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/04/australian-doc... [1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-03/racism-covid-19-coronavirus-outbreak-commissioner-discrimination/12117738 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-03/racism-covid-19-coron... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0cYJkGk7gI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0cYJkGk7gI

ImaCake 7y ago
I'm not sure what you are saying adds to this discussion. In fact I think it mis-directs a useful debate. All the things you are complaining about are true literally anywhere else in the developed world right now. In fact, Australia probably has more cause for them then most because self-iso and aggressive contact tracing have done so much to keep us safe so that we can be free sooner rather than later.
- contingencies 7y ago
  Sometimes zoom-out perspective, "right now the whole western world [your point] is like a dystopian Gibson novel" is deeply meaningful.
  - ImaCake 7y ago
    Yes, but that can be considered assumed knowledge. The specialities of people here lend themselves well to discussing the gritty details of how dystopian surveillance systems are implemented. Which is a far more interesting discussion once you have exhausted your broader perspectives. I worry that the parent comment has a strong emotive hook which will distract from a more useful conversation that hasn't be had yet.

tgsovlerkhgsel 7y ago

Does this randomize the Bluetooth address too? I saw the README (from the dissection) mention a function that hides the name "so the other side only gets the address", which would defeat the entire purpose of rotating identifiers. If it does randomize the Bluetooth address, does it use a separate identifier, and if so, does it rotate both at the same time? Otherwise, you can use an identifier that changes at time 1 to link the other identifier with its new version when it changes at a different time.

rstuart4133 7y ago
It's OpenTrace [0]. OpenTrace is GPLv3, and is based on a published specification that's not too difficult understand. The fact that it is dervived from OpenTrace and they haven't published the source is the whole basis of this story. To answer your direct questions: - randomize Bluetooth addresses: I expect not, as that would screw any existing bluetooth connections, like headsets. - does it use a separate randomised identifier: yes. On Android at least you would be foolish to trust it without a verifiable chain of trust from the source to the binary you are running. It has two things that matter greatly: your true name, and your precise location. There is nothing physically preventing them from uploading your whereabouts every 10 minutes to a server - so you have to trust the binary doesn't do that. Right now we only have their word [1]. Whether you care enough above the sort of information it could leak to need to trust it is a different question. But if you do care, you would be a fool to do so without a verifiable chain. A verifiable chain of trust means: - source starts from a trusted origin. (It does: opentrace) - there is a cryptographically signed audit trail showing how they change it to get to its current state. (The original is in github, so that's possible). - they publish the source before deployment. (The two points above means someone inspecting the result only has to look at the changes, not the entire thing). - they use a reproducible build. [0] https://github.com/opentrace-community https://github.com/opentrace-community [1] Right now I'm sure they are good for their word. Move on 24 months and if you still have it installed, then based on their past history I would not trust them as far as I could kick them.
- angry_octet 7y ago
  It would be obvious if they tried to get precise location (GPS) as that requires a discrete permission. However, precision location is a red herring -- it isn't needed for intelligence purposes. They are much much more interested in the social graph. From that they can likely back track to calculate approximate location (using cell positioning information and other sources). Last I looked the OpenTrace was exchanging an encrypted binary blob generated by the government, likely a unique identifier key and timestamp, which could be updated on demand by the server/app owner. Basically there is no anonymity for the user versus the Govt, only somewhat against other users.

ggm 7y ago

I'd love to know where 15 minutes exposed came from. Feels like a value imputed from a join over battery drain and usefulness. I thought five minutes made more sense. If you are 15 min within 1.5m of a stranger in most Australian states you're probably mildly in beach of social distancing.

aiham 7y ago
15 minutes was part of the definition for a casual contact 2 months ago, a lot earlier than the app and the social distancing rules. https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/03/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-casual-contacts-of-a-confirmed-case.pdf https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020...
- ggm 7y ago
  You will notice in that guidance that if you subsequently fall ill as a casual (sub 15 min) contact they will need to talk to you for contacts tracing.. So that implies there is a health risk burden under 15 which needs to incur costs of contact tracing at which time this app cannot help.

alfiedotwtf 7y ago

Would anybody be interested in setting up a bounty? I'm thinking first team to show a major break in privacy wins the pool. I'll put in $100, and I hope others do too. Edit: to be explicit, I'm talking about REing the app locally, nothing server side

bamboozled 7y ago

I'm wondering how the application protects against people running malicious clients works? If the point of this app is to broadcast identifiable information into the public domain, what is stopping others from snooping this information and creating their own tracing DB?

mkj 7y ago
Legally it's probably disallowed by https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00480 https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00480 section 6(1)
mickotron 7y ago
Cool go ahead, you're only gonna get my device identifier, phone model, some encrypted temporary ID that identifies me for 15 minutes, which health agency the app is affiliated with (the same as the attacker given we are in range), etc. Seriously my Facebook app and the underlying Android OS is sucking way more sensitive data than this is broadcasting. And only to the restricted physical range of Bluetooth. And if you did happen to get my device identifier, TempId etc, you still have to map those to my personal identity. Decrypt my TempId and what do you get, my app UserId. Not even my phone number. Try harder. My bigger concern is a malicious client that can exploit a weakness in mine by sending a specially crafted json payload and gaining remote code execution. The data on its own is pretty worthless for location tracking. It needs enrichment or correlation with other data to be used for that purpose.

Sophistifunk 7y ago

The Australian government is not to be trusted, they (both parties) have been trying to take control of the internet for decades now, and even when they're not trying to do something nefarious, government IT projects have a long history of incompetence. Even recently (but before CV19) they've been drastically increasing the reach of the state to spy on people and force backdoors into software.

stephen_g 7y ago

My biggest worry (apart from the fact that any Australian law enforcement agency or intelligence service could serve the department that released the app with a notice under the TOLA Act (AA bill) to add a backdoor, and they would be compelled to do it and then deny its existence), is that it probably just won't be extremely effective, but people will see it as a magic bullet out of lockdown. There is a lot of pressure from the right wing and business lobbies to re-open everything, but the only reason that we have had such low numbers is because we locked down early and hard. People are saying "Install the app so we can go back to normal quicker" already - this is dangerous. With commercial grade hardware and software not designed for this, we can't assume the app will be reliable all (or even most) of the time. The period of time somebody is infectious seems to be quite long. So using the app as an excuse to ease lockdown will not work and would probably just result in unrestrained community transmission. Especially as we are coming into winter, we really don't want a second wave!

scoot_718 7y ago

> Remind them how little time they think before they download dozens of free, adware crap games that are likely far worse for their data & privacy than this ever would be!” Not a convincing argument for anything.

thisrod 7y ago

I think this discussion is putting the cart before the horse. If there is no alternative to this app, what protections should it have? That's the second question to ask. The first one, which hardly anyone is asking, is whether the thing is necessary to start with. There is one very strong reason to suspect Australians don't need this: the app has only been here 3 days, but the novel coronavirus has been around for 3 months, and it has never looked like getting out of control. Turns out that telephones and old-school contact tracing still work, and they work even better with some help from DNA manipulating virus detection robots. Who would have thunk it? Plus, at this point, each app user has a 1 in a million chance of being exposed to the virus. Talk about number needed to treat! Australia should focus on prisons, aged care facilities and concentration camps, where the risks are still meaningful. And we should rack our brains to imagine other ways that the virus could rapidly spread beyond our capacity to contain it. If things keep going right, we won't need this app. If something goes wrong, it will be an unexpected thing that the app can't fix.