Australia Set To Spy on WhatsApp Messages With Encryption Law (bloomberg.com) 151
Australia is set to give its police and intelligence agencies the power to access encrypted messages on platforms such as WhatsApp, becoming the latest country to face down privacy concerns in the name of public safety. From a report: Amid protests from companies such as Facebook and Google, the government and main opposition struck a deal on Tuesday that should see the legislation passed by parliament this week. Under the proposed powers, technology companies could be forced to help decrypt communications on popular messaging apps, or even build new functionality to help police access data.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has said the legislation is needed to help foil terrorist attacks and organized crime. Critics say it is flawed and could undermine security across the Internet, jeopardizing activities from online voting to market trading and data storage.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has said the legislation is needed to help foil terrorist attacks and organized crime. Critics say it is flawed and could undermine security across the Internet, jeopardizing activities from online voting to market trading and data storage.
About time (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I wasn't aware they had any organized terrorism there for them to spy on:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
But they communicate with pheromones, not Whatsapp.
Aussie doxing (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Can't wait for the first round of Australian politicians and law enforcement to be compromised by this.
It compromises their own defense forces - it's a nasty piece of law for all democracies.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, obviously something must have completely terrorized them! What have Australians been terrorized by, if not terrorists?
The local wildlife? Maybe. I know I sure as fuck wouldn't dare touch anything if I went there. But I don't think that's it.
Invasive species? Maybe. But I still laugh my ass off whenever I watch that Cane Toads movie [imdb.com]. I don't think people can be scared when they're laughing.
What else could it be that has them so terrorized? Some terrorist must have totally defeated them, demanded the
Doesn't whatsapp use end to end encryption? (Score:2)
WhatsApp end-to-end encryption ensures only you and the person you're communicating with can read what's sent, and nobody in between, not even WhatsApp. "
So what does this announcement mean? Pick one:
a) That whatsapp will turn off end to end encryption for Australian custome
Re: (Score:2)
So what does this announcement mean? Pick one:
a) That whatsapp will turn off end to end encryption for Australian customers?
b) Whatsapp will cease operations in Australia because e-to-e contravenes Australian law?
c) The encryption scheme is already broken and we just don't realize it?
d) There will be a lot of noise between public officials with no knowledge of how the tech actually works, and this will all just blow over... (possibly with a situation like that fiasco in Brazil, depending on how much noise they make)
Re: (Score:2)
or d, whatsapp will say they don't give af and continue their merry way because they don't book any profits in AU so don't really care?
Oh, they sold out to FB who does make money there.
Oh, and they need the app store to allow people to download their app (well, mandatory for iOS, not so for android)
But really, I don't see this working out well if they manage to pass said law. Forcing companies to build something for them? Are they being paid? I know the aussies are a bit weird but i don't believe they al
Re: (Score:2)
They must be plotting something.
The act allows all five eyes countries to bypass their constitution via intelligence agreements with Australia. So if you are in one of those countries you will be affected.
Idiots (Score:5, Insightful)
Do these legislative entities not realize that the bad guys can write their own encrypted apps?
Or send coded messages through existing apps that still won't help law enforcement?
Re: (Score:1)
Do these legislative entities not realize that the bad guys can write their own encrypted apps?
Yes, but it raises the effort level. As a bad guys' boss, now you need to (a) have a resource that develops the app for you (b) ensure that they are loyal to your agenda (c) if not (b) then at least they will keep their mouth shut (d) have a resource to maintain your server and (e) ensure that the guy in (d) is competent.
Also if your server is discovered, the authorities can shut it down like they do with botnets. They can't do that with WhatsApp and its brethren.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but it raises the effort level.
They don't have to write anything, it already exists.
Re: (Score:1)
If anyone thinks this is going to have a significant impact on solving crimes, they will soon realise their mistake.
If anyone thinks this will help state surveillance, well -%£~'#? ... [No Carrier]
Re: (Score:2)
(a-c) Sounds like a business opportunity.
(d-e) Sigh. Everything's gotta have its own server. No way you could encrypt and decrypt messages on a phone and send them over e-mail/jabber/4chan/whatever.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Off hand I could setup email pgp in a couple of minutes. What are they going to do then, shut down email service?
Issue a TCN, then a TAN, then assess you as capable of subverting your own systems. If you don't co-operate fine you $30,000-$60,000 and jail you for 5 to 10 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The last time there was an actual terrorist act in Australia was in 1995. Since then it's been a couple of shootings or a knife attack.
Your response:
NU UH! Look here, SON...
Endeavour STABBINGS
2015 Parramatta SHOOTING
Minto STABBING
Queanbeyan STABBING
Mill Park STABBING
2018 Melbourne STABBING
The other two, let's have a closer look:
Sydney hostage crisis - Ahh, let's investigate this "terrorist" attack:
Man Haron Monis, a lone gunman, held hostage ten customers and eight employees of a Lindt chocolate café located at Martin Place in Sydney, Australia. The Sydney siege lead to a 16-hour standoff, during which 3 gunshots were heard from inside over a period of time. The first two shots were fired in the general direction of fleeing hostages and were left unopposed by on scene police command, however police officers from the Tactical Operations Unit stormed the café after reports the third shot was the execution of hostage Tori Johnson. Hostage Katrina Dawson was killed by a ricocheted bullet fragment in the subsequent raid. Monis was also killed. Three other hostages and a police officer were injured by police gunfire during the raid.
Wow, 3 shots fired. Total terrorist attack.
Brighton siege - Let's have a closer look:
Yacqub Khayre shot dead a Chinese-Australian receptionist in a serviced apartment complex and took a prostitute hostage in Brighton, Victoria. Police officers were involved in gunfight with Khayre who was shot dead and three officers wounded. ISIL claimed responsibility for the attack and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull described the incident as terrorism, however Victoria Police warned that there was no evidence to suggest he was acting on orders given from overseas. Khayre had previously been charged in relation to the Holsworthy Barracks terror plot but was acquitted in trial. He had recently been released on parole.
I guess when I say "terrorist attack", I think of Oklahoma City bombing, Pan Am Flight 183 or 9/11
Re: (Score:2)
I guess when I say "terrorist attack", I think of Oklahoma City bombing, Pan Am Flight 183 or 9/11. The activity that you're talking about are simply things that happen sometimes, but were later labled as "terrorist".
You're trying to move the goal posts. Remember that AUS doesn't have anything like the 2nd amendment, and guns are fairly restricted. That means the methods of "terror" come from other methods for instance, in this case mass stabbings and so on. You should also note that in nearly every case that said AC mentioned, they were religiously motivated by muslim extremists. That does make it terrorism. Just like the "beltway sniper" was a muslim extremist. Or the muslim that shot the war memorial in Ottawa,
Re: (Score:2)
Remember that AUS doesn't have anything like the 2nd amendment, and guns are fairly restricted. That means the methods of "terror" come from other methods for instance, in this case mass stabbings and so on.
This is a very good point. I'm an American and have obviously grown very accustomed to guns being a thing (especially since I'm from Alabama where guns are quite normal).
You should also note that in nearly every case that said AC mentioned, they were religiously motivated by muslim extremists. That does make it terrorism.
Wow, you have a lot to learn about Muslims. You thinking this way would be the same as Muslims thinking that all Christians are the Westboro Baptists (This is their actual webpage [godhatesfags.com]).
Re: (Score:2)
I seem to recall the definition of terrorism being acts of violence that were politically motivated. Nothing about religion in there.
Did you forget that Islam is both a religion AND political philosophy AND a code of laws? Oh I guess you did, sure explains why you're not understand this.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, right! Muslim = terrorist. How silly of me to forget.
Well if you're in Australia, that is sure true. And if you're in Canada too, not forgetting about the muslim who tried to setup a biological weapon on a VIA train through major urban centers. Or the Toronto 18, or the drive-by-jihad in Alberta and the guy running over a dozen people. And they all declared it for one ideology.
Re: (Score:3)
To be fair they are more concerned about the average low tech criminal having easy access to powerful encryption tools.
If they wanted to go full 1984 they could simply make the use of unbreakable encryption for messaging a crime and charge anyone found to be using it. Apple and Google would block such apps in their app stores, and most criminals would not have the skills to write their own (and even if they did would be convicted if discovered).
So actually this law can be quite effective if they are willing
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
Won't work. Unbreakable crypto is needed for e.g. web businesses, and the bad guys can always set up shop and communicate through that site.
Re: (Score:2)
Won't work. Unbreakable crypto is needed for e.g. web businesses, and the bad guys can always set up shop and communicate through that site.
This point has been made to them and they ignored it.
TLS (Score:2)
All TLS connections will have to terminate at the great firewall of OZ now.
Power hungry (Score:2)
To be fair they are more concerned about the average low tech criminal having easy access to powerful encryption tools.
I have read the entire Bill and wrote a two part 80 page analysis on it and can say to you that they are far more concerned in providing an avenue to all five eye countries a means to by-pass telecommunication encryption on all types of technology.
If they wanted to go full 1984 they could simply make the use of unbreakable encryption for messaging a crime and charge anyone found to be using it.
They have gone beyond that by subverting the use of encryption and allowed means to coerce IT professionals to co-operate or face liability for security flaws, fines and jail terms of up to ten years for not cooperating.
Apple and Google would block such apps in their app stores, and most criminals would not have the skills to write their own (and even if they did would be convicted if discovered).
Apple, Google, IBM and many other all made s
Re: (Score:2)
The idea that it takes any kind of technical savvy to download an app like Signal and install it on a phone to pass encrypted messages is ridiculous. People can figure it out when they want to pirate movies, criminals can figure it out as well.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The big cheese is off. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But the security agency submissions aren't public, so who knows what story they were told.
The Bill is 176 pages long. At 6am this morning they published 100 pages of amendments and now they are debating the passage of the Bill.
See my other post with a link to the live stream of the debate.
yes, whatsapp should give the police messsage (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No problem, just give us all messages then.
How does this tell good guys from bad? (Score:5, Insightful)
What's to stop nefarious people from using that same functionality? If police can use it, even if you give them the benefit of all doubt that they would never do anything harmful with it, then the bad guys can use it too.... either because of leaks or hacking or what have you... and because the technology has to accommodate being decrypted in this way by legitimate law enforcement, how does the technology tell the difference, and recognize when it is being accessed by legitimate law enforcement and when it is not? And if (when) it cannot, then what extra measures are law enforcement going to take to protect the general public from such eventuality?
It seems to me that this is going to make law enforcement's job harder, not easier.
Australian lawmakers are idiots.... and that's being complimentary to actual idiots.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:How does this tell good guys from bad? (Score:5, Interesting)
If it were true that Google had a plaintext copy of messages it says are end-to-end encrypted it would be another Snowden moment. I assume you have zero evidence for this assertion or you would have provided it.
I assume the same goes for WhatsApp.
Back in reality for a moment, it actually makes a lot of business sense to use E2E encryption. If you don't you are going to get bombarded with requests from law enforcement, which cost money to process. Not to mention the reputation damage.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't even be a Snowden moment. If it's not encrypted on your end, it's not E2E. That means you have universal verifiability: anyone can look into it, and nobody can stop them from telling the world what they find [slashdot.org].
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So where is this link to download my incognito mode Allo chats? They are not part of Takeout.
Re: (Score:2)
My god, are people that naive? I mean I know people like AmiMojo are dumb, but I didn't realize ignorance was this widespread.
It is your niave ignorance that should be criticized. You do not understand the global implications of this bill because you are uninformed about what this bill does to western civilization via established intelligence agreements.
Your assumptions are completely flawed.
Re: (Score:2)
Back in reality for a moment, it actually makes a lot of business sense to use E2E encryption. If you don't you are going to get bombarded with requests from law enforcement, which cost money to process. Not to mention the reputation damage.
I wish this point got called out a little more often. It is very much a strong motive for E2E, which becomes more obvious if you put yourself in the position of operating a global messaging service.
The other motive is simply preventing mass surveillance (i.e. the thing Snowden called out). Of course these two are kinda complementary.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How do the ads work if they don't get to what a person is interested in? The user is the product.
What have you actually done to fight this Bill?
Re: (Score:2)
Nefarious people already are using this functionality. Don't you think Google has a plaintext copy of all your messages you send over their servers? If you use one of these corporate controlled messaging services you are already being spied upon.
The difference is that they are not being compelled with liability, fines and jail terms to give the government what they want. Additionally they attach liability to IT professionals to maintain secrecy of the government with further jail terms.
I don't know about you however I am not keen on cooling my heels on a jail cell for 15 years because someone else says I can do something I am either unwilling or unable to do.
Re: (Score:3)
Can they actually enforce it against WhatsApp? Does WhatsApp have any business dealings in Australia?
Otherwise it seems like the most they can do is pressure Google and Apple to block it from the Australian app stores. Maybe try to get ISPs to block it, good luck with that.
Re: (Score:2)
Good question. The other one I'm curious about is whether they can enforce it against all the other apps that offer end to end encryption. Even if they manage to block the ones that do now, will they be able to keep up with all the new ones that spring up? How about every web page that takes a message and a public key to create encrypted text?
The sad thing is going to be how successful this sounds in the press releases put out by government representatives. There are plenty of stupid and petty criminals who
Re: (Score:2)
Good question. The other one I'm curious about is whether they can enforce it against all the other apps that offer end to end encryption. Even if they manage to block the ones that do now, will they be able to keep up with all the new ones that spring up? How about every web page that takes a message and a public key to create encrypted text?
Yes. The Bill targets the entire OSI stack and the entire hardware stack from the bios to the UI.
Will the voters feel happy about that or will they actually care about their privacy?
They have been deceived. The government said that there would be further review of the Bill and then did a double take. As I watch the live stream now they have passed the amendments against the will of the people.
Re: (Score:2)
Why argue technicalities? Oh yeah, that's what this account is for. So, you're saying that the law targets the things I mentioned, but that's not the same thing as being able to enforce it. Enforcement effectiveness is what I was questioning, not targets. Either they'll fail to enforce the law consistently or they'll effectively kill off internet access. I personally think the voters would revolt if they instituted a white-list internet access system, so I think enforcement will fail.
The voters have been de
Re: (Score:2)
Does WhatsApp have any business dealings in Australia?
Sure, WhatsApp is owned by Facebook. Facebook's Australian revenue in 2017 was $477M, that's a fair bit of leverage.
Luckily Facebook is a principled organisation that would never compromise its users privacy for mere money.
Re: (Score:2)
It wouldn't surprise me if Facebook started a campaign against the government, like how it tries to smear other opponents.
Re: (Score:2)
Can they actually enforce it against WhatsApp? Does WhatsApp have any business dealings in Australia?
Yes. What more the US, UK, Canada and NZ can access the powers in this laws through existing intelligence agreements.
In this case the US can request Australia to access and implement means to access your communications, as a US citizen by coercing IT professionals and organization to provide this access.
Otherwise it seems like the most they can do is pressure Google and Apple to block it from the Australian app stores. Maybe try to get ISPs to block it, good luck with that.
No. The word is coerce. The pressure being 10 million dollar fines per instance and jail terms.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Stupid politicians ... (Score:5, Insightful)
This is stupid. Encryption is mathematics, and mathematics has no built in back-doors for illiterate politicians who don't understand how encryption works.
If you poke holes in it, then another motivated actor can find those holes and exploit them. Period.
Tell you what, politicians who demand broken encryption should be forced to use any such system for their own security. They'll cry loudly how their stuff is too important to use broken encryption.
Any encryption method which has back doors is, by definition, no longer secure. This will impact literally everything which uses encryption -- which these days is pretty much everything, including financial transactions.
You can't legislate that Pi is 3, and you can't legislate that encryption can be bypassed without understanding that if you can bypass it, someone else can and will also bypass it.
This is like mandating that all locks have a law enforcement button which opens the lock, and then saying nobody else will ever use that button because they're not supposed to -- it simply doesn't work that way in real life. Once you break it, it's broken for good.
These companies can't deploy once means of encryption in one place, and another means for Australia. So, yeah, TFS is right, this could undermine all network security.
Fucking idiot politicians.
Re: (Score:1)
This is stupid. Encryption is mathematics, and mathematics has no built in back-doors for illiterate politicians who don't understand how encryption works.
If you poke holes in it, then another motivated actor can find those holes and exploit them. Period.
TIt is entirely possible to encrypt content for both the public key of the receiver and the government, without introducing any flaw into the encryption itself.
This is like mandating that all locks have a law enforcement button which opens the lock, and then saying nobody else will ever use that button because they're not supposed to -- it simply doesn't work that way in real life. Once you break it, it's broken for good.
No, it's like given the government a key to the lock.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Correct. The real reason to be against it is that a backdoor key would be a secret which, if lost, would wipe the messaging company's stock value and cause a total of billions of dollars of damage to their clients. I doubt the government is intending to purchase insurance against this kind of eventuality. They want a shiny toy and if they lose it then their answer will be "oops".
Re: (Score:1)
No, it's like given the government a key to the lock.
You are exactly right, and that is the problem.
When talking about Encryption people are usually focused on the lock.
This is where Bruce Lee slaps you not to look at the finger [youtube.com].
The KEY is everything. Ownership and control of the key determines who the encryption serves.
Imagine a car with two locks.
One built into the door for which you hold the key.
Another built into the boot, wrapped around your tire, for which the city holds the key.
Whose purpose are the those locks serving?
Hint: Don't look at the lock, loo
Re: (Score:3)
Pedantically, yes, but instead of introducing a flaw in the encryption, you're just shifting the flaw to the architecture surrounding it. Now you have a key that is so secret that law enforcement cannot be trusted to possess it, because if it gets out, every piece of encrypted data can then be decrypted.
The best you can do is come up with a key escro
Re: (Score:2)
It is entirely possible to encrypt content for both the public key of the receiver and the government, without introducing any flaw into the encryption itself.
Except the government isn't a single person, it is many people, many minds, many motivations.
There is no way physically possible that every last single person that the government consist of will properly secure their key and not want to see it public.
It's also so unlikely that you may as well say it's impossible for each and every last person in the government to protect that key with the level of protection needed, and also to never make any mistakes at all with that.
So rendering your claim through the rea
Re: (Score:1)
Still, I don't think the added costs and complexity (and honestly, however robust there will be some reduction in security) are really justified for the ability to read messages. I'm a little sceptical of the idea that this would ev
Re: (Score:1)
Fucking idiot politicians.
They aren't idiots, they don't care what you think. What are the Australians going to do? Revolt with their banned and already confiscated guns?
Be quiet or we will legislate more of your freedoms away since we have already shown you there isn't anything you can do about it.
lol
Re: (Score:1)
Fucking idiot politicians.
They aren't idiots, they don't care what you think. What are the Australians going to do? Revolt with their banned and already confiscated guns?
Be quiet or we will legislate more of your freedoms away since we have already shown you there isn't anything you can do about it.
lol
American, so why don't you rise with your stupid pellet guns? You're being fucked up in the ass while your freedoms are slipping away. Save your advice for yourself.
Stupid voters (Score:1)
Your "stupid" politicians are only relevant because voters vote for them. If they didn't have the overwhelming support of the country, you never would have heard of them.
Voters hear stupid shit and say "I love stupid shit but I want things to become more stupid" and they vote for them, hoping that today's stupidity is the seed for tomorrow's super-stupidity.
The voters insist. Either legislate Pi==3 or be replaced by someone who will do what The People demand.
Re: (Score:1)
Tell you what, politicians who demand broken encryption should be forced to use any such system for their own security. They'll cry loudly how their stuff is too important to use broken encryption.
Which is why you don't give them a choice. Get the companies writing these messaging apps to implement a special Anti-Encryption-Politician setting. Any user who it is determined is a Politician who is advocating for anti-encryption measures gets that setting turned on, and then none of their messages are encrypted. And a first step to that would be to add to the TOS front-and-center that they reserve the right to do that.
Of course, then the average user would need to trust that their accounts are not
Re: (Score:2)
All of what you say is true. But somewhere between the app and the screen there has to be a plaintext. And that's the weakness.
I'm really shocked that there is all the effort to "break encryption", when it's far easier just to intercept the plain text.
But! The terry wrist can send messages, already encrypted by another source - like PGP on a non-internet connected PC! And have a second phone read the image from the first phone, OCR and decypt - so on.
There will be a short stink when dirty secrets of one pol
Re: (Score:2)
> All of what you say is true. But somewhere between the app and the screen there has to be a plaintext. And that's the weakness.
Obviously, if your machine is owned to the level where an adversary can read your text straight out of the decryption routine, your use of an encrypted messaging app isn't going to help. But you've got other problems at that point.
Re: (Score:2)
They know how it works. Our former PM (same party) declared that while the Laws of Mathematics are noble, the only Law that applies in Australia is the Law of Australia.
Re: (Score:2)
What a crock.
Gravity...It's not just a good idea (Score:2)
Except in Australia I guess. I always wondered about that, them being on the bottom side of the globe and all.
Geoblock? (Score:3)
Whatâ(TM)s the chance that as soon as this is inacted some corporations will simply geo block Australia?
Unlocking the vault could be a slippery slope to anyone wanting to get in.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah.
I would just make the Aussie version of WhatsApp with a fixed key of " 1 2 3 4 5 ". :D
Re: (Score:2)
Nah.
I would just make the Aussie version of WhatsApp with a fixed key of " 1 2 3 4 5 ". :D
Please leave my luggage out of this.
And how do they propose to do that (Score:2)
Don't use a secure messaging app available (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The 5 eyes networks will share every win in real time. Got some new keys to crypto? 4 other governments just got the same :)
Exactly.
On top of that it criminalizes innocent third parties who have nothing to do with crime. It also criminalises IT professionals for not acting as proxies for the intelligence agencies.
Penalties for individuals is $60,000 in fines, exposure to liability and up to ten years jail.
So say goobye to Aussie software companies (Score:2)
if they have any. If that law passes we know that any encrypted transaction in Australian software is backdoored, as is every TLS encrypted connection to eg. a bank.
So... (Score:2)
iMessage (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm looking forward to Apple turning off iMessage in Australia to make a point.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm looking forward to Apple turning off iMessage in Australia to make a point.
So is everyone else. Finally we can get rid of that shithouse system that takes over your SMS ability and locks you in to Apple without requiring a convoluted way to switch out.
Btw SMS is incredibly popular in Australia so few people would miss iMessage. You want an example that makes an impact, WhatsApp in Brazil, West Europe, or India would actually have an affect.
The world so far. (Score:3)
Of course, all access to this system will be recorded and stored on multiple sites with no way to delete or alter the records, for later review by elected officials to ensure no funny business like spying on political opponents.
What? No?
Huh.
Use open systems like SMS (Score:2)
Similar to the recommendations to use PGP, I always preferred to use this:
https://silence.im/
Unfortunately, Google pulled it from the play store, but an open app that uses standard sms and layers encryption basically eliminates the central authority to spy on everything. Use SMS. Encrypt it. Why bother trusting the centralized systems like Whatsapp. Of course they get your meta data, but how much can you really hide that anyway?
Five eyes stalking horse (Score:4, Insightful)
It is worth knowing that this proposal emerged fully formed from the security agencies. This probably means that it was cooked up by the five eyes collective led by the USA and Australia was chosen as the country most likely to support it's introduction.
As many people have pointed out there is no way of implementing this without fundamentally violating the security of encrypted message applications and the impacts would flow on across the world. The assumption is that doing this would be undesirable.
Once in place, and proven to work other countries will rush to "catch up" with similar laws. Until this occurs the five eyes nations can all utilize the Australian back doors via existing intelligence sharing agreements.
Re: (Score:2)
The pineapples walk by night (Score:2)
Live stream of debate on this Bill (Score:2)
The Bill is being debated right now. This is the live stream link [aph.gov.au] at the time of posting.
Re: (Score:2)
It is now before the Senate Livestream link [aph.gov.au] at the time of posting.
Call their bluff (Score:2)
I would love to see Apple and Google team up and point that out, then back it up by showing that since they can't change maths then they can not longer offer their services in Australia. Simply block the whol
OZ versions of soft/hardware (Score:2)
So will there now be special versions of self-encrypting SSD for sale in Australia? Will apple / ms have a special branch of iOS / windows with weakened encryption?
Or will there be backdoors in everything for everyone now, even in the less stupid countries?
Can an Australian be a kernel maintainer?
Is there any job where an Australian software developer is not toxic now?
So... (Score:2)
Exactly...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Sometimes, they are. We know this because sometimes someone takes the software apart with reverse-engineering tools, then tells everyone.
That kind of universal verifiability is the basis of integrity. I've been pushing it for voting. Current electronic voting machines use secret software reviewed by some people under NDA and loaded on the machines before the election, so you can't verify any of it. For an electronic voting machine to be usable during an election, you need to publish the software image
Re: (Score:2)
How long do you think we could hide code in WhatsApp to parallel-encrypt with another public key and send to another server?
Not very long, given that WhatsApp messages are encrypted using the Signal protocol which is open and easy to verify. In fact the German c'T magazine did verify operation using ARP spoofing.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just that the protocol is open. You can disassemble the binary into code, dump the running process, and do other things to check out what's going on with it. With several billion people, some subset is both capable and interested in doing so.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you guys really think the corporations aren't reading your messages? They aren't giving this stuff away for free.
This Bill forces those companies to act as a proxy for intelligence services whilst giving the government dictatorial powers over those corporations internal infrastructure.