With the Australian Labor Party caving in on the proposed encryption law that will allow Australian police and agencies to access private data directly from vendors, the new proposed laws are now agreed in principle to introduce government level snooping of user messages and encrypted files. Agencies like ASIO or the Australian Federal Police will have the ability to request that telecommunications and tech companies help them with their investigations and compel companies to build ways to allow targeted access to encrypted communications data.
Previously: Australian Government Pursues "Golden Key" for Encryption
Five Eyes Governments Get Even Tougher on Encryption
Apple Speaks Out Against Australian Anti-Encryption Law; Police Advised Not to Trigger Face ID
Australia follows New Zealand to demand passwords
New Australian Push For Encryption Backdoor in Wake of Alleged Terrorist Plot
Related Stories
The Australian Government believes that it needs a golden key to backdoor encryption within Australia via legislation. The Brits and the Yanks have both already had a nudge at this and both have conceded that requiring a backdoor to encryption is not viable but this will not stop the Australian Liberal Party from trying.
Digital rights experts have described the proposal as "ludicrous" as Cyber security minister Angus Taylor stating that the legislation would be presented for public comment within the next quarter. While the Australian Government has not detailed how it expects to gain access to encrypted data, companies may be penalized if they don't kowtow to the new laws. There is nothing to be discussed here that hasn't been said before other than the Australian Government sincerely believes it can force companies to divulge encrypted data to authorities on demand.
Submitted by chromas from IRC, as story from ZDNet:
"The governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are committed to personal rights and privacy, and support the role of encryption in protecting those rights," began a document agreed to last week. Sounds good. But wait.
The government ministers who met on Australia's Gold Coast last week went on to explain that the information and communications technology vendors and service providers have a "mutual responsibility" to offer "further assistance" to law enforcement agencies.
"Governments should recognize that the nature of encryption is such that there will be situations where access to information is not possible, although such situations should be rare," it said. That's clearly setting an expectation for industry to meet.
The good news is that service providers who "voluntarily establish lawful access solutions" will have "freedom of choice" in how they do it. "Such solutions can be a constructive approach to current challenges," the document said, cheerily, before ending with a warning.
Apple argues stronger encryption will thwart criminals in letter to Australian government
Apple has long been a proponent for strong on-device encryption, most notably for its iPhones and the iOS operating system. This has often frustrated law enforcement agencies both in the US and overseas, many of which claim the company's encryption tools and policies are letting criminals avoid capture by masking communications and securing data from the hands of investigators.
Now, in a letter to the Australian government, Apple says it thinks encryption is in fact a benefit and public good that will only strength our protections against cyberattacks and terrorism. In Apple's eyes, encryption makes everyone's devices harder to hack and less vulnerable to take-overs, viruses, and other malicious attacks that could undermine personal and corporate security, as well as public infrastructure and services. Apple is specifically responding to the Australian Parliament's Assistance and Access Bill, which was introduced late last month and is designed to help the government more easily access the devices and data of criminals during active investigations.
Letter here (#53), or at Scribd and DocumentCloud.
Also at Ars Technica, Engadget, 9to5Mac, and AppleInsider.
Police told to avoid looking at recent iPhones to avoid lockouts
Police have yet to completely wrap their heads around modern iPhones like the X and XS, and that's clearer than ever thanks to a leak. Motherboard has obtained a presentation slide from forensics company Elcomsoft telling law enforcement to avoid looking at iPhones with Face ID. If they gaze at it too many times (five), the company said, they risk being locked out much like Apple's Craig Federighi was during the iPhone X launch event. They'd then have to enter a passcode that they likely can't obtain under the US Constitution's Fifth Amendment, which protects suspects from having to provide self-incriminating testimony.
Also at 9to5Mac.
Related:
California Lawmaker Tries Hand at Banning Encryption
New York Judge Sides with Apple Rather than FBI in Dispute over a Locked iPhone
FBI Chief Calls for National Talk Over Encryption vs. Safety
Hacker Decrypts Apple's Secure Enclave Processor (SEP) Firmware
Federal Court Rules That the FBI Does Not Have to Disclose Name of iPhone Hacking Vendor
Law Enforcement Agencies Increasingly Cracking iPhones Using "GrayKey"
Australian Government Pursues "Golden Key" for Encryption
When's A Backdoor Not A Backdoor? When The Oz Government Says It Isn't
Five Eyes Governments Get Even Tougher on Encryption
FBI Used Cooperative Suspect's Face to Unlock His iPhone
In the wake of recent changes to NZ law to allow the NZ government to demand traveller's pass codes to their devices when they cross NZ borders, the Australian government is stepping up its plan to snoop on user communications by introducing a systematic weakness or vulnerability to products and systems including ISPs. While being very loose on details and unclear exactly how this would work the so called 'decryption bill' while claiming that "The protections provided in this bill are actually greater than what presently exists in the physical world.” Meanwhile, not one single person has provided concrete information about the practical real world implications of this bill.
A recent alleged Islamic terrorist plot in Melbourne has prompted fresh calls from Australian Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton to endorse the Assistance and Access Bill, proposed in August 2018, which may help government agencies access user data on computers and mobile devices.
Mr. Dutton believes that the planned attack involving Hanifi Halis, Ertunc Eriklioglu, and Samed Eriklioglu may have been successful if the alleged terrorists had solely used encrypted communications for planning. Mr. Dutton described the ease at which criminals and potential terrorists could communicate as an "unacceptable risk". According to police, counter-terrorism agents have foiled 15 attempted attacks since 2014, four of which have been described as "major".
If the cops and Feds can't read people's encrypted messages, you will install backdoors for us, regardless of the security hit, US Attorney General William Barr has told the technology world.
While speaking today in New York, Barr demanded eavesdropping mechanisms be added to consumer-level software and devices, mechanisms that can be used by investigators to forcibly decrypt and pry into strongly end-to-end encrypted chats, emails, files, and calls. No ifs, no buts.
And while this will likely weaken secure data storage and communications – by introducing backdoors that hackers and spies, as well as the cops and FBI, can potentially leverage to snoop on folks – it will be a price worth paying. And, after all, what do you really need that encryption for? Your email and selfies?
"We are not talking about protecting the nation's nuclear launch codes," Barr told the International Conference on Cyber Security at Fordham University. "Nor are we necessarily talking about the customized encryption used by large business enterprises to protect their operations. We are talking about consumer products and services such as messaging, smart phones, email, and voice and data applications. There have been enough dogmatic pronouncements that lawful access simply cannot be done. It can be, and it must be."
Related: DOJ: Strong Encryption That We Don't Have Access to is "Unreasonable"
FBI Director Calls Encryption a "Major Public Safety Issue"
FBI Director: Without Compromise on Encryption, Legislation May be the 'Remedy'
Five Eyes Governments Get Even Tougher on Encryption
Australia Set to Pass Controversial Encryption Law
FBI: End-to-End Encryption Problem "Infects" Law Enforcement and Intelligence Community
FBI: End-to-End Encryption Is an Infectious Problem
Just in case there were any lingering doubts about U.S. law enforcement's stance on end-to-end encryption, which prevents information from being read by anyone but its intended recipient, FBI executive assistant director Amy Hess told the Wall Street Journal this week that its use "is a problem that infects law enforcement and the intelligence community more and more so every day."
The quote was published in a piece about efforts from the UK, Australia and India to undermine end-to-end encryption. All three countries have passed or proposed legislation that compels tech companies to supply certain information to government agencies. The laws vary in their specifics, including restrictions on to what information law enforcement can request access, but the gist is that they don't want any data to be completely inaccessible.
Related: FBI Chief Calls for National Talk Over Encryption vs. Safety
FBI Failed to Access 7,000 Encrypted Mobile Devices
DOJ: Strong Encryption That We Don't Have Access to is "Unreasonable"
Five Eyes Governments Get Even Tougher on Encryption
Apple Speaks Out Against Australian Anti-Encryption Law; Police Advised Not to Trigger Face ID
Australia Set to Pass Controversial Encryption Law
Split Key Cryptography is Back... Again – Why Government Back Doors Don't Work
In response to the news of what's going on in Australia, Derek Zimmer over at Private Internet Access' blog covers split key cryptography and why government back doors don't/won't/can't work. Attempts to regulate cryptography have been going on for a long while and each try has failed. He starts with recent history, the cold war, and follows through to the latest attempts to stifle encryption. These past failures give a foundation which can be applied to the current situation in hopes of understanding why cryptographers around the world are universally against these kinds of schemes.
The new proposal touted by the NSA, GCHQ, The Australian government and others is a simple evolution of Key Escrow. The proposal is key escrow with split-key cryptography, which is just key escrow with extra steps. There is still a "Golden Key" that can decrypt all messages from a particular service, but this time, two or more entities have pieces of that key. The concept, popularized by a Microsoft researcher, is said to solve the problem of abuse, because all parties have to agree to decrypt the messages.
Earlier on SN:
Australia Set to Pass Controversial Encryption Law
Apple Speaks Out Against Australian Anti-Encryption Law; Police Advised Not to Trigger Face ID
When's A Backdoor Not A Backdoor? When The Oz Government Says It Isn't
Australian Government Pursues "Golden Key" for Encryption
and more
(Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Wednesday December 05 2018, @10:50PM (35 children)
Australia has decided that all of its tech companies will have irrelevant and inferior software that cannot be exported or used elsewhere, and any open source / FOSS communities will find asylum in other countries.
The tragic part about this is that the Australian government is now ensuring it will be easy to compromise its networks, corporations, and users.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Wednesday December 05 2018, @10:58PM (21 children)
If anybody sees any follow-up stories about companies pulling out of Australia because of this, please submit them. I'd like to see a backlash much fiercer than when North Carolina did the bathroom bill [wikipedia.org]. Maybe there aren't enough major tech companies in Australia to make a difference?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by edIII on Wednesday December 05 2018, @11:13PM (19 children)
I would say foreign companies are not going to cooperate or stay, but Google is building China's censorship and surveillance systems. Who knows how Twitter and Facebook will react, and other "companies" will be wholly incapable of cooperation like those behind Signal, Telegram, Whisper. None of them are going to just roll over and start baking in backdoor keys into those protocols. Not going to happen. Any zero knowledge platforms and systems just got kicked out of Australia. Is Carbonite going to pony up money to put backdoors into its backup software? Extremely doubtful, and end users won't use that product anymore.
So realistically, Australia is going to be without Facebook, Twitter, and many others. China may be worth it as a demographic, but Australia is not China.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Thursday December 06 2018, @12:18AM (13 children)
Coming soon: special geo-blocked app stores (hold on, we already have that)
So, will fdroid have to be blocked, as it allows loading of apps that (gasp!) have encryption?
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 4, Interesting) by edIII on Thursday December 06 2018, @12:27AM (9 children)
Oh, yes. That's the other part of this incredible stupidity. Apple may be locked out of Australia permanently. I don't see them giving enough of a shit, and it would give them fantastic PR elsewhere to fight against this as if Apple had principles at work. Same with Google and Twitter, and the other corporations. Are they going to go after Redhat? Ubuntu? FDroid? Australia won't be able to badger a foreign organization that effectively that doesn't give two shits in the first place. Like Telegram's response to Russia; Suck It!
Australia will need one hell of a firewall, and a content manager forced on every device, if they think that they can stop people from rolling their own. Point in fact, I don't think they are trying that at all, but instead going with 50k fines when you don't pony up the key. If that's impossible, fine.
That's what happens when you try outlawing algorithms and math.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Mykl on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:34AM (2 children)
The wording is a bit more subtle (which you allude to at the bottom). If you have built something that can't be backdoored reasonably, then the government will leave you alone. This is their get-out-of-jail-free card for Apple to stay in the country. Every politician who voted for this knows they would be consigned to oblivion at the next election if the majority of the public lost their toys.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday December 06 2018, @06:20AM (1 child)
So it's all for show? Or to help Apple and the larger companies not have any competition from smaller vendors that have to cave?
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by Mykl on Friday December 07 2018, @01:59AM
I think it's closer to the government demanding access as long as they think they can get away with it.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Thursday December 06 2018, @03:13AM (5 children)
The funny thing is, I think that Apple does have some underlying principles. They are kind of screwy, and confusing, but yes, they do have principles. Despite the whole cathedral vs the bazaar thing, Apple seems to believe that your data is your data. Few other companies share that principle, although many companies share the cathedral outlook on business.
It should be evident that I'm no Apple Phanboi, but, yes, some of their policies and actions are pro-consumer / pro-customer.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday December 06 2018, @04:19AM (4 children)
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/04/tim_cook_tech_jesus/ [theregister.co.uk]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Thursday December 06 2018, @03:19PM (3 children)
Humorous. Good article, I like it.
Now, let's contrast Cookie to Gatesie. Did Billy Boy, or any of his subordinates, ever speak out against any evils, other than "pirating" Windows? I know the Gatekeeper moaned and groaned about people not understanding that they needed to PAY FOR MSDOS - ohhhh - I guess I first heard that about MSDOS 3 or so. Now, today, he's a mysogenist, or anthropologist, or philanthropist, or something like that. But, when he was running things, he wanted to hang all of us from the mizzenmast, or the middenmast, or something like that, if we didn't give him heaps of money. And, I'm pretty sure I've never heard Bill make any mention of any of humanity's other vices, or virtues.
However good or bad Apple might be, they seem to recognize vices and virtues.
I gotta quit this though. I don't want to be mistaken for an Apple Phanboi, or a Job's Phan. Go ahead, post more Evil Apple stuff. I'll shut up now.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 3, Insightful) by takyon on Thursday December 06 2018, @03:27PM (2 children)
Corporations speaking out about social issues is a relatively new trend.
Apple speaking out about how much they care about your privacy is a marketing move. It may be true, may not always remain true, and might not stop your data from leaking. Their fight with the FBI was the best press they could have had on this issue. But will they always remain "good"?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by DECbot on Thursday December 06 2018, @09:49PM (1 child)
Apple wants to protect your data because that means they then retain a monopoly over your data. Thus, if advertiser B wants to know the likelihood you, an iThing user, likes to shop for underwear C, advertiser B knows that they can only go to Apple to buy the data.
cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
(Score: 2) by Mykl on Friday December 07 2018, @02:20AM
Actually, even Apple doesn't know that you like to shop for underwear C.
Apple can afford to be privacy focused, because they are in the business of selling hardware, not user data. You're right, their position helps sell more hardware than if they sold data to the highest bidder, so there's no reason for them to change their privacy position any time soon. That's what separates them from Google, Facebook etc, who rely on being data-pimps to survive.
(Score: 2) by Hyper on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:00AM (2 children)
Didn't the US already try that years ago
(Score: 5, Interesting) by edIII on Thursday December 06 2018, @06:36AM (1 child)
What specifically? The US has been at it for some time now, going back to at least the 80s.
First it was fighting the largest telecom because due process was rigidly enforced and law enforcement felt they couldn't act fast enough and should be on the honor principle instead. This is the true reason why they broke up Ma Bell in the first place, not anti-monopoly laws specifically. Had Ma Bell played ball, I wouldn't be surprised if their monopoly was allowed to continue somehow.
Then you had shit like CALEA which mandated that all telecoms provide intercept capabilities. There was resistance, till the FBI paid the half billion for the mediation equipment. This is why the entire PSTN network is bugged at the L1 level. That whole AT&T and the room with the fiber going to the NSA.
When modems were the rage the FBI wanted chips on every modem that allowed them intercept capabilities. Behind the tech curve a little since the Internet was only a few years ahead.
Once people started using email and Internet aggressively, the FBI called for the Raptor program to have their own servers in every datacenter, every telecom, performing mass collection of all emails, messages, or anything determined to be a communication. They would fucking log Everquest chat at your ISP level.
More recently you had the FBI arguing that Internet communications fell under Telecom laws, and therefore they didn't have to perform foreplay goddammit and could get straight to the rapin'. FCC still hasn't reclassified it, which is why you have continual attacks on encryption using whatever hyperbole they need to. "Responsible" encryption just means, "stop being private you fuckers! Were the FBI!"
That's just one of the Three Stooges. There is still the CIA and the NSA. We know now the CIA was Curly, because those idiots couldn't roll a covert comm channel if an agent's life depended on it. That leaves the NSA. All the eggheads that could be like the Justice League with *pow* to that zero-day, *whammo* to another, but fuck that.... let's collect them instead! Give them cool names! Use it on non-foreign targets. Yay! These are the people who weakened a well used CSPRNG so that they had an edge on cryptanalysis that was enough to crack some encryption that people didn't think you could. Not saving American corporations from the zero-day, but looking the other way.
So, yeah, which attempt and by whom?
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by Hyper on Thursday December 06 2018, @07:40AM
The parent was referring to geoblocking stores.
I was thinking about DVD region blocking. Which has been ruled illegal in some places.
Further to that, the US placed an embargo on encryption. What will happen this time? You can't export or import encryption based apps? Can't import a phone or computer that doesn't report back home?
Will AU follow in the steps of USA?
Those who do not learn from the past..
(Score: 4, Funny) by Gaaark on Thursday December 06 2018, @12:31AM (3 children)
"So realistically, Australia is going to be without Facebook, Twitter, and many others."
Go Aussies! :)
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @07:42AM
Suddenly overnight the average iq down under jumps by .5 %
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:08PM (1 child)
No Facebook or Twitter. Possibly no Apple. Throw Microsoft into that last list and Australia may start to be like a piece of heaven.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Thursday December 06 2018, @05:17PM
Amen!
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 4, Funny) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:00AM
So even in the worst of situations there's still SOME good news.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 05 2018, @11:57PM
And if you don't see those stories, and don't hear about major efforts to bring offerings into compliance with the law ... Is that evidence enough that those major players already have everything back-doored and Australia is only bringing it to light?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by c0lo on Thursday December 06 2018, @01:50AM (12 children)
No worries, mate. This is only the nose of the camel; US and the rest of 5 eyes will adopt similar legislation in a short time, leading to no differences in the legally allowed software.
Russia and China already have legislation targeting encrypted messaging apps, with US and the others adopting them it will be illegal to use "strong privacy" apps anywhere but Europe.
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 5, Interesting) by edIII on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:16AM (11 children)
Bull-Fucking-Shit
There are enough privacy oriented people, militia nuts, etc. that the moment they attempt an outright ban of encryption, there will be open revolt. On that I'm serious. It's the one litmus test, the canary in the coal mine, that I have for immediate civil war. I can put up with a lot, but being told I can't have privacy or use math? Time for revolution, protests, mass civil disobedience.
I'm a white hat, but once that world is thrust upon me, I will engage in as much destruction as I possibly can till I'm caught. I'll destroy whole networks, surveillance cam systems, storage, etc. Can you imagine what an army of pissed off thousands of IT guys with moderate to advanced skills could do to infrastructure?
They need us to keep that shit going, and we can only be pushed so far before we say "fuck it!" and burn it all down.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:26AM (7 children)
Wishful thinking, mate. Even the 4chans turned towards actively promoting authoritarian agenda by the support they lent to alt-right. Long gone the times of the Anonymous-collective.
I wish you good luck, you will need it.
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday December 06 2018, @06:16AM (6 children)
Thank you. I'm not alone, and I can only lose so many of the "God given" rights that Americans have fought so damn hard for. Try telling a patriot in the 19th century it was forbidden to speak without the government knowing due to fear of the consequences. That explicitly you were not allowed to be private, and only some math you could perform. Americans would've responded, and government would've been afraid.
That's the only way you can frame Australia's bullshit, if that is what in fact they have done.
No true American (and I mean that) would put up with it. The intellectual community would revolt, the vets would revolt, and it would essentially be bipartisan resistance. This isn't going to split down party lines, but certain ideological ones. There are some stupid Americans that don't believe the 1st is all that important, but I do believe by and large that regular Americans would find it a fundamental violation of our freedoms.
The bread and circuses can only mollify the public so much.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Blymie on Thursday December 06 2018, @07:36AM (5 children)
I'm sorry, but you're deluded.
An example. For 10+ years, hell for longer, prior to Wikileaks, Snowden, Manning and others, I told people how much was stored. Saved. Copied. Watched. Listened to.
"No", people told me.. "That's absurd, our government would never do *that*".
Then said info became 100% public knowledge. The NSA lying to congress. The depth and breadth of the domestic spying. Causing Google to go on a campaign of HTTPS (eg, punish search results), and others doing the same sort of stuff -- because of the NSA spying on domestic corps.
I could go on, and on, and on with the hundreds of "finally shown to be true" revelations the public now has access to. And you know what?
They *do not care*.
Not one bit.
Most people still don't even know. Literally, talk to people on the street. Random people. No idea, no clue, and do you know why?
Don't care! They don't! Literally!
99% of the population doesn't even know what 'judicial oversight' is, how it's important, why warrants are important.... and these are non-technical subjects.
Yet you want to discuss encryption?! People have NO IDEA what encryption is. None. Zero. Nada. You may as well say "Bluggerflats" or some nonsense word, they'd understand what you mean just as much.
No my friend, I'm sorry. People don't care, don't understand, don't know.
And even if each of us sat down and explained .. for hours and hours, they *can't* understand. Because much of the population literally does not have the intellect to understand!
For example, literacy. The US has 99% literacy? Yes, because 'literacy' is often defined as either being able to read labels on food packages / "STOP" signs, or alternatively at a 4th grade level!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States#Defining_and_measuring_literacy [wikipedia.org]
People that can actually read anything beyond a few hundred words? It's so few people you'd be astonished, I know I was when I researched it.
The average voter is good at many things, because life does not often require certain skills. But don't expect the average voter to understand encryption. Experts need to tell them whether it is good or bad, whether back doors are good or bad.
They don't understand the *arguments*, even. At all. So they MUST rely upon someone telling them "This is good" or "bad", and that's IT.
(Score: 2) by acid andy on Thursday December 06 2018, @01:15PM
Although you're right, I also think it's fundamentally worse than the people just being unable to understand the arguments (and I'm sure many people at least know roughly what a secret code is): it's that even the ones that are intelligent enough to grasp it won't get it because they fall for the instinctive, optimistic "It won't happen to me." fallacy. This thinking gets expanded after the fact into variations of the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" mantra combined with a subconscious level of trust that they have in authority figures in their own tribe. Their own national government falls into that category on some level, even if they might criticize them on a conscious level. I think it's similar instinctive behavior to why most of us start out with a certain level of respect for our parents. This gives rise to the fallacy you highlighted, of "That's absurd, our government would never do *that*".
So, us ape-men seem to have inbuilt irrational levels of optimism and trust. They need to be there to stop us giving up altogether, so that we succeed at survival, but sometimes they work against our best longer term interests. I've also noticed it's quite common for some people's brains to just shut down when they come across any ideas that make them feel uncomfortable. These people believe only the things that make them feel good; a sort of intellectual hedonism, I suppose.
Welcome to Edgeways. Words should apply in advance as spaces are highly limite—
(Score: 3, Insightful) by edIII on Thursday December 06 2018, @08:26PM (3 children)
I. Don't. Give. A. Fuck.
Whether my fellow Americans can figure it out or not. At that point the U.S government takes away my fundamental human right to privacy, and states explicitly that it is illegal for me to speak privately (keeping info from them) with another citizen, or use certain types of math, I will engage in outright civil war. I will destroy infrastructure and do everything I can to fight it.
I'm a real American, and we don't give up our rights. We shed blood to keep them.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Thursday December 06 2018, @10:44PM (2 children)
You may not care, and you may fight to keep your rights -- but my contention is that sorry, your fellow Americans won't.
Don't get me wrong, I'm scratching my head as well. Let me ask you this -- the NSA was spying on Americans illegally. The NSA was spying on US companies illegally. It still is.
What infrastructure have you destroyed? How have you fought this?
Realistically, I'm sure you've done what I've done. You've made sure people are aware. You've fought via contacting elected representatives (something I've done).
But have you seen the average person down the street care? At all? Even remotely?
Let me ask you something else...
Where were you after 9/11, and even today -- right now, when laws were passed to spy on all credit card transactions? When libraries were forced to spy for the government?
Have you fought that?
I'm with why you're angry, 100%. And I very much wish I was wrong, and that people cared.
But they don't.
And when no one cares? Well, you'll continue to do what you've been doing -- nothing.
Because a war of 1 makes zero sense.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday December 06 2018, @11:03PM (1 child)
Destruction not yet justified. They are doing something wrong under the guise of terrorism. Yet, at that same time there is spirited debate, great pushback at the intellectual level at least, and we still are allowed to legally use strong encryption. They're going after the companies, performing PR campaigns, vaccuming up all plain text data that you can imagine, but they are not yet outlawing the use of the Signal protocol, or mandating that all computer users register their encryption keys.
I have fought this. I've supported the EFF, have been supportive of, and use, encryption. I'm working on secure platforms myself, and contribute to the open source movements that have the goals of providing privacy and data security.
I stopped using credit cards for any kind of personal transactions. Only the most boring shit, like gasoline and some bare necessities. I paid utility bills with them. Otherwise, any sensitive was paid with cash or pre-paid cards. Don't recall how libraries were forced to spy. I've got the Internet :)
Again, various acts of civil disobedience.
Wrong. Standing up for your principles and fighting for your basic human rights, always makes sense. Even if the other people around you are scared, apathetic, or ignorant. I would rather not be living in the world where such fundamental and basic human rights have been stripped from me. I would rather die as an example to the rest.
Sorry, but my name is, and always will be forever, Kunta Kinte. You're going to have do a lot fucking more than chop off one of my feet before I cooperate and call you master.
You seem reasonable, and disillusioned, and doubtful of Americans. I respect your decision to just slowly have your rights stripped away, like a frog in boiling water. Whether you can understand mine or not, is immaterial and irrelevant to whatever forms of civil disobedience I will perform in an increasing tyrannical government.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Blymie on Friday December 07 2018, @12:31AM
Thing is, at each slow step of encroachment -- this is what happens. Each "little thing" is never quite enough to make a sane man pick up a gun, and just shoot and kill every authority figure around him.
Amusing. I'm Canadian, and took very much the same tact. Here though, debit cards have 'been a thing' for 30 years. Everyone uses them instead of cash, and while the government doesn't have transactional history, well... let's say I know ways that the data gets out, regardless of the fact.
But I use it for grocery shopping, gas. I use cash for almost everything else. I leave a 'trail', when I legitimately don't care.
But my phone? Not linked to me name, never on at home (wifi or 4G), only paid for it by cash, pay for top-up minutes by cash, only paid for google play by cash cards + adding, don't use google for addresses/etc, fake name, etc.
So the phone doesn't link to me in any way. I don't even give out the phone number, because once someone has your number? You can easily be tracked by a variety of means.
(I have VOIP forward to my cell phone, and give out the VOIP number)
I find this fascinating. You've not fought anyone with a gun, not used physical force to change things, yet you act/talk as if you have.
Frankly, I doubt you've done as much as I have. Note.. I certainly admit that you do more than 99.9999% of people out there.
But I'm not doubtful of Americans. I just know history, and what I've seen. Most Americans don't care. They just don't. That's not doubt, that's fact.
Prove to me that Americans care. No one cares, dude. Just you and me, and a few others.
I mean -- you also have to know history, to know *why* you should care. You need to be well read, to know why you should care.
Most people aren't that.
It's like any other problem today. People will only care, when it directly, immediately, effects them. I mean *care*, not hit the like button on a Facebook post, or complain on Reddit. But *care*.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:52AM (2 children)
There are privacy-oriented people in the US and elsewhere, but there aren't enough of them to make a huge difference.
As for the militia nuts, where are they right now? The NSA is conducting unconstitutional mass surveillance on the populace, TSA thugs are groping people at airports, the government is waging several undeclared and unconstitutional wars overseas, and so on. So, why are they doing nothing now, and why would they suddenly care about encryption?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @08:17AM
If you are calling them militia nuts, they must be involved with a militia. Organizing a militia is something. And they are doing it. They are probably doing some other things too, like prepping, border watch, making movies [good-guys.us], and supporting [ronpaulinstitute.org] Constitutionalist politicians [thehill.com].
Maybe it's not what you wanted, but it is something. My guess is they don't know much about encryption.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @05:56PM
I quit flying and I quit paying the income tax. I am working on ways to deny them further. The work of my life is dedicated to the cause of freedom in one way or another. I invite other Real Americans and freedom loving people around the world to join me. We don't even have to kill these authoritarian scum, unless they force the confrontation (which they increasingly do). We just have to quit sheepishly funding and supporting/legitimizing them. They will have to reform and get honest work or further reveal themselves for the criminals they are, at which point The Normals can see the reality of the situation.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 05 2018, @11:01PM (1 child)
Just looking up their terrorism entry makes it pretty clear that compared to most European nations, the worse they've faced was a couple of stabbings and the odd plot or two.
These laws are just their way to further commit to sticking with the US in the trade wars. Nothing more.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Fluffeh on Thursday December 06 2018, @12:11AM
Never let the truth get in the way of a good story. Or a good fear-mongering campaign to get what you want to have more control.
Don't get me wrong, I think this is being put in place for all the right reasons, I just also think that it will be abused for all the wrong ones and by all the wrong people.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 05 2018, @11:23PM
Almost like the US but the put their assholes on steroids.
Did you blokes take Roger the Kangaroo as your political mascot? I'm a buff idiot! MRAWWWW!
I'd like to hear Jim Jeffries mock this move!
(Score: 5, Informative) by NewNic on Wednesday December 05 2018, @11:25PM (10 children)
Let's not forget that this piece of anti-privacy authoritarianism has been brought to you by a right-wing party.
I realize that this violates the orthodoxy that some posters here would like to promote, but actions speak louder than words.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 05 2018, @11:40PM
Nono, only socialist hippy scum could pass such bullshit legislation! The right are RIGHT! How is this such a hard concept to figure out?
(Score: 5, Funny) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday December 05 2018, @11:41PM (4 children)
Yup, there's plenty about any party worth bitching about. Generally enough to warrant all politicians serve a mandatory two terms. The first in office and the second in prison.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday December 06 2018, @01:09AM (3 children)
There's just no irony in that the most hated people on the planet always win the election. The psychosis is real.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday December 06 2018, @04:21AM (2 children)
The planet doesn't get a vote. Only the bits of it that have citizenship with the nation in question do.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday December 06 2018, @06:40AM (1 child)
Disagree. The planet does get a vote. It's called Climate Change and Mass Extinction :)
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:14PM
No, they get to bitch or they get to start a conflict but a vote is something they do not and should not get.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:06AM (2 children)
Let's not forget that, except for minor grumbles and political skirmishes, the legislation has by-partisan support (you see that "With the Australian Labor Party caving..." at the very beginning of TFS, don't you?)
Do you remember who was in power when "metadata retention law" surfaced first [news.com.au]? (Attorney-General Nicola Roxon rings a bell? Care to remember the "you'll-wear-red-underpants-if-I-say-so" Stephen Conroy and his Internet filter?).
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Friday December 07 2018, @12:28AM (1 child)
Again, actions speak louder than words.
Look at the government in power when the laws were passed.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday December 07 2018, @01:22AM
You mean... like the opposition's action today to back down from opposing it [abc.net.au] when they actually could block it?
In this very concern (and whenever is the case), I'll hold both sides as responsible, thank you.
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by bradley13 on Thursday December 06 2018, @06:03AM
Just goes to show that the left-right political spectrum wraps around. When they turn all authoritarian, both sides become tyrannical asshats.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 05 2018, @11:57PM
Man, i'm tired of hearing about North Korea, and you misspelled it too.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday December 06 2018, @12:13AM (13 children)
Does anybody want to remind me what makes having all those political parties in the government any better than the American "two" party system? I mean, granted, the Americans need two parties, but the question is still valid.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @12:26AM
So that the political parties have to actually consider how their base feels! With two parties you can pander to the extremes and ignore the bulk of actual concerns. You either become pro choice or pro life, there is no middle ground of "stop political corruption" because the issue of abortion is more important.
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:07AM (5 children)
Only two in the lower house, labour and the liberal/national coalition - greens and independants don't have any real authority in the lower house (unlike the senate if things line up the right way). Not enough people here vote for the alternatives just because they are the alternatives.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by jb on Thursday December 06 2018, @03:24AM (4 children)
That was true until relatively recently (last week?).
Currently, Australia has a minority government: the (tiny) cross-bench in the house of reps holds the balance of power.
But it is not the cross-bench who are letting this nonsensical bill through.
The government is pushing it through with the support of the opposition.
So for all you out there blaming this on the Liberal Party -- you are both right & wrong: it is the Liberal Party who have been pushing it, but it the Australian Labor Party who are letting it through.
In short: Australia suffers from the exact same problem as the US -- the two major parties are so close together in policy positions (and neither stands for any of the principles they once held dear any more -- they both simply run with whatever polls best at the time) that there is very little difference between voting for one and voting for the other (in fact, it's quite amusing that these days the left faction of the Libs is considerably to the left of the right faction of the ALP and vice-versa).
Frankly, after this ... following hot on the heels of selling off Australia's sovereignty on the TPP-11 deal ... I think one would have to be a complete masochist to vote for either major party at next year's election.
Minor parties do exist in the centre, as well as on the far left, on the far right & everything in between -- something to suit almost everybody's individual taste -- most of which at least stand for something.
Unfortunately, actually reading platform statements and analysing them critically (instead of the more common process of simply asking oneself "which of these two liars sounds more convincing?") seems to require more effort than most voters are willing to put in.
I used to be proud of the fact that voting is compulsory in Australia. Now I'm not so sure...
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Thursday December 06 2018, @03:51AM
That one didn't exactly grab a lot of headlines.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday December 06 2018, @04:21AM (2 children)
You are right for the wrong reasons.
It is true that Australia suffers from the exact same problems as the US.
You a wrong about the reason, though. It is not that the two major political parties are so close in their positions, it is because both the countries shares the same "deep state" that's pushing the agenda, namely the US deep state.
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @07:50AM (1 child)
Have you considered the possibility that the problem is that the Australian politicians have their heads stuck up the ass of the US and the US have their hands stuck up the asses of the pollies ala kermitthefrog?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Thursday December 06 2018, @08:31AM
The cause of the cause, you ask?
I considered many possible explanations for why our polies are missing the asses of the American deep state on a bipartisan basis.
The most probable one to my mind is the fear the Chinese won't want just to play nice with what the Aussies will want to sell them, but will come with demands in regards with the access to 'strategic resources'. And perhaps, in time, will back this demands with some military bases in the friendly countries, like East Timor, Fiji, Vanuatu, etc. Of course, with the permission of these countries, not hard to buy their goodwill after Australia played for grabs with some of them [wikipedia.org].
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday December 06 2018, @04:23AM (5 children)
More flavors of shithead to argue over. It's just the illusion of choice, really. You're going to get screwed no matter who's elected. The extra choices are just there so you'll get mad at each other rather than at the people screwing you.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday December 06 2018, @08:17AM (4 children)
It's just the illusion of choice, really.
Illusion or no, the problem is the voters' to fix. They have to take their own initiative. Nobody will do it for them.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:15PM (3 children)
S'true. Unfortunately the lizards are extremely adept at distracting them from this.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:36PM (2 children)
No, we have to acknowledge our own lizardness. It's not "them", it's all of us. We have to ignore the distractions. To follow is a choice, much more meaningful than whatever the windbag spews.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:45PM (1 child)
Wise words. Unfortunately almost nobody will grok either the direct sentiment or the implications and resolve to do or think any differently.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday December 06 2018, @03:00PM
It's an evolutionary thing. Biological, not 'intellectual'. Our feeble idealism simply doesn't compete, in fact it doesn't really oppose, quite the opposite, we serve our master well.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @12:38AM (2 children)
bob: 0xB16B00B5
alice: 0xDEADBEEF
cop: sorry folks, those integers are illegal
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @12:42AM (1 child)
child pornography is just a series of binary digits
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @02:58AM
And mere possession of child pornography should not be illegal. For one thing, it becomes all too easy to frame someone when all you have to do is surreptitiously plant data on their equipment. For another, the idea of voodoo harm being done to the original child victims every time someone looks at the data is laughable nonsense. If that were true, like organizations such as the FBI pretend, then the FBI itself would have to admit that they harm more children than anyone with their extensive child porn honeypots.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by legont on Thursday December 06 2018, @01:43AM
I don't think serious investors would agree with Aussie police reading their communications. So far even China gives major banks a free ride in this space.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.