Slashdot Mirror


Australia Passes Anti-Encryption Laws [Update] (zdnet.com)

Earlier today, Australia's House of Representatives passed the Assistance and Access Bill. The Anti-Encryption Bill, as it is known as, would allow the nation's police and anti-corruption forces to ask, before forcing, internet companies, telcos, messaging providers, or anyone deemed necessary, to break into whatever content agencies they want access to. "While the Bill can still be blocked by the Senate -- Australian Twitter has been quite vocal over today's proceedings, especially in regards to the [Australian Labor Party's] involvement," reports Gizmodo. ZDNet highlights the key findings from a report from the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS): The threshold for industry assistance is recommended to be lifted to offenses with maximum penalties in excess of three years; Technical Assistance Notices (TANs) and Technical Capability Notices (TCNs) will be subjected to statutory time limits, as well as any extension, renewal, or variation to the notices; the systemic weakness clause to apply to all listing acts and things; and the double-lock mechanism of approval from Attorney-General and Minister of Communications will be needed, with the report saying the Communications Minister will provide "a direct avenue for the concerns of the relevant industry to be considered as part of the approval process."

The report's recommendations also call for a review after 18 months of the Bill coming into effect by the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor; TANs issued by state and territory police forces to be approved by the Australian Federal Police commissioner; companies issued with notices are able to appeal to the Attorney-General to disclose publicly the fact they are issued a TCN; and the committee will review the passed legislation in the new year and report by April 3, 2019, right around when the next election is expected to be called.
In short: "Testimony from experts has been ignored; actual scrutiny of the Bill is kicked down the road for the next Parliament; Labor has made sure it is not skewered by the Coalition and seen to be voting against national security legislation on the floor of Parliament; and any technical expert must have security clearance equal to the Australia's spies, i.e. someone who has been in the spy sector." Further reading: Australia Set To Spy on WhatsApp Messages With Encryption Law.

UPDATE: The encryption bill has passed the Senate with a final vote of 44-12, with Labor and the Coalition voting for it. "Australia's security and intelligence agencies now have legal authority to force encryption services to break the encryptions, reports The Guardian. Story is developing...

42 of 289 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Let's see them try by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is Australia, where the laws of the nation Trump the laws of mathematics.

    --
    Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  2. Decrypt This Blockchain! by mentil · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'd really like to see who they take to court to try and undo the encryption on the Monero et al. blockchains.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re:Decrypt This Blockchain! by gweihir · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Simple: Own Monero? Go to prison for as long as they like to lock you up! Proto-Fascist nations have no trouble ignoring mathematical reality.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:Decrypt This Blockchain! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While the bill is fucking retarded. You aren't expected to magically break encryption, you are expected to provide as much technical assistance and information as possible when requested. Still a fucking awful invasive disaster that will drive away investment in this sector here, but it isn't quite as insane as what many make it out to be.

    3. Re:Decrypt This Blockchain! by mcvos · · Score: 2

      I've heard one report that claimed employees may be forced to secretly implement backdoors in their employer's software, and go to prison if they tell their employer what they're working on in company time.

      That is pretty insane if you ask me. Hopefully Australian companies take their code review seriously.

    4. Re:Decrypt This Blockchain! by Tomahawk · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's only a 128-bit AES key. We are running the following code to calculate the key:

      for (long i=0; i0xffffffffffffffff; i++) { // something here
      }

      It's running now on our fastest computers. We estimate it'll only take a few dozen millennia to run the calculation, assuming Moore's Law holds for that long...

      Oh, wait, did you say they used a 256-bit AES key...??! We can still help, but we'll need a few dozen eons for the calculation to finish -- actually the universe will probably end, restart and end a few more times before we have the key. When did you say you wanted this by?

    5. Re:Decrypt This Blockchain! by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      It does not work because you simply FOSS the encryption software, so you the individual, when you implement that open code, are the one not allowing a back door. The code it fully exposed and you simply compile and implement it, no back dooring possible. This is more targeted at social media, possible future generally encrypted email, more for legal reason than actual full encryption ie breaking the law when you decrypt it without permission of the sender. This law will just force people to encrypt all of the time now, just because.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    6. Re:Decrypt This Blockchain! by sg_oneill · · Score: 3, Informative

      No what you have heard is the usual shit on the internet from tin foil wearing idiots that happily make up anything. This new law is terrible, but it is nothing like that and even if they wanted to they couldn't do that as none of that software is developed in Australia.

      No, don't just make shit up. There are three forms of notices.

      From the Governments OWN site;-

      Technical capability notice (TCN): Under a TCN, the Attorney-General can require a provider to build a new capability that will enable them to give assistance to ASIO and âinterception agenciesâ(TM), where the Attorney-General is satisfied that the requirements are âreasonable and proportionateâ(TM) and that compliance is âpracticable and technically feasible

      That is, the government can force Apple or Google to create a backdoor for the government to decrypt your messages.

      Already we have had news that Apple might just pull out of the Australian market, just like Google did to China a number of years ago, because destroying their own technical infrastructure to comply with a relatively tiny market might not be worth the it. We've had a number of Australian tech stocks shit the bed because the international market won't be able to trust our technology.

      And it won't even fucking work, because while your grandma will now be putting her credit cards in a web browser that might have a compromised SSL cert (And lets be honest, the Australian govt is incredibly leaky, that sort of backdoor will be in criminal hands within weeks) , the criminals and terrorists will just install Linux or use Signal and be completely immune to this shit.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    7. Re:Decrypt This Blockchain! by currently_awake · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Fascism = corporations own the government. Socialism = government own the corporations. For the poor and the middle class they look the same, for the rich and powerful it affects who to bribe.

    8. Re:Decrypt This Blockchain! by mjwx · · Score: 4, Informative

      You know, socialism and fascism are not actually mutually exclusive in practice.

      And yet, so many socialist countries manage to own the means of production AND manage to pull the fascism hat out of their ass all at the same time. East Germany to Venezuela...some things never change.

      The common trait you're looking for isn't fascism, it's authoritarianism.

      Fascism is far right authoritarianism.
      Communism is far left authoritarianism.
      Fascism is a government based on ultra-nationalism, it simply needs authoritarianism to achieve this (read: to silence and suppress their opposition).

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    9. Re:Decrypt This Blockchain! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I hate it when idiots redefine words.

      Fascism must be authoritative. It's literally part of the definition. It also must be nationalistic, again, part of the definition.

      Communism is an economic model. It doesn't have to be authoritative or nationalistic, but in practice, it seems to always head that way.

      This is why I hate it when people label fascism as "right wing". All it does is means you have to make up two words that mean the exact same thing, but one for when it's right wing and another when it's left wing. And note, this whole "fascism is right wing" is a very recent redefinition of the word. Something like within the last 10 years. Historically, Stalin was considered fascist because that right wing requirement wasn't there. Fascism is neither right nor left. And as far as I can tell, the only reason the right wing thing got attached is because left wing idiots didn't want to be labeled fascists.

    10. Re:Decrypt This Blockchain! by mcvos · · Score: 2

      The version I originally heard was that the government could demand an employee to insert a backdoor without the knowledge of the employer. From what I understand from you and others, that's not what this law says. If it was, that would be a whole new level of insanity on top of all the obvious stuff you mention.

      But even without that, it's a pretty stupid and harmful law, that basically means nobody will buy Australian software for anything where security is an issue.

    11. Re:Decrypt This Blockchain! by Shotgun · · Score: 2

      Fascism = corporations own the government. Socialism = government own the corporations. For the poor and the middle class they look the same, for the rich and powerful it affects the address to put on the bribe.

      FTFY. The people getting paid are exactly the same. Only the address of their offices changes.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    12. Re:Decrypt This Blockchain! by jd · · Score: 2

      Don't need it. You just need to convey by multipath the coordinates of a pulsar and a precise range of times. It's a near-perfect source of random numbers. There's effectively an infinite number of windows and a very large number of pulsars. The odds of intercepting the four numbers, identifying their meaning and then collecting the radio data in the designated time, especially if you send the packets by differing routes, is pretty close to zero.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  3. Welcome to the advent of Big Brother in Australia by SigmaTao · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wouldn't be a bit surprised if this bill was a backroom deal between the desires of the five eyes and the Australian Government.
    Breaking encryption for one government breaks it for all.
    I just means there will be a plethora of hidden encryption apps used exclusively by those who plan to do evil.

    Wait until someone adds machine learning to the process of communicating meaning and watch people's messages disappear entirely.
    As it's not words that information gathers wish to capture, but the meanings being conveyed.
    The Australian government have escalated the information war, and don't understand the consequences of doing so.

  4. Re:Update: by MrKaos · · Score: 3, Informative

    Has been stopped for now:

    No it hasn't. It is being debated in the Senate right now.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  5. Australia has the most stupid tech laws... by gweihir · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I mean how can you ignore experts on a question that only experts can understand? It does not get much more stupid than this.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:Australia has the most stupid tech laws... by MrKaos · · Score: 5, Informative

      I mean how can you ignore experts on a question that only experts can understand? It does not get much more stupid than this.

      As someone who analysed all 176 pages and make a two part 80 page submission to the PJCIS among many others my sense is that the government wants these powers and they are bulldozing anyone or anything that gets in the way.

      This law is about as offensive to any person who holds free will and freedom of association as one of the fundamental tenants of democracy.

      I wouldn't call it stupid. I'd call it intentionally deceptive and calculated to completely broadside the electorate. The government has gone back on all of its assurances to push this into 2019 and review the Bill properly. To give you an idea of the deception involved, over 100 pages of amendments were presented at 09:00am this morning and at the end of the day no one has even had a chance to look at what the amendments are.

      Furthermore, about 10 minutes ago the so called "opposition" has just revealed that it won't support it's own amendments to the Bill. This is about as a disgusting travesty or so called "democracy" I have ever seen.

      Have no doubt this bill has global ramifications via intelligence sharing agreements.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    2. Re:Australia has the most stupid tech laws... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I didn't want to give up our firearms, we were compelled to on a wave of media hand wringing. The Port Arthur massacre was the impetus and it was conducted with an illegal firearm.

      My criterion for the validity of the massacre argument for banning guns is that I would consider it a valid point the first time a gun were found to be autonomously walking around and firing at people.

      I don't know what the stats are in Australia, but the problem in the US that we have no commonsense controls on the mentally ill. They can walk around wherever they want to, piling up in our cities as the "homeless problem," setting wildfires in the countryside, and annoying your children at public parks and libraries. Once we had mental hospitals where we could institutionalize people who would be a problem on the street. Even the assault mentally ill, those with high-capacity legal files of antisocial offenses, go free. All the rest of us can do is wait until the next one snaps.

  6. Welcome Big Brother *from* Australia by MrKaos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Watching the debate that is happening right now, the lies being used to convince the house to pass this Bill are just sickening.

    For US, UK, NZ, Canadian citizens their governments can access the powers via existing intelligence agreements.

    The Australian government have escalated the information war, and don't understand the consequences of doing so.

    Fraud. They talk about not building backdoors, they just want the keys to the front door by coercing IT professionals with fines, liability and jail time.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  7. Ruling class protecting itself by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Of course it passed. This is the ruling class protecting itself from us. They know well how poorly they represent our interests and we would overthrow them if we had the full story. They would if the situation were reversed. So we must not be allowed to have secrets from them. Of course Labour voted for it. They are all ruling class. They show solidarity with one another and keep us divided and fighting with identity politics. I've recently reread 1984 and one passage sticks out at me.

    The essence of oligarchical rule is not father-to-son inheritance, but the persistence of a certain world-view and a certain way of life, imposed by the dead upon the living. A ruling group is a ruling group so long as it can nominate its successors. The Party is not concerned with perpetuating its blood but with perpetuating itself. Who wields power is not important, provided that the hierarchical structure remains always the same.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  8. Five Eyes, Five Ears... by Arzaboa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It has been a dream for any one of the five eyes countries to pass laws like this. Once the agencies are able to get a foot in the door, precedence will be used as a reason the other four courts should also have access to the data. "The tools to are already created" argument will now exist in a courtroom . This is going to open a whole plethora of doors for all countries.

    This will quickly spill over into the rest of the world. Once you see the democracies of the world go this route, the flood gates will open. There will be laws made all over the world that will copy this word for word. Entire turn-key packages to look all of this up will be sold to the highest bidders.

    In the end, I see a market being created for stolen country keys and hacked law enforcement portals. Those keys will be nearly priceless. One key for all of whatsapp? Done. One portal for all of proton-mail? Done. The next question will be, "How would you like your secrets served up today sir?"

    --
    Be mindful when it comes to your words. A string of some that don't mean much to you, may stick with someone else for a lifetime. - Rachel Wolchin

  9. Now being voted on in the Senate by MrKaos · · Score: 2

    The "opposition" has just moved to drop their own amendments to the Bill. The Division bell is now ringing. The greens attempted to move the "oppositions" amendments however leave was not granted for them to do so.

    So for all of the effort from industry and individuals the Bill now stands before the Senate to be passed as originally presented in its flawed form.

    This is disgusting.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  10. its just RIPA with more legal wangles by johnjones · · Score: 4, Interesting

    its pretty much the same as Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (c.23) (RIP or RIPA) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom

    they don't try and break encryption they simply ask that you hand over the Keys so they can break into the stream

    the same thing as the :

      United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC, also called the FISA Court) is a U.S. federal court established and authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to oversee requests for surveillance warrants.

    so americans do you want to examine your own systems because the people who Cant Infiltrate Anything simply go to court...

    1. Re:its just RIPA with more legal wangles by MrKaos · · Score: 2

      IIUC the difference is that RIPA has judicial oversight written into the law.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    2. Re: its just RIPA with more legal wangles by Shotgun · · Score: 2

      The FISA court can only issue a warrant against an american when that american is communicating with foreign sources

      Nice point...that is useless, because there is a "Two Hop Rule". The get a warrant against me, because I visited Prague earlier this year.

      Now they can survey you, because I'm communicating with you here.

      Now they can survey EVERYONE in your company, because you communicate with them.

      The 2-Hop Rule completely immasculates the FISA warrant restrictions. A graph of who 2-hops from me gets to probably covers half the worlds population (including Kevin Bacon).

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  11. Officially gotten to complacent by Kokuyo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It seems it's been too long since we've had to work for our freedom and pay for it in blood, both our enemies' and our own.

    That which comes free and is considered to be a given rarely has any worth in the eyes of people.

    We are descending into totalitarianism again, one way or another, and at some point we will be sick enough of being enslaved, also one way or another, that we'll rise up, heads will roll and we'll install another ruling class, one we trust, to slowly grow complacent and enamored with their power.

    The cycle is alive and well and we merely markers on it.

    1. Re:Officially gotten to complacent by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The problem is that about half the people vote for these asshats and actually agree with them.

      There's an easy fix for that. Remove SSL from all Australian commercial websites, and enjoy the pandemonium as everybody gets hacked and loses their bank accounts and credit cards. Any public perception that encryption is only for the benefit of criminals and terrorists will quickly fade.

    2. Re:Officially gotten to complacent by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      Or just modify all web browsers to automatically add a "This site is insecure, and may compromise your security. Are you sure you want to load this page?" message for every website in Australia, whether protected by TLS or not, under the assumption that TLS on Australian servers is inherently and irreparably compromised. Make it so that nobody outside of Australia is willing to do business with Aussie companies.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  12. Time to start sending blocks of random numbers by petes_PoV · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The first duty of an agency that wishes some unknown data to be decrypted would be to prove that it was, in fact, an encrypted message. If they were presented with a file containing random numbers they couldn't just say "you must provide the key to decrypt that" as they have not shown that such a key actually exists.

    Of course, the only way to prove that such a key exists would be to use it to decrypt the data. But until the transmission of blocks of random junk becomes widespread and well known (possibly with the occasional encrypted message inserted, as government agencies do it) the "reasonable man" criteria would apply and courts would assume that all apparently random data is actually encrypted messages.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
  13. Daddy I want a Unicorn for Christmas... by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Okay honey, let me go pass a law to make them exist for you.

  14. Re:But why would they do that ? by Powercntrl · · Score: 2

    I can see how a local telco like Telstra might have to do it, but the tech giants like Apple/Google/MS etc don't.

    Bwahahahah! That's a good one. Yeah, I'm sure they're all just lining up to put principles ahead of profit.

    All they have to do is a pop-up which says "In compliance with Australian regulation whatever it's called, your unique decryption key will be uploaded to and retained on our servers. Have a nice day."

    --

    ---
    DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
  15. Re:Let's see them try by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, that's not entirely true. What will happen in reality is that everything that relies on encryption, will either leave AU or be inherently insecure.

    They will also find themselves an island in many more ways than they already are because they will be treated as a security hole. By both the good and the bad guys. They have no idea what they are in for.

  16. Just users by BankRobberMBA · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Generally there are two ways this will work:

    1. Companies/corporations that build or provide services using uncrackable encryption get fined and then sanctioned until they either build in backdoors or go out of business/leave the country.

    2. Users of such services get fined or imprisoned until they render their passwords. Use of hard encryption first becomes evidence of wrongdoing, and then conclusive proof of it.

  17. Re:Let's see them try by quenda · · Score: 2

    This is Australia, where they "block" piratebay at the DNS level.

  18. Re:Not Even A Month Since Election by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, the right supports privacy and encryption.

    Of course they do.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  19. Re:Let them for now... There is still a supreme co by MrKaos · · Score: 2

    It usually comes crashing down. In my experience Supreme Courts have a habit of wanting reasoning, procedures, redress procedures, limitations and implementations explained to them. Then the inconsistencies come to light in a forum they cant bullshit their way out of. I've seen numerous instances were courts asked the government if they had a severe case teh dumb.

    No, only if the law is unconstitutional.

    The law now says that if you, as an IT professional, do not comply you are deemed not in compliance and subject to fine ($60,000) and jail terms (up to 10 years). Additionally, you are subject to the liability from users who take legal action to recover damages if they were the victim of a subsequent crime because the government's actions - how is that for a stroke of cuntishness if you want to try to protect you users privacy.

    If you do comply you are obliged to keep the actions you have complied with secret or face ($30,000) and 5 years jail and the users have no recourse to recover damages as a result of the consequences.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  20. Hold my beer! by jittles · · Score: 4, Funny

    US: Nobody can do anything more embarrassing than us. Just look at the 'president' we've elected.
    Australia: Hold my beer...

  21. Straight forward solution by srichard25 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's a rather straight forward solution to this problem, but I doubt tech companies have the backbone to do it. Every tech company should stop selling their products and services to Australia until this law is reversed. Take away the iPhones, Facebook, Android, and every all website from anyone in Australia. Let the people of Australia decide if they want these gadgets or if they want a government that can break encryption.

  22. Re:Let's see them try by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Once again, the wrench cartoon is unironically used in a situation where it actually indicates that the citizen ends up being protected against the most common and concerning attacks.

    Here is why a $5 wrench does not completely compromise the privacy given by cryptography: it is impossible to hit someone with a wrench without them knowing about it. In fact, you can't even show a wrench to someone purely for intimidation purposes, without them knowing about it.

    Massive slurping on an internet backbone, using wrenches? Can't do it.

    Secretly investigating someone by wrench-cracking their crypto without them at least being able to talk to a lawyer? Can't do it.

    It's a technological measure, and it works. Crypto nerds have already beaten the wrench is most conceivable scenarios. The situations where the defense doesn't work? Doesn't matter, because those scenarios are someone's silly movie fantasy.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  23. Re:Welcome to the advent of Big Brother in Austral by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If I was any company potentially affected by this, and the data security of my customers was important to me, I'd probably pull my services out of Australia over this, and that's precisely what I'd recommend to any and all companies operating in Australia at this point in time. This is utter and complete bullshit from the Australian government and it should not be allowed to stand.

    ..and as others have pointed out in this instantiation of this subject, as in past conversations about it, as in many comments of my own in the past: now that encryption-for-all is essentially worthless in Australia, only Australian criminals, and terrorists, and other 'ne'er-do-wells' will have encryption -- and the idiotic Australian govenment will have no way to 'force' anyone to unlock any of that. Only legitimate communications, transactions, and data will be compromised.

    The depths of utter stupidity our species is capable of astounds me. It's no wonder, if there are actually starfaring alien civilizations in our galaxy, that they would refuse to reveal themselves to us. Things like this are an embarassment.

  24. Lets do something about it... by FastNat · · Score: 2

    I tweeted last night an idea on how we could possibly get this repealed. I decided to put my money where my mouth is open source; open community; http://internetprotests.com/wh... If we the internet join together; I believe we could get it repealed. Guess that depends on how much the people are willing to do to work against it... Just complain or actually do something about it.