Australian Commonwealth Government set to repeal mathematical law

[bilby]

In an apparent attempt to recover some ground after the recent efforts by the US and UK to corner the world market in stupidity, Australian Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, plans to introduce legislation in the Spring session of parliament, which opened today, to allow police, intelligence and security forces to read encrypted communications on the Internet.

When this was first mooted last month, It was pointed out to the PM that this would be technically impossible without deliberately compromising security by adding a 'back door' to encryption software. He responded:

The laws of Australia prevail in Australia, I can assure you of that. The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia.

This is not satire. Those are the actual words of the actual Prime Minister of Australia in the year 2018.

Words fail me.

 

[laughing dog]

In an apparent attempt to recover some ground after the recent efforts by the US and UK to corner the world market in stupidity, Australian Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, plans to introduce legislation in the Spring session of parliament, which opened today, to allow police, intelligence and security forces to read encrypted communications on the Internet.

When this was first mooted last month, It was pointed out to the PM that this would be technically impossible without deliberately compromising security by adding a 'back door' to encryption software. He responded:

The laws of Australia prevail in Australia, I can assure you of that. The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia.

This is not satire. Those are the actual words of the actual Prime Minister of Australia in the year 2018.

Words fail me.

So how long have Australians been floating around since the law of gravity does not apply in Australia?

 

[bilby]

In an apparent attempt to recover some ground after the recent efforts by the US and UK to corner the world market in stupidity, Australian Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, plans to introduce legislation in the Spring session of parliament, which opened today, to allow police, intelligence and security forces to read encrypted communications on the Internet.

When this was first mooted last month, It was pointed out to the PM that this would be technically impossible without deliberately compromising security by adding a 'back door' to encryption software. He responded:

The laws of Australia prevail in Australia, I can assure you of that. The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia.

This is not satire. Those are the actual words of the actual Prime Minister of Australia in the year 2018.

Words fail me.

So how long have Australians been floating around since the law of gravity does not apply in Australia?

They had to repeal Universal Gravitation as soon as the first penal colony was established at Port Jackson, because the convicts kept trying to escape by letting go, and falling off the bottom of the world.

 

[Patooka]

The article was written in July of last year. I suspect the proposal died a quiet death. Doesn't change the fact that Turnbull's only saving grace is that he is not Tony Abbott.

 

[bilby]

The article was written in July of last year. I suspect the proposal died a quiet death. Doesn't change the fact that Turnbull's only saving grace is that he is not Tony Abbott.

Apparently it's not dead; It's quietly alive and kicking.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/08/12/australia_close_to_encryption_legislation/

My apologies for the error in the date - the article in the OP is indeed 13 months old. The inspiration for the thread was the news that this is due to be legislated in the spring session that begins today (and is due to run until December).

 

[Patooka]

Two things that leaped out to me in that article:

The Australian government has scheduled its “not-a-backdoor” crypto-busting bill to land in parliament in the spring session, and we still don't know what will be in it.

That is never reassuring.

The bill requires both domestic and foreign companies supplying services to Australia to provide greater assistance to agencies.

Good fucking luck trying to enforce that.

This article also outlines some parts of the act. I suppose the silver lining is by all reports, this piece of legislation is about as realistic and achievable as purchasing T-65 X-Wings for the RAAF.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

In an apparent attempt to recover some ground after the recent efforts by the US and UK to corner the world market in stupidity, Australian Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, plans to introduce legislation in the Spring session of parliament, which opened today, to allow police, intelligence and security forces to read encrypted communications on the Internet.

When this was first mooted last month, It was pointed out to the PM that this would be technically impossible without deliberately compromising security by adding a 'back door' to encryption software. He responded:

The laws of Australia prevail in Australia, I can assure you of that. The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia.

This is not satire. Those are the actual words of the actual Prime Minister of Australia in the year 2018.

Words fail me.

He’s going to have to try a lot harder. We have professional buffoons on charge.

 

[barbos]

Russian government is trying to do that too. They passes a law ordering all companies save all traffic for the last 6 months.
There were some talks about busting encryption too.

 

[Lion IRC]

Im pretty sure the Aust Govt has a few well-paid encryption experts working in the public service.
And I'm sure those guys would have explained to their bosses that it won't be maths preventing the government from getting its own way.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomas...nment-can-access-any-apple-iphone-cellebrite/

 

[fromderinside]

Since I'm from 'merica where stupid reigns I know that isn't a good bet.

 

[phands]

Insane indeed. Given that many activities legally require encryption (Banking, healthcare, GMail and many more), this cannot ever work. At it's simplest, it makes use of HTTPS illegal there....and Google use that for everything. It would also mean VPNs will no longer be P, and use of TOR and similar could become criminal.

 

[bilby]

Im pretty sure the Aust Govt has a few well-paid encryption experts working in the public service.
And I'm sure those guys would have explained to their bosses that it won't be maths preventing the government from getting its own way.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomas...nment-can-access-any-apple-iphone-cellebrite/

This is not about unlocking devices; It's about cracking encryption so you can read intercepted traffic without access to either sender or reciever.

This is currently understood to be impossible, but if you can demonstrate that P=NP, go right ahead. You will likely get the Fields Medal, and can either become very wealthy selling your technique to ASIO, or get even richer transferring everyone's online bank balances to your offshore account.

I'm pretty sure that the reason behind this stupidity is that the government is listening to confident idiots <edited> who have no idea what problem they are even discussing, but who don't let that give them the slightest pause before chiming in; instead of listening to people who know what they are taking about.

After all, who wants to listen to some negative nelly who says it's mathematically impossible to do something?

 

[Lion IRC]

You don't need to 'crack' encryption. You just politely ask the person who encrypted it to un-encrypt it so that you and the terrorist can BOTH read it.

 

[Lion IRC]

Al Qaida Operative - "hey Usama, I'm gonna send you the top secret terrorist plans by telegram"
UBL - "no, don't do that. What if some spy discovers and reads it?"
Al Qaida Operative - "shit you're right Usama, I'd better send it by email"
UBL - "no, don't do that. Your password might get discovered"
Al Qaida Operative - "right again boss. I know, I'll send it via an encrypted iPhone app"
UBL - "Noooooooo!!!!!! Whatever you do don't send me an encrypted message. I'll never be able to open it"

 

[bilby]

You don't need to 'crack' encryption. You just politely ask the person who encrypted it to un-encrypt it so that you and the terrorist can BOTH read it.

Yeah, because you can always rely on criminals to help out the police, and on terrorists to assist the government.

And obviously the security forces know which messages they need to decrypt, out of the millions that pass through the network every second. So they won't decrypt your internet banking password as a side effect of their snooping, and even if they did, you can certainly rely on the government to keep everything secure.

Just as long as the government remains completely trustworthy, it will all be fine.

The draft legislation has been released, and it's pretty fucking ugly: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/08/14/oz_encryption_backdoor/

Law enforcement agencies would get the right to provide software or equipment that providers would have to install in their networks or systems; and providers would have to facilitate “access to devices or services.” But it's not a secret backdoor.

Agencies would be able to ask the industry to help them develop their own “systems and capabilities”, and providers would have to tell agencies if they changed something in their systems. But it's not a secret backdoor.

If a provider is in control of a service, agencies could require them to modify or substitute the service to give them access to a device or individual's data. But it's not a secret backdoor.

And finally, providers would have to agree to stay quiet about agencies' covert operations, enforced by jail time and massive fines. But it's not a secret backdoor.

Cyber Security minister Angus Taylor this morning told Australian Broadcasting Corporation current affairs program AM that the powers would only be invoked for “serious crimes” involving sentences of three years or greater.

That's a very wide net indeed, and certainly isn't limited to what the public imagine to be 'serious' crime, such as terrorism.

 

[Elixir]

You don't need to 'crack' encryption. You just politely ask the person who encrypted it to un-encrypt it so that you and the terrorist can BOTH read it.

Yeah, because you can always rely on criminals to help out the police, and on terrorists to assist the government.

And obviously the security forces know which messages they need to decrypt, out of the millions that pass through the network every second. So they won't decrypt your internet banking password as a side effect of their snooping, and even if they did, you can certainly rely on the government to keep everything secure.

Just as long as the government remains completely trustworthy, it will all be fine.

The draft legislation has been released, and it's pretty fucking ugly: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/08/14/oz_encryption_backdoor/

Law enforcement agencies would get the right to provide software or equipment that providers would have to install in their networks or systems; and providers would have to facilitate “access to devices or services.” But it's not a secret backdoor.

Agencies would be able to ask the industry to help them develop their own “systems and capabilities”, and providers would have to tell agencies if they changed something in their systems. But it's not a secret backdoor.

If a provider is in control of a service, agencies could require them to modify or substitute the service to give them access to a device or individual's data. But it's not a secret backdoor.

And finally, providers would have to agree to stay quiet about agencies' covert operations, enforced by jail time and massive fines. But it's not a secret backdoor.

Cyber Security minister Angus Taylor this morning told Australian Broadcasting Corporation current affairs program AM that the powers would only be invoked for “serious crimes” involving sentences of three years or greater.

That's a very wide net indeed, and certainly isn't limited to what the public imagine to be 'serious' crime, such as terrorism.

Aren't there any laws they'd have to repeal in order to put their brilliant idea into practice without committing felonies?

 

[bilby]

Yeah, because you can always rely on criminals to help out the police, and on terrorists to assist the government.

And obviously the security forces know which messages they need to decrypt, out of the millions that pass through the network every second. So they won't decrypt your internet banking password as a side effect of their snooping, and even if they did, you can certainly rely on the government to keep everything secure.

Just as long as the government remains completely trustworthy, it will all be fine.

The draft legislation has been released, and it's pretty fucking ugly: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/08/14/oz_encryption_backdoor/



That's a very wide net indeed, and certainly isn't limited to what the public imagine to be 'serious' crime, such as terrorism.

Aren't there any laws they'd have to repeal in order to put their brilliant idea into practice without committing felonies?

I imagine so; But it's not uncommon for the repeal of earlier laws to be included in new legislation.

And our nation's history as a penal colony means that a lot of our existing laws are pretty draconian already.

That which is not mandatory is prohibited.

 

[Patooka]

You don't need to 'crack' encryption. You just politely ask the person who encrypted it to un-encrypt it so that you and the terrorist can BOTH read it.

Yeah, because you can always rely on criminals to help out the police, and on terrorists to assist the government.

And obviously the security forces know which messages they need to decrypt, out of the millions that pass through the network every second. So they won't decrypt your internet banking password as a side effect of their snooping, and even if they did, you can certainly rely on the government to keep everything secure.

Just as long as the government remains completely trustworthy, it will all be fine.

The draft legislation has been released, and it's pretty fucking ugly: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/08/14/oz_encryption_backdoor/

Law enforcement agencies would get the right to provide software or equipment that providers would have to install in their networks or systems; and providers would have to facilitate “access to devices or services.” But it's not a secret backdoor.

Agencies would be able to ask the industry to help them develop their own “systems and capabilities”, and providers would have to tell agencies if they changed something in their systems. But it's not a secret backdoor.

If a provider is in control of a service, agencies could require them to modify or substitute the service to give them access to a device or individual's data. But it's not a secret backdoor.

And finally, providers would have to agree to stay quiet about agencies' covert operations, enforced by jail time and massive fines. But it's not a secret backdoor.

Cyber Security minister Angus Taylor this morning told Australian Broadcasting Corporation current affairs program AM that the powers would only be invoked for “serious crimes” involving sentences of three years or greater.

That's a very wide net indeed, and certainly isn't limited to what the public imagine to be 'serious' crime, such as terrorism.

If this absurdity actually goes through, I suspect we will be the ones felling back-doored .

 

[barbos]

Im pretty sure the Aust Govt has a few well-paid encryption experts working in the public service.
And I'm sure those guys would have explained to their bosses that it won't be maths preventing the government from getting its own way.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomas...nment-can-access-any-apple-iphone-cellebrite/

This is not about unlocking devices; It's about cracking encryption so you can read intercepted traffic without access to either sender or reciever.

This is currently understood to be impossible, but if you can demonstrate that P=NP, go right ahead. You will likely get the Fields Medal, and can either become very wealthy selling your technique to ASIO, or get even richer transferring everyone's online bank balances to your offshore account.

I'm pretty sure that the reason behind this stupidity is that the government is listening to confident idiots <edited> who have no idea what problem they are even discussing,

So confident idiots are not limited to Russian government, Australia have them too.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Just as long as the government remains completely trustworthy, it will all be fine.

Trustworthy?

I'd set my threshold at 'competent.'

Seems like every month there's another alert, about how if you're a customer of X, Y, or Z, or listed with govt. agency A, B, or C, their database has been hacked and your private information may have been compromised.

legislating that all systems be designed for hacking just seems like these alerts would be better placed on a ticker tape, scrolling across the bottom of your screen.