|
Mad Katter posted:Yeah, I guess that's helpful. For the record I understand it but was kind of looking for something that's easier to share. https://twitter.com/tomsulston/status/1070118335294009344
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 12:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:46 |
|
|
Yeah those are both great. Thanks to you both for saving me from doing any research of my own.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 12:24
|
|
|
Weeks ago I had a post ready to shoot off about how there is no point even putting labor in power unless they are willing to be bold and vicious in pushing some major reform through. Specifically that if they aren't willing to take the risk of ramming media reform through in order to shake up the propaganda machine than anything else they try to accomplish is pointless since they will lose in one or two terms and have their achievements erased immediately, without justification, consequence or scrutiny. If this is a preview than things are even bleaker, since they are willing to capitulate even without any necessity or advantage to doing so. The Obama style negotiation tactic of letting them know you are willing to compromise on everything before you even show up to the table only makes things worse in the long time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 12:32
|
|
|
You might also be worth pointing people towards "The Athens Affair", where the nsa exploited similar weaknesses introduced to the Greek phone network for wiretapping to spy on their government and military.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 12:32
|
|
|
Mad Katter posted:Yeah those are both great. Thanks to you both for saving me from doing any research of my own. No sweat. I'm studying to be a journalist so I'm all about not doing research.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 12:36
|
|
|
i loving told you guys that federal labor and the lnp are two sides of the poo poo coin. loving centre right bullshit neo liberal fuckwits completely getting hosed up the arse by the government in the senate all day today and then immediately asking if they'd like their poo poo smeared dick sucked off afterwards i'd rather have a loving government of sexual predator greens if at least they stick by some standard of ideology
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 12:48
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AntonyGreenABC/status/1070641825797423105
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 12:50
|
|
|
My understanding of tech ain't that great, but couldn't this legislation make it easy/easier for a con artist to dress themselves up as say ASIO and convince someone at a tech company (we have any left?) to hand over their vulnerabilities under threat of jail time then sell that info to another country/company?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 12:56
|
|
|
Thinking about newspoll.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 12:57
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:Thinking about newspoll. Movement with the margin of error that people put way too much stock into.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 12:58
|
|
|
Would laugh if it narrows due to ALP being spineless.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 12:59
|
|
|
Specifically naming whatsapp, the instant messenger used by maloclm tunbrull when he coup'd abbott, as a terrorist threat in their scare campaign lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 13:00
|
|
|
If someone quit their job as soon as they were ordered to undertake ~-*top secret encryption busting activities*-~ would they still go to jail?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 13:00
|
|
|
Starshark posted:No sweat. I'm studying to be a journalist so I'm all about not doing research. you missed your calling in political science
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 13:03
|
|
|
So not having read the legislation but looking at this article: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12-06/labor-backdown-federal-government-to-pass-greater-surveillance/10591944 quote:But companies will not have to introduce such features if they are considered "systemic weaknesses" — that is, they are likely to result in weakened security for others. ...isn't this a caveat for tech companies or workers? Can't they just say "sorry can't do that without checking it through the entire company for a decade." Worker is threatened with 5 years jail for non compliance but can still say "this will introduce a systemic weakness. If you don't like that answer officer, then we can take to manager / whatever tech oversight committee is required" and then... that's that. Am I way off here?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 13:27
|
|
|
They (the companies/workers/victims) don't get to decide if it's a systemic weakness or not. They can object that it is, which might prevent it, but the government can gets to decide if it is or isn't, or you know, they might just say "no it's not, now gently caress off and do it".
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 13:35
|
|
|
How do you know who gets to decide? Unless the legislation specifies the government as the authority on what satisfies that definition in all cases - I doubt that. On the face of it and being maximum charitable it seems to point to the way out for the worker choosing between sabotaging their product or jail. Of course they'd likely threaten such a worker with abetting terrorism or obstructing justice unless they can prove the systemic weakness. The whole thing is such stupid and evil police state poo poo you can't say whether the legislative incompetence that led to it is a feature or a bug.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 13:52
|
|
|
clusterfuck posted:being maximum charitable why are these specific brainworms so common, why do you feel this urge
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 13:53
|
|
|
wasn't that systemic weaknesses thing part of the labor amendments that labor pushed to the side to get it through today?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 13:54
|
|
|
Karneios posted:wasn't that systemic weaknesses thing part of the labor amendments that labor pushed to the side to get it through today? This article I posted was from 8pm and says they're in but poorly defined. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12-06/labor-backdown-federal-government-to-pass-greater-surveillance/10591944 Jonah Galtberg posted:why are these specific brainworms so common, why do you feel this urge Because the faith of JBP broke and now I am the ghost of his political past. clusterfuck fucked around with this message at 14:05 on Dec 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 13:55
|
|
|
Letting all the hackers of the world know that there are guaranteed security flaws in all Australian located encrypted apps surely won't focus their attention on finding and exploiting them. Tarantula posted:My understanding of tech ain't that great, but couldn't this legislation make it easy/easier for a con artist to dress themselves up as say ASIO and convince someone at a tech company (we have any left?) to hand over their vulnerabilities under threat of jail time then sell that info to another country/company? You don't even need to add a third party conman to that scenario. Since individual employees are supposedly meant to put the backdoor in without notifying their employer an enormous amount of trust is being given to individual programmers. They could sell knowledge of the backdoor, be compromised by foreign intelligence, or simply choose to undermine their company's security to prove a point. Or ASIO itself will get hacked or a Snowden style leaker will release all their info on the vulnerabilities. Like how CIA/NSA developed hacking tools are now used by black hat hackers worldwide. clusterfuck posted:How do you know who gets to decide? We dont get to know poo poo and neither do the mp's voting on the decision. All of these new security laws have been justified with a statement from Dutton saying that they are necessary and if we dont pass them immediately right now this second the terrorists will win, but he obviously can't provide any proof of that as it concerns ongoing security matters. It is insane. The other repeated pattern is labor acknowledging that the law has been poorly written such that it could allow huge abuses of power, but passing them anyway after the lnp assures them that they obviously won't use them in that bad way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 14:02
|
|
|
100% that the ROC will be hacking into union organiser's poo poo by monday.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 14:06
|
|
|
clusterfuck posted:How do you know who gets to decide? Unless the legislation specifies the government as the authority on what satisfies that definition in all cases - I doubt that. The (first reading) legislation says it is decided by "Assessors" appointed by the Attorney-General. quote:317WA Assessment and report 317ZG is the section about systemic weaknesses by the way. and here's 317ZG quote:317ZG Designated communications provider must not be required to implement or build a systemic weakness or systemic vulnerability etc. Not sure how this might vary from the version that was passed,or if it does at all, though. Shanakin fucked around with this message at 14:18 on Dec 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 14:13
|
|
|
Hahaha where's all that smug "change from within is working" poo poo from a month ago?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 14:14
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 14:25
|
|
|
 Shanakin posted:The (first reading) legislation says it is decided by "Assessors" appointed by the Attorney-General. gently caress yeah. Thanks for digging that out.  317ZG still isn't really defining systemic, is it? And besides as moon atari said if every hacker knows Australian encryption is full of federally approved exploits then the security environment has violently changed. So you have to change the whole system to compensate. Anyway I need to shutup and actual lawyers and techies look at this poo poo. clusterfuck fucked around with this message at 14:48 on Dec 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 14:44
|
|
|
Amazing clusterfuck posted:317ZG still isn't really defining systemic, is it? And besides as moon atari said if every hacker knows Australian encryption is full of federally approved exploits then the security environment has violently changed. So you have to change the whole system to compensate. Maybe it defines it elsewhere but legislation is a tangled self-referential mess which makes it a pain to read and find stuff. Not to mention I believe the government version that passed was meant to have 171 amendments over the first reading version which I took that from.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 14:55
|
|
|
You're right though that the govt is claiming the authority to decide by way of the "assessors" what is or isn't a systemic weakness.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 15:09
|
|
|
Shanakin posted:The (first reading) legislation says it is decided by "Assessors" appointed by the Attorney-General. Cutting through the bullshit all that means is that it is at the complete discretion of the attorney-general since all they need to do is find one person with IT knowledge and one exjudge to rubber stamp it, and they can easily shop around for those. Once again, concentrating all power with the executive and no real option for any oversight.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 16:34
|
|
|
Which was my original point. I mean theoretically they could appoint independent, impartial and well informed assessors, and it may well be a reasonable system. On the other hand somehow, especially with the current government, I find that unlikely.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 16:41
|
|
|
Labor does end up looking piss-weak on this, but at the end of the day it is a bit of realpolitik. They have a substantial polling advantage and they don’t want to risk a fight on an issue that most people won’t understand (and in one of the few areas the Coalition is more “trusted” with). I think this article is a bit telling - https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/breakdown-on-national-security-a-damning-indictment-of-both-sides-20181206-p50klx.html quote:In the end, Labor has backed legislation it says is flawed while reassuring Australians that it can be revisited, even though it will be law, inked in the statute books. Basically - worst case scenario - there’s a terrorist attack over the Christmas break and Labor gets blamed for it because they didn’t pass the encryption law. Yes, we all know it’s bullshit, but that’s the reality as it stands. Labor could fight on this issue, but the senior leadership probably doesn’t have the sophistication to articulate the issue well enough. Post-election, they would likely be in a good position to revisit and tidy up the legislation. Yes it’s a poo poo way to go about it, but the alternative is giving ScoMo a national security platform to bleat about over the Christmas break. If that coincided with an actual terrorist attack, it could be the circuit breaker he needs to (at the very least) save the furniture. JJ fucked around with this message at 16:44 on Dec 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 16:42
|
|
|
Krazyface posted:disappointment is shorten Can someone make this please. To follow up from our Tony Death is Certain. Put notes on the skull also pls. hooman fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Dec 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 16:55
|
|
|
Some of you are going to be prodded at gunpoint into expanded Nauru facilities going “Libs are playing checkers, Shorten is playing chess  ”
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 18:16
|
|
|
Don Dongington posted:Oh sweetie, no. Well he's actually not wrong, in addition to the local stuff. You see, there's a little club called the Five Eyes and they definitely want to use this and it's definitely a reason the bill was proposed. We are the little fish in a pond of sharks, remember? Why wouldn't it be in US/UK interests alone to spy on all telecommunications here on the doorstep of Asia. Not that it's going to help because everyone with half a brain cell just decided to move operations out of Australia. Maybe you want to stick with the techie stuff and leave the politics to the grownups, "sweetie".
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
JJ posted:Labor does end up looking piss-weak on this, but at the end of the day it is a bit of realpolitik. They have a substantial polling advantage and they don’t want to risk a fight on an issue that most people won’t understand (and in one of the few areas the Coalition is more “trusted” with). There is literally no legislation Labor could agree to pass that would result in them not being blamed by the Liberals and a large part of the media for a terrorist attack.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 20:23
|
|
|
snoremac posted:Some of you are going to be prodded at gunpoint into expanded Nauru facilities going “Libs are playing checkers, Shorten is playing chess “What ever happened to civil discourse?” I sigh, as I’m rounded up for posting into a camp by the government approved militia Reclaim Australia headed by Chief Racist Blair Cottrell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 20:50
|
|
|
Thanks Bill Thill
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
Solemn Sloth posted:There is literally no legislation Labor could agree to pass that would result in them not being blamed by the Liberals and a large part of the media for a terrorist attack. Like it couldn't be that hard to put forward as your sound bite that: "this legislation is so badly written it will lead to (insert tech company) pulling up stumps in Australia" Hell I even got a sports analogy in there. But no, the path of least resistance real poltik comes before the good of Australian Society once loving more.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
Dude McAwesome posted:“What ever happened to civil discourse?” I sigh, as I’m rounded up for posting into a camp by the One Government approved militia GetUp Australia headed by Chief Globalist Simon Sheik.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:46 |
|
|
Solemn Sloth posted:There is literally no legislation Labor could agree to pass that would result in them not being blamed by the Liberals and a large part of the media for a terrorist attack. This. The lesson of the Murdoch dominated west is to never make a decision based on what attacks your opponents might make, since they will attack you over it anyway, and to the maximum degree, no matter what you do. So you might as well ignore it and show some spine sticking up for what you want to do , since you might build momentum and influence the narrative with your boldness instead.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2018 21:57
|
|