[AusNOG] Dutton decryption bill

[trs80 at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au]

On Mon, 3 Sep 2018, Paul Wilkins wrote:

> "Sure they will be able to enforce it against others, but their whole
> argument for these laws is to go after those actors when it is manifestly
> ineffective for that."
> 
> Yes, and no. There's actors, and then there's their actions. There's 2 different sorts of traffic on the internet that law
> enforcement & security services want to go after - broadcast (eg: social media), and point to point. When it comes to
> identifying users of social media using it for illegal ends, this is something that should have been done ages ago, should have
> been a priority before Data Retention. When it comes to isolating actors with a serious agenda to use end to end to encryption
> for nefarious means, I figure most everybody realises this is like looking for a needle in a haystack.

This law is not about the first type of traffic. Well maybe it is, but 
it's certainly not the bit that requires forcing companies to break 
end-to-end encryption that the bill is trying to do.

-- 
# TRS-80              trs80(a)ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au #/ "Otherwise Bub here will do \
# UCC Wheel Member     http://trs80.ucc.asn.au/ #|  what squirrels do best     |
[ "There's nobody getting rich writing          ]|  -- Collect and hide your   |
[  software that I know of" -- Bill Gates, 1980 ]\  nuts." -- Acid Reflux #231 /