[AusNOG] Dutton decryption bill

[Robert Hudson]

On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 at 11:53, Paul Wilkins <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Paul,
> I can't agree. There appear to be specific protections under the bill that
> prevent weakening of security - viz: 317ZG & 317ZH.
>

And then further comments where a government minister at the time (a
political appointment, remember) can decide what is and what is not
appropriate in order to achieve the desired result.  And there's no
oversight until later - after the horse has bolted.


> The internet has come to an important cross roads. It's no longer
> acceptable to expect that privacy considerations are sufficient to justify
> free reign for the crooks, creeps, and crazies. Something has to give. The
> best we can hope for is that LEA are given powers only sufficient that
> would allow search and seizure under judicial writ, and that this be well
> regulated with proper oversite checks and balances. But that requires
> engaging with the process. Otherwise LEA will steam roll ahead with the
> sort of ambit claims included in the bill.
>

I completely disagree here.  I don't see why I (or anyone else) has to give
up freedoms in order to let the government do stupid things that won't
actually catch "the bad guys", but will almost certainly get misused
against innocent citizens.


>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20180904/8fa62f5c/attachment.html>