On a satire note - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW-OMR-iWOE But seriously - https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about/consultations/assistance-and-access-bil... And - https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about/national-security/five-country-minister... The thing that worries me is that this bill will probably go through and it can hoover up relay operators. That is they can force you to add/develop tools to eavesdrop on you. Is there any real defense against this bill? IE having a parameter in the torrc that would act like a canary? Paul 137CF322859E400455E457DB920F65FFDD222CDF
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 at 11:20, Paul Templeton <paul@coffswifi.net> wrote:
Before getting into a death-spiral of geek solutions to political problems: what makes you believe that relay operators would get classed (under a legal definition) as "communications providers"? Or, possibly, that may be off-topic for this list, in which case please reply to tor-talk@ -a -- http://dropsafe.crypticide.com/aboutalecm
Before getting into a death-spiral of geek solutions to political problems: what makes you believe that relay operators would get classed (under a legal definition) as "communications providers"?
A communications provider is "the provision by the person of an electronic service that has one or more end - users in Australia"
Hello, On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, 11:20 Paul Templeton, <paul@coffswifi.net> wrote:
I remember reading about this a while ago. I don't have the links to the articles on the device I am using however they mentioned three things: 1). The organisation would need the skills and resources to bake in back doors (e.g. knowledgeable people). 2). Free speech - Can you make a programmer code (speak) something they do not want to say. 3). Assuming someone is willing to help - it may take one person years to do as they have been asked, so during that time are they employed by the government? Do they get assistance (e.g. mentoring or hardware) to do the task? As you can see it would be difficult to implement I think. Thanks
I live in the United States so they’d need to pass an act here for it to be enforced, which would be constitutionally challenged with every last legal measure available. Have you seen the legal shitstorm with social networks censoring conservatives, can you imagine them hearing the government is making people say things they disagree with? Additionally I will sooner delete my relay keys and such down than ceed control to the Australian government. Cordially, Nathaniel On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 7:58 AM Gary <jaffacakemonster53@gmail.com> wrote:
Good point. Although most relay operators can set up packet dumps and debug logging.
2). Free speech - Can you make a programmer code (speak) something they do not want to say.
There is no general right to free speech under Australia law. As far as I'm aware, there are no precedents that treat code as speech, either.
3). Assuming someone is willing to help - it may take one person years to do as they have been asked, so during that time are they employed by the government? Do they get assistance (e.g. mentoring or hardware) to do the task?
The law specifically allows payments by the government. T
Hi, I am unfamiliar with the nuances of Australian law however I do wonder the following: On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 at 14:01, teor <teor@riseup.net> wrote:
The law specifically allows payments by the government.
Lets speculate and say there is a relay operator who runs their relay in their spare time, and the Australian Government want to force this person to spend time and rig their relay and turn it "bad", sucking up all sorts of data as it goes through. The real test would be if they could ask this person to quit their full time job in order to complete this (for any) task. Sure they might get 'compensation' (pay) of some sort, perhaps hardware - but if they feel they are being asked to do too much its unlikely they will be able to appeal - and even if they can appeal it is likely it would be done in secret. A member of the Australian Government is known for saying "the laws of mathematics are great - Australian laws are better" (referring to back doors in encryption), perhaps under these new laws they can force a person to work more than 24 hours a day lol. Thanks. On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 at 14:01, teor <teor@riseup.net> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 04, 2018 at 10:19:45AM +0000, Paul Templeton wrote:
The thing that worries me is that this bill will probably go through and it can hoover up relay operators. That is they can force you to add/develop tools to eavesdrop on you.
Is there any real defense against this bill? IE having a parameter in the torrc that would act like a canary?
I don't believe they can actually force you to do these things, in this hypothetical future. You will always have the alternative of deciding to stop running your relay. If you are faced with this choice, you should stop running the relay -- and then find some lawyers to get advice on how best to get the word out. Tor's strength is in its distributed nature: a single relay operator isn't in the same centralized position as, say, Lavabit was. These proposed laws are still scary, though, first because they promote broad insecurity (making civilization weaker at a time where attackers already have the advantage in so many ways), and second because if they get enough momentum in enough different places, our strategy will need to shift from "route around that terrible country with its stupid law" to some more pervasive design changes to handle the new attacks. For those wanting more thoughts on this area, check out the discussion at https://blog.torproject.org/calea-2-and-tor (spoiler alert, it's basically the same broken record from 2013) --Roger
participants (7)
-
Alec Muffett -
Gary -
Mirimir -
Nathaniel Suchy -
Paul Templeton -
Roger Dingledine -
teor