@Paul, it does depend on circumstances, but this law doesn't. This is saying they will have full access.
And the priest therapist is on topic, you are saying that refusing to hand over a password is to hold up law enforcement, then how does that same argument not hold up to priests and therapists? Maybe you are .01% of people that have never lost a single password or SSH keys, but I don't know anyone that hasn't. Would the majority of people that claim it be telling the truth? Probably not. But reasonable grounds still applies, it IS reasonable that SSH key could get lost. To go to jail for 10 years because of it is ridiculous. "It has allowed threats to representative democracy to get ahead of the curve" - I'm sure the great firewall of China came in under a similar guise. What about if the cops think you shot someone, but need the gun to prove their case. If you refuse to tell them where it is should you go to jail for a decade? What if the cops think you did something illegal via mail, but need the letters to prove their case. If you refuse to tell them where they are should you go to jail for a decade? What if you did something illegal online, but the police needs your messenger messages to prove their case. If you refuse to tell them your password should you go to jail for a decade? There are many cases where the lack of evidence leads to people getting away with it. But innocent people shouldn't be trampled by laws for the minority. He who gives up liberty for security deserves neither and will get none. Regards, Bradley Silverman | VentraIP Australia *Technical Operations* mobile. +61 418 641 103 phone. +61 3 9013 8464 On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Paul Wilkins <paulwilkins...@gmail.com> wrote: > Bradley, > To be clear, lawyer, spouse confidentiality is qualified. It depends on > circumstances. > > As to whether priests' and therapists' communications should enjoy > qualified privilege, that's a whole other debate :) > > I "lost" the SSH key sounds like the dog ate my homework - tell it to the > judge. > > This is not Orwellian, as it's not mass surveillance. It's enforcing the > existing process of judicial warrants to the cyber domain. This was always > inevitable, and should have been done long ago, and only hasn't because of > the dilatory legislative process. It has allowed threats to representative > democracy to get ahead of the curve. > > Kind regards > > Paul Wilkins > > On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 at 11:16, Bradley Silverman < > bsilver...@staff.ventraip.com> wrote: > >> @Paul I can tell a lawyer, priest, therapist or spouse my secrets and the >> judicial system can't force them to give up the information. Are you saying >> those laws need to be changed too? >> >> What if I had done nothing wrong, had a device that was using a SSH key >> to access and legitimately lost the private key, should I spend 10 years in >> jail because I lost a file? >> >> It's incredibly short sighted to say, we should give the government full >> access to monitor anything and everything I do, which is what this is >> leading towards, because only bad people need privacy. >> >> I can actually *hear* Orwell rolling in his grave. >> >> Regards, >> >> Bradley Silverman | VentraIP Australia >> *Technical Operations* >> >> mobile. +61 418 641 103 >> phone. +61 3 9013 8464 >> >> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Paul Wilkins <paulwilkins...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I believe the point of not surrendering a password or private key, is to >>> frustrate due judicial process. It's no different to barricading the door >>> if the police turn up with a search warrant - it's obstruction of justice, >>> and the only reason people won't surrender keys is fear of the consequences >>> of discovery of admissible evidence. The cyber domain has always been >>> subject to the rule of law, same as the rest of society. >>> >>> Kind regards >>> >>> Paul Wilkins >>> >>> On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 at 11:02, Christian Heinrich < >>> christian.heinr...@cmlh.id.au> wrote: >>> >>>> https://www.crikey.com.au/2018/08/15/encryption-bill-password-jail/ is >>>> behind a paywall but it makes the point in their preview. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Regards, >>>> Christian Heinrich >>>> >>>> http://cmlh.id.au/contact >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> AusNOG mailing list >>>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net >>>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> AusNOG mailing list >>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net >>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog >>> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ > AusNOG mailing list > AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog > >
_______________________________________________ AusNOG mailing list AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
