On Jul 22, 2013 2:30 AM, "Noel Butler" <noel.but...@ausics.net> wrote: > > On Fri, 2013-07-19 at 08:15 -0400, Michael Poole wrote: > >> >> The only thing that US law has to do with anything is that the US --like 40 other countries, including >> most of those already mentioned has implemented export controls under the Wassenaar Arrangement > > > The Wassenaar Arrangement is that, only an agreement, not being a treaty it is unenforceable by those who don't want to honour it
Maybe true at a national level -- but the same is true of many treaties -- but absolutely irrelevant at the citizen level. You are subject to your country's laws whether they are enacted under, say, the Geneva Conventions, the Wassenaar Arrangement, or the Rudd/Gillard Whim. >> >> Everyone else who has mailed on this thread so far is affected >> by similar export controls. > > > Complied with by a simple notice on ftp servers, and, funnily enough, inside the package you need to open and read before building, when was the last time you saw such a notice before downloading httpd, or postfix etc I can't say for sure how the law is interpreted in Australia, but I rather suspect it is like the US -- where there must be more significant efforts to prevent unauthorized exports. I haven't seen that kind of notice in a long time, because laws relaxed after the Wassenaar Arrangement was adopted, and now mostly the servers will just refuse to download files to IP addresses from NoKo, Iran, etc. >> >> Anyone who feels outraged by "PRISM" type programs should read up on >> their own local laws about mandatory key disclosure, lawful intercept >> requirements, and the like; US law provides slightly more protections > > > Luckily in Australia, one can not currently be forced to hand over keys, and no intercept may take place without a specific named target in a court order (I used to action such requests for a service provider over here), of course the nannies running the country want to, and this year even tried to, change this to bring in mandatory data retention, but the public outcry and pending federal election has put a, at least temporary, stop on that idea. It's recently been rumoured though that the defence signals directorate (watered down NSA/GCHQ) has of course questionably obtained information from NSA on locals under the "eyes of five" BS Wikipedia and Electronic Frontiers Australia both disagree with you about the requirement to hand over keys in Australia, and both of them cite the Cybercrime Act of 2001 as the legislation that requires individuals to disclose cryptographic keys or face prison time (even if the disclosure would incriminate the person). Argument by "of course" is not very convincing when it's made by someone who shows so little understanding of the things he writes about. Michael
_______________________________________________ Coder-com mailing list Coder-com@undernet.org http://undernet.sbg.org/mailman/listinfo/coder-com
