On 13/11/18 8:42 pm, Kim Holburn wrote:
On 2018/Nov/13, at 5:55 pm, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
DNSSEC proves that the answer has not been tampered with. It does not prevent
eavesdropping, but DNS over HTTPS or DNS over TLS do.
Yes, and neither of these have been rolled out to retail or domestic
Rural health experts are concerned the Federal Government has
overlooked how individuals and medical practitioners will manage a
digital health record in areas with little internet connectivity.
Aboriginal medical organisations have been working to ensure those
without internet access know
The Victorian government has released the agreement signed with China on
the Silk Road/Belt and Road Plan, 8 October:
https://www.dpc.vic.gov.au/index.php/news-publications/bri-mou#
However, the document was only provided as a scanned image, so I have
run converted it to searchable text:
Jim,
On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 15:16:33 AEDT Jim Birch wrote:
> I'm hearing what appear to me to be a lot of lot of fluffy and
> unsubstantiated claims around here. [...] A list of what you think are
> actual risks with a real chance of happening would help.
Many people, myself included,
> On 2018/Nov/13, at 5:55 pm, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
> On 13/11/18 4:57 pm, Kim Holburn wrote:
>> The problem is that DNS is currently basically broken. DNS requests go
>> unencrypted, in the clear and there is no kind of proof that the answer has
>> not been read or tampered with.
>>
>>
