Bail Conditions For Arrested Australian Activists Demand The Impossible: No Using Encrypted Applications
from the encryption-in-the-land-down-under dept
The Australian government doesn’t care much for encryption. It has, for years, tried to legislate encryption out of the picture. A law passed in 2018 gives the government the power to compel encryption-breaking efforts from tech companies.
The law survived a cursory review by the Parliamentary Joint Committee. Its 2021 report said the law was completely legal. And, even though it found oversight of the new encryption-breaking powers was inadequate, the law was a good thing for the government. Very little was said about the people affected by the law or the tech companies being forced to make their offerings less secure in Australia.
As Australian law enforcement sees it, the only people who actually need encrypted services and devices are criminals. And that’s why suspected criminals (who have only been accused of crimes at this point) are being forced to give up their access to encrypted services, as Ariel Bogle reports for ABC (the Australian one) News.
Since late June, Greg Rolles must produce on demand his computer and mobile phone for police inspection, and tell them his passwords.
He is not allowed to use any encrypted messaging apps, like Signal or WhatsApp. He can only have one mobile phone.
And there is a list of 38 people, many of whom are his friends, who he’s not allowed to associate with in any way — even, another activist found, liking a post on social media.
Rolles is allegedly a member of activist group Blockade Australia. The group has been known to engage in highly disruptive protests. Those often involve immobilizing vehicles and equipment. And there have allegedly been incidents where police officers (or at least the vehicles they’re in) have been attacked.
Thanks to a new anti-protest law, the government is able to treat even more innocuous protests in a heavy-handed manner. As this post detailing Blockade and its interaction with the new law notes, some members are being hit with 10-year prison sentences. Others have been arrested for vague violations like “planning to block traffic.”
The bail conditions are equally heavy-handed. As noted above, arrested Blockade members have been forbidden from using encrypted messaging apps or associating with each other. One member found themselves in violation of their bail conditions simply for sending a “thumbs up” emoji in response to a Facebook post by another member. (Bail violation charges were ultimately dropped for this action, but it still involved the person being accosted by police, detained, and booked.)
The restrictions imposed on Rolle have cut him off from the Afghanistan residents his church was providing assistance to. They communicated via WhatsApp, which is no longer an option for Rolle.
But it’s not just WhatsApp and Signal. Plenty of apps (and internet services) utilize encryption. And the bail terms are vague enough it could prevent Rolle and others like him from living somewhat normal lives while out on bail.
Large swathes of the internet are encrypted, which simply means that information is converted into code to protect it from unwanted access. Apps from online banking to streaming services are typically encrypted.
“Encryption is everywhere because it’s a fundamental part of keeping modern communications technology secure and functional,” a spokesperson for Electronic Frontiers Australia said.
“[That includes] essentially any modern device, including laptops, mobile phones, ATMs, TVs, PlayStations, and government websites such as myGov, Medicare, and Centrelink.”
The bail conditions forbid arrestees (who are only accused of crimes at this point) from “possessing an encrypted application/media application.” That covers a lot of ground, especially since so many sites providing services from banking to streaming to news delivery prefer to route users through proprietary apps — apps that generally utilize encryption in one form or another.
Even those who feel the courts’ hearts are in the right place — attempting to prevent the planning of future protests that may be disruptive and/or turn violent — feel these conditions go too far. The head attorney at the Shopfront Youth Legal Centre (Jane Sanders) stated this imposed a possibly unlawful restriction on the rights of people who’ve only been accused of criminal activity.
“To effectively shut down the right to political communication with these conditions, it seems extreme to me,” Ms Sanders said.
Well, as they say, the extremity is the point. The government has already deemed encryption to a tool of criminals and terrorists. The passage of a law increasing punishments for protest-related activity was meant to deter dissent. These new bail conditions drive it home: speak up against the government and/or its favored corporations and you can expect to have your life derailed, your communications severely restricted, and your freedom while bailed eliminated at a moment’s notice.
Filed Under: australia, bail, bail conditions, blockade australia, encryption, greg rolles, protests
Comments on “Bail Conditions For Arrested Australian Activists Demand The Impossible: No Using Encrypted Applications”
Encrypted "application"?
The “application” isn’t encrypted. It uses encryption.
Re: Nothing changes
Not a useful distinction, because no one in the government will care about such a small wording issue. Everyone understands that whatever the lawmakers meant by “encrypted application” is closer to “app which uses encryption” than to “app whose data representation is encrypted”.
Maybe Australia is playing the long game to get rid of DRM? We know they were annoyed by DVD regions – https://www.smh.com.au/technology/are-regionfree-dvd-players-legal-20120201-1qs42.html
Re:
this situation isn’t about DRM in any way
Re: Re:
You’re right: The protester bail conditions situation isn’t about DRM.
You’re also wrong: the GP mentions DRM specifically in the context of:
1) The Australian government wants to get rid of encryption
2) DRM uses encryption
3) therefore, the Australian government will oppose DRM
Unfortunately, the Australian government is … not wrong, in the context of DRM. As the post above said…
Re: Re: Re:
“therefore, the Australian government will oppose DRM”
if you actually believe that, I’ve got a bridge in the Sahara to sell you
Re: Re: Re:2
Whoooooosh.
Re: Re: Re:
“As Australian law enforcement sees it, the only people who actually need encrypted services and devices are criminals.”
Cool, then according to the AUS government most people who work in enterprise businesses are criminals. I’m sure that won’t backfire…
Re: Re: Re:2
Considering how many Australian politicians cough six cough have been arrested for possessing child pornography in the past, that’s not exactly a stretch.
Not no nothing
No driving newer cars, streaming, internet, DMV, government kiosks, ATM machines, digital door locks, phones, working at any job, and absolutely NO baseball signals.
Re: Payments too
Credit cards too!
Can they even use the internet in general? Every browser defaults to HTTPS which I’m pretty sure uses an encrypted data stream.
Re:
Can they even use a mobile/cell phone, default is for phone to base station connection to be encrypted.
Then there is the automatic update check of the OS itself, that is probably making a https request somewhere…
let’s see how far this goes when Govt sites and/or banking services have to be found guilty of using encryption, Let’s see pretty much all of Australia’s internet fall because only criminals and terrorists uses encryption.
This is fully unenforcable.
Re:
The Australian Government clearly wants this man to be used as an example to never oppose the Australian Government, regardless of how one protests.
Ah, I see, totalitarianism is working as intended.
This man is now an example of how the Australian government will deal with activitism.
Next up on the list, criticism of the government or any political parties will be considered protests, and treated as such.
(I am NOT pleased at all, btw).
Let's return to the good old days
I guess this is Australia’s way of restoring their nation’s culture to its historical origins: populated entirely by criminals.
Re:
I guess this is Australia’s way of restoring their nation’s culture to its historical origins: populated entirely by criminals.
I rather suspect that Australia’s First Nations Peoples would politely request that you clarify the timeline on this hoary old chestnut.
Re: Re:
That and a significant portion of the non-male adult convicts were shuffled off from britaons debtor prisons and workhorses.
How do you manage to make more citizens question what the fsck the government is up to??
You do stupid shit like arrest people over an emoji.
From the country that refused to let the media report the name of a convicted child predator, but has no problem allowing the media to report on these people who are merely accused not convicted.
Re:
If anything, it just proves that the Nelson Mandela approach to activism is stone fucking dead.
New Government
As of the end of May this year we have a new government.
One that is very left.
I hold up no hope.