This week, the majority of international publications were overwhelmed with a new wave of an unprecedented political decision. But what’s happened? Another Facebook disclosure? No. New Russian hacker attack? No! Everything is much simpler.
On Thursday, Australia’s government passed the new "Assistance and Access Bill 2018," which is considered by many IT giants as a threat to private correspondence and a disgusting violation of civil rights.
How bad is it?
It’s bad. The new bill will force tech companies “to help” Australian authorities decrypt users’ private data. In foreseeable future, it could represent a major blow to data privacy elsewhere in the world as well. Thus Australia is trying to “fight dangerous terrorist organizations.”
In fact, everything looks a little bit different. It doesn't appear that Australia really intends to combat the terrorist threat since, so far, it is only known that the state will fine up to $10 million companies that don’t comply with these requirements. There are no talks about restricting the activities of companies for not providing confidential information.
Perhaps, in this way, the Australian government is trying to prevent a repetition of the events that happened in 2014 in Sydney. Nevertheless, as a world practice shows, disclosing personal data and its deciphering doesn’t help to deter terrorist attacks at all.
Why? Because they are still happening!
Russia, for example, in its time already passed the Yarovaya law, that is obliging IT companies to provide to law enforcement agencies, on request all confidential information, without notifying the owner itself.
The Durov brothers (founders of the Russian popular analog of FB — social network VK) left Russia and created a new service (Telegram), which is, however, remain being blocked on the territory of Russia, but nevertheless it is in a great demand all over the world. If you read this article you might probably have it on your smartphone.
More and more often, governments all over the world are calling for the strict Internet regulation in order to fight against the terrorist threat. Anyway, so far no initiative against terrorists has been implemented in such a way that it does not violate civil rights.
Thus, it is not surprising, that for many countries cryptocurrency is a new threat, although the IMF has already admitted that new financial assets don’t pose a threat to the global economy.
How long will the crypto space exist in its initial way? It depends on how well governments can tighten the screws in it.