I was just going off of the previous comment, that the govt would force some random developer to make changes in a company's codebase. Such a thing would be ridiculous for the reason I pointed out: there's no way to keep it secret.
Even if the govt approaches a C-level exec, I don't see how this would be kept a secret. The codebase is generally available within a company to everyone who has access, which for a large project is many people. Are they going to somehow swear all the devs in a department to secrecy? How do they enforce this? If the devs had security clearances and this job required keeping state secrets, that's one thing, but that's not what we're discussing here. If I were working in a civilian (non-clearance) job and the govt forced some nefarious changes into the codebase I was working on, I wouldn't feel any obligation to not inform the press.
>These orders can force people to hand over their passwords, their biometric data, or knowledge of any relevant systems and devices. They don’t just target the person suspected of a crime, but can also cover their associates, owners of the devices in question, systems administrators and those who have used the devices.
>Not complying with these requests under the SD Act can lead to up to 10 years imprisonment and an A$126,000 (US$88,212) fine.
>In a similar manner, the changes to the ASIO Act enable the Director-General to petition the Attorney-General to force individuals to provide the same kind of data. Refusing to comply can lead to up to 5 years of jail, or an A$63,000 (US$44,106) penalty. One of the biggest issues with the new powers under the ASIO Act is that there is no judicial oversight – the authorities never have to go before a judge to get permission.
>It’s worth noting that these powers can be used in the investigation of any crime with a maximum penalty of three years or more. It seems heavy-handed that someone who refuses to comply could potentially end up with a sentence that exceeds the penalty for the original crime.
>I wouldn't feel any obligation to not inform the press.
Worth noting that anyone who reported on it would face jail time as well.
All this stuff goes directly against the First Amendment which guarantees free speech. Australia of course has no constitutional right to free speech, but America does.
Even if the govt approaches a C-level exec, I don't see how this would be kept a secret. The codebase is generally available within a company to everyone who has access, which for a large project is many people. Are they going to somehow swear all the devs in a department to secrecy? How do they enforce this? If the devs had security clearances and this job required keeping state secrets, that's one thing, but that's not what we're discussing here. If I were working in a civilian (non-clearance) job and the govt forced some nefarious changes into the codebase I was working on, I wouldn't feel any obligation to not inform the press.