News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of sto... by danieltillett on Thursday March 28, 2019 @01:21AM (#19509491)
No you can’t be compelled to give evidence against yourself in a normal criminal case. You can be compelled to give evidence in a royal commission hearing and that evidence can be used to prosecute you in a subsequent criminal case.
Re:Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of sto... by zaphirplane on Thursday March 28, 2019 @08:33AM (#19511521)
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.lawyersweekly.com.au/pol...

“Section 6DD of the Act provides that, where a witness is compelled by a summons to give evidence to the Royal Commission, that evidence isn’t admissible against a natural person in any civil or criminal proceedings in any court of the Commonwealth, or of a state or territory. It is, however, admissible against a corporation. ”

Re:Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of sto... by danieltillett on Thursday March 28, 2019 @06:33PM (#19517317)
Interesting. There is this very relevant paragraph which makes the immunity rather moot.

However, evidential immunity under s 6DD doesn’t protect clients (who have been compelled to give evidence to the Royal Commission) from a regulator, such as ASIC, using their evidence as a springboard to gather secondary or derivative evidence, and using that derivative evidence against them.

Re:Microsoft says encryption laws make companies wary of sto... by kdtsh on Thursday March 28, 2019 @06:39AM (#19510906)
Source? I'd guess that that evidence would be inadmissible in a criminal case.