Australian parliament passes encryption laws unamended
Some of the comments so far seem to suggest that this bill would require software to include backdoors.  However, it looks like [the bill's PDF](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bi...) includes:> Division 7—Limitations> 317ZG Designated communications provider must not be required to implement or build a systemic weakness or systemic vulnerability etc.> (1) A technical assistance notice or technical capability notice must not have the effect of:>  (a) requiring a designated communications provider to implement or build a systemic weakness, or a systemic vulnerability, into a form of electronic protection; or (b) preventing a designated communications provider from rectifying a systemic weakness, or a systemic vulnerability, in a form of electronic protection.>  (2) The reference in paragraph (1)(a) to implement or build a systemic weakness, or a systemic vulnerability, into a form of electronic protection includes a reference to implement or build a new decryption capability in relation to a form of electronic protection.> (3) The reference in paragraph (1)(a) to implement or build a systemic weakness, or a systemic vulnerability, into a form of electronic protection includes a reference to one or more actions that would render systemic methods of authentication or encryption less effective.These limitations would seem to imply that the bill can't require a "systemic weakness", either by introducing a new one or prohibiting the patching of an existing one, which would seem to suggest that end-to-end crypto wouldn't be affected.Is this a correct reading?  Or are there concerns that the government might, say, require end-to-end crypto to be vulnerable to a government-held golden key?---Edit:  Part of the text,> to implement or build a new decryption capability in relation to a form of electronic protection, sounds like it's prohibiting golden-key-based schemes.