New national security laws giving authorities the power to intercept encrypted communications are likely to pass parliament by the end of the week despite ongoing concerns from global tech giants and Australian IT firms.

The new laws seek to modernise police powers in the age of the internet and smartphones but have been slammed by critics for being broad in scope, vague and potentially damaging to the security of the global digital economy.

Agencies like ASIO or the Australian Federal Police will have the ability to request telecommunication and tech companies help them with their investigations and compel companies to build ways to allow targeted access to encrypted communications data.

Among other things, the bill also gives powers to police to force you to open your smartphone for them.

Encryption underpins much of what we do online (including ensuring no one can see the saucy pics you send on WhatsApp) and it’s unclear how the world first laws would be implemented, and the overall security consequences to the safety of the internet.

MORE: Major doubts over how new surveillance powers would work

A Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security has been scrutinising the bill which the Coalition has been trying to push through. On Tuesday afternoon, the federal government and Labor came to an in-principle agreement on key parts of the bill, after both sides made concessions.

The laws will help security agencies nab terrorists, child sex offenders and other serious criminals, according to Attorney-General Christian Porter. About 95 per cent of people currently being surveilled by security agencies are using encrypted messages, he noted.

“This is a massive step forward for the Australian people, in ensuring our outstanding intelligence and security agencies are, in their words, back in the game,” he said.

One of the key changes prompted by Labor is that the bill must define what constitutes a “systemic weakness” in a device, something that remains an unclear sticking point.

“If the revised draft bill attempts to define ‘systemic weakness’ — as it should do — it is important that this definition not be so narrow that it allows substantial and dangerous back-doors to be ordered by enforcement agencies and yet escape being identified as systemic weaknesses,” said Communications Alliance CEO, John Stanton.

The opposition was also trying to limit the powers of the bill to cases involving child sex offences, homicide and terrorism as opposed to all federal crimes involving a three-year prison term.

After speaking out strongly against the bill earlier this week, Labor MP Tim Watts defended his party’s turnaround on the controversial legislation.

“I’d suggest that you wait and see our amendments before forming a conclusion,” he wrote to detractors on Twitter.

Robert Hudson, the president of Information Technology Professionals Association which was established to advance the understanding of ICT (information and communications technology) matters within corporate and government sectors in Australia, shot back saying the government’s rationale for the bill is delusional.

“‘Shred it, bin it, set the bin on fire, pretend that (we) weren’t ignorant enough to even consider a bill this stupid’ is the only worthy amendment,” he wrote.

“The (bill) weakens legitimate usage of encryption and does nothing to help prevent crime. Thinking otherwise is delusional.”

I honestly don't believe I've been this disappointed in our political system and its outcomes before.



Worse things have been done by our politicians, no doubt - but today, the sheer bloody-minded stupidity and refusal to take good counsel has floored me.#aabill #auspol — Robert Hudson (@manaz_d) December 4, 2018

The proposed changes still need to be signed off by parliament’s intelligence and security committee.

The opposition gave way on wanting to remove state police from the bill and on having an authorisation process the government says would have been too slow. Shadow attorney-general Mark Dreyfus says the draft laws are far from perfect and there are likely to be significant outstanding issues.

“But this compromise will deliver security and enforcement agencies the powers they say they need over the Christmas period, and ensure adequate oversight and safeguards,” he said on Tuesday. However due to a 28 day consultation period, government agencies wouldn’t actually be able to use the new powers in time for Christmas like the Coalition keeps saying is necessary.

A reminder that there's a 28-day waiting period on the new encryption bill. So even if these changes are signed into law tomorrow, the earliest they can be used is AFTER New Year's Day.



Just remember that when we hear - from all sides of politics - that we're safer over Xmas. — Shalailah Medhora (@shalailah) December 4, 2018

The latest changes also include greater oversight of the Technical Capability Notice powers in the bill.

Under such a notice, a company such as Facebook or Apple, for example, must build a new function to help police access suspects’ data, or face a fine.

The attorney-general and communications minister would need to authorise such a notice and where there was a dispute over whether a notice would create a systemic weakness, this would be determined by a former judge and a technical expert.

Mr Dreyfus said it was yet another example of Labor working responsibly to improve national security laws.

“I want to issue a call to the government — the trashing of bipartisan process and politicisation of national security that has occurred over the past month must never happen again,” he said in a statement.

Earlier, Mr Porter accused Mr Dreyfus in parliament of dragging the chain. “How much more constructive could the shadow attorney-general be if he put his considerable legal skills to reading the submissions, understanding what they say and acting on them appropriately and passing this counter-encryption bill this week,” Mr Porter said.

Under the proposed new laws, Australian government agencies could compel companies to provide technical information such as design specifications to help in an investigation, remove electronic protections, assist in accessing material on a device subject to a warrant and even build or install software or equipment that could help authorities gather information.

- With AAP