[Linux-aus] Grant Application from Fraser Tweedale for Support the myGov Code Generator source code FOI review
Info
info at petermoulding.com
Sat Jul 18 09:11:36 AEST 2026
I agree on the need to fight for transparency.
Australia is about to replace entry cards with an app. On return from my next trip, I will be forced
to install an application. Where is the code for review?
Establishing a precedent will help fight for a public review of this new app.
Peter Moulding
On 16/7/26 22:23, Jonathan Oxer via linux-aus wrote:
> I fully support this initiative by Fraser and would like to see the grant approved for the full amount.
>
> Linux Australia is generally seen as having a primary role within the Open Source community as a
> facilitator of conferences and events. However, it has also undertaken other roles in the past
> including lobbying, such as during the period of the introduction of the Australia-United States
> Free Trade Agreement (AUSFTA) way back in 2004/5. I believe that supporting initiatives such as
> Fraser's are directly in line with the values and mission of the organisation:
>
> https://linux.org.au/about-us/values/ <https://linux.org.au/about-us/values/>
>
> It's easy to let issues like this slide. When someone is willing to step up and take a stand, we as
> a community should support them.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jonathan Oxer
>
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2026 at 21:08, Linux Australia Website via linux-aus <linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
> <mailto:linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au>> wrote:
>
> Your Email Address: frase at frase.id.au <mailto:frase at frase.id.au>
> Project name: Support the myGov Code Generator source code FOI review
> Grant Type: Project Grant
> Aim of the project: I am applying for a grant of $5,000 to help cover litigation costs in a
> Freedom of Information review at the Administrative Review Tribunal. The matter is *Tweedale and
> CEO, Services Australia*, file 2025/4916. I applied for review of Services Australia’s access
> refusal decision in relation to my request for access to the source code of the myGov Code
> Generator app, a (now retired) mobile app published by Services Australia for myGov login MFA
> (TOTP). The case involves critical questions about government transparency and software
> security, the validity of “security by obscurity” arguments in this context, and the benefits
> and consequences of governments granting access to the source code of applications they develop
> and expect citizens to run on their devices.
> Much more detail about this matter, and regular updates, are available at https://openmygov.au
> <https://openmygov.au>.
> The outcomes of this legal proceeding and my associated efforts will include:
> * Precedent: A binding or persuasive administrative law decision regarding the accessibility of
> government-developed source code under Australian law, and the validity of “security by
> obscurity” arguments for refusing access.
> * openmygov.au: continued free, unhindered public access to all disclosable submissions,
> evidence, expert witness reports, decisions and other documents, and a chronicle of the conduct
> of this case—in other words, a legal toolkit for future open-source FOI litigation in Australia
> (and possibly useful elsewhere)
> I am happy to answer any questions or provide further information to Council and/or the Linux
> Australia membership in support of this application.
> ## Risks and disclosures
> ### Impact on LA funding and government relations
> Impact: Actively financing public-interest litigation against a major Federal Government agency
> may have a chilling effect on future sponsorship opportunities for LA-auspiced events, or
> otherwise introduce friction in LA’s interactions with Government.
> Mitigation: Contributing to the costs of this litigation does not enjoin LA as a party or
> subject LA to any risks of further direct costs. Also, the matter and the purpose of the review
> is aligned with Linux Australia’s values and purpose and is being pursued in the public
> interest; it is unlikely to be perceived as frivilous or vexatious.
> ### The Tribunal decides against transparency
> Impact: Should the Tribunal agree with the Respondent’s “security by obscurity” arguments and
> refuses access, it sets an unfortunate precedent.
> Mitigation: This is barely worse than the status quo, where agencies refuse access for these
> reasons anyway, but those decisions are not challenged. Grounds for appeal (judicial review) in
> Federal Court will be considered, although costs would be in another order of magnitude and may
> be prohibitive. Win or lose, the community will have an extensive and durable record of and
> playbook for FOI litigation involving open source and cybersecurity matters.
> ### Disclosure of EO2027 treasurer role
> I am a core organising team member and the appointed Treasurer for the Everything Open 2027
> conference, which is an official subcommittee of Linux Australia. I have no influence over grant
> funding decisions, and conference money is managed in complete separate accounts.
> Estimated cost breakdown of the project: Through a successful Pozible crowdfunding campaign
> early in 2026, and an ongoing Chuffed campaign, I raised approximately $20,000 to help with the
> costs of this litigation. Though I always expected costs to exceed this amount, procedural
> battles over Services Australia’s national security claims and applications for confidentiality
> orders over critical evidence have depleted these funds sooner than expected. We are now in an
> intense phase, finalising the evidence and submissions. The substantive hearing is listed for 3
> days from 2–4 September in Melbourne.
> Cumulative costs by the end of this proceeding will certainly exceed $30,000, and could end up
> in the range of $40,000–$50,000. The shortfall between funds raised (so far) through
> crowdfunding campaigns and the eventual costs is therefore at least $10,000 and possibly much
> more. In addition to Wise Law’s fees (the biggest expense by far), my costs include travel to
> and accommodation in Melbourne for the hearing, and for a one-day strategy meeting back in
> February. (Wise Law and both expert witnesses are based in Melbourne.)
> I am applying for a **$5,000** grant to help close this gap. I would gratefully accept any
> lesser amount the Linux Australia Council deems appropriate, as I recognise that the requested
> amount is a significant proportion of the 2026 grants program budget, and I do not want to
> disadvantage or preclude other worthwhile grant opportunities.
> Project team details: I (Fraser) am a free software developer and active member of the
> Australian open source community. Most of my work over the last decade has been on open source
> PKI, authentication and identity management solutions, and supply chain security. I will give
> evidence in this proceeding on open source public policy and law in Australia and around the
> world, and on cybersecurity matters.
> I have engaged two expert witnesses to assist the Tribunal, both known to the LA membership and
> Australian open source community: cryptographer and electoral security researcher Dr Vanessa
> Teague; and Dr Peter Serwylo for his Android expertise and involvement in the F-Droid project.
> Vanessa and Peter are providing their services free of charge.
> My legal representative in this proceeding is Jason Bosland of Wise Law, a boutique cyber law
> firm based in Melbourne. Jason is an expert in administrative law, and he has a good grasp on
> the technical aspects of the case. Wise Law are generously providing their services at a 50%
> discount, in recognition of the public interest nature of this case. Jason has also employed a
> paralegal to help with preparation of my case; this will reduce costs because the volume of
> evidence and submissions is significant.
> First Name: Fraser
> Last Name: Tweedale
> Email Address: frase at frase.id.au <mailto:frase at frase.id.au>
> A statement including a willingness to provide regular project updates on the project: I publish
> detailed information and updates about this case at https://openmygov.au/ <https://openmygov.au/
> >. All information I can publish, I do, including submissions, evidence, and Tribunal decisions
> and orders. It will form a significant and valuable artifact for Freedom of Information
> applicants or litigants, and people interested in the intersection of free/open source software,
> public policy, and administrative law.
> I am committed to absolute transparency with respect to all funds received (from all sources)
> and all expenditure, including publication of invoices and bank statements (I have a dedicated
> bank account for this purpose).
> _______________________________________________
> linux-aus mailing list
> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au <mailto:linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au>
> https://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus <https://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/
> listinfo/linux-aus>
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to
> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au <mailto:linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-aus mailing list
> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
> https://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to
> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au
More information about the linux-aus
mailing list