North Korean IT workers have infiltrated the Fortune 500

My thoughts on this as an Australian software engineer: how could they possibly “order” me to “install a backdoor”? To change a production system, I need an issue in the issue tracker, I need a PR, I need a colleague to review and approve it-if I’m not allowed to call it “install backdoor at Australian government’s demand”, what am I going to call it? How am I suppose to justify it to the reviewer? How do I respond to their questions? How do I convince them to approve it? “I’m sorry I’m not allowed to tell you why this PR is needed” is not going to get it approved

And in the (I think highly implausible) event the government did order me to do such a thing-first I’d insist it was impossible (due to the kind of internal controls I’ve already mentioned), and if they wouldn’t accept that answer, then I’d resign rather than do it. I don’t think the law can stop you from quitting your job, and once you quit, you are no longer able to comply with any such orders.

It seems to me like one of these laws which has disturbing wording but is going to be very difficult for the authorities to utilise in practice.

(Disclaimer: of course I don’t speak for my employer, etc)

As for how they'd force you, just like any intelligence agency, they'd start with carrots. They'd offer you money, or the chance to feel you were serving your country (both are free to the Australian government, and likely more effective than a double ration of wheat). They'd have you do very innocent, justifiable things at first. They'd work their way up to higher demands. If you got cold feet, they'd tell you you were in too deep. They'd then consider the sticks. They'd threaten to expose your spying, or release some other compromat. They'd arrest you or a family member on a he-said-the-cops-said enemy-of-the-people crime like drugs, child pornography or terrorism, and make it clear that only your full cooperation would see a release.

Nobody thinks the Australian government relies on this kind of thing as much as NK, and the checks and balances of a democracy make it too expensive to do this at an industrial scale. But you'd be foolish if you thought the state doesn't have these capabilities, and the complete willingness to use them for matters of national security, and the ability to make it "legal", perhaps by pardoning people or not cooperating with any court.

The state is a coercive institution, but seeing how Australia is a liberal democracy with a constitution I would want to see some actual proof of threatening families.

What you are describing here is something any country could do – yes, it is conceivable that Australia's intelligence agencies could use bribery/harassment/threats/blackmail/etc to turn Australian citizens into unwilling spies – but the same is true of the UK, the US, France, Germany, whatever.

The thing that people are calling out Australia over, is a law which says a court can order someone to install a secret backdoor, and furthermore order them not to tell (almost) anyone about it. [0] And I'm sceptical that law could be used in the way you describe – e.g. "They'd offer you training on how to bypass the controls" – the law says a court can order you to install a backdoor – it doesn't say it can order you to attend a training course on how to "bypass controls".

Keep in mind, while proceedings are under seal, you are allowed to retain a lawyer, and your lawyer can make legal arguments before the judge, and can appeal the judge's rulings. IANAL, but would a judge rule that a power to order someone to install a backdoor extends to ordering them to attend a government-run training course on how to deceive their employer? Even if a judge did rule that way, would the appellate courts uphold the ruling?

Or, similarly – "They'd get you to exfiltrate the code and the product roadmap" – does a legal power to order someone to install a backdoor, extend to a legal power to order them to hand over generalised confidential information of their employer? Or similarly – "They'd have you do very innocent, justifiable things at first" – does a legal power to order someone to install a backdoor, extend to a legal power to order them to do "very innocent, justifiable things" which don't in themselves directly contribute to installing any backdoor?

And, as I said, if your lawyer can't talk the court out of it – resign. Will a judge hold that a judicial power to order to the installation of a backdoor extends to ordering a person not to resign their job?

Get a medical certificate saying you can't work. Get yourself admitted to a private psychiatric hospital on the grounds that the stress of this secret government order has caused you to have a nervous breakdown / panic episode / suicidal ideation / etc. (I think if I ever were issued such a secret government order, it really would have that kind of extreme detrimental impact on my mental health, I wouldn't be faking it.) I think a lot of psychologists/psychiatrists/etc would be very sympathetic to your plight. What's a judge supposed to do if they have a psychiatrist testifying that you are medically unfit to comply with the order, or return to the job which the order is associated with?

[0] You are explicitly allowed to tell your personal legal counsel.