'Hacking' To Be Declared Illegal
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Wed Oct 25, 2000 08:53 AM
from the heard-this-one-before dept.
from the heard-this-one-before dept.
sowalsky writes sent us an MSNBC story that talks about hacking being declared illegal. Talks about the difference between hacking and cracking,
but more importantly, how the Draft Cybercrime Treaty would make things like BugTraq illegal, as publishing exploits would be aiding and abetting.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
'Hacking' to be Declared Illegal
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 495 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
This is total and complete bullshit. (Score:3)
Further, remember that Full Disclosure lists like BugTraq keep vendors honest. These lists force vendors not only to admit their bugs, but also pressures them to release fixes quickly and not sweep problems under the rug.
- Jay Beale, Lead Developer, Bastille Linux
Don't forget... (Score:3)
Nevermind that the "War on Drugs" is the most blatent constitutional violation that ever existed. What I put into my own body is my own goddamn choice, thank you.
And you thought you lived in a free country.
Please, vote Libertarian [lp.org] and put an end to this madness.
Crime pervention is what keeps out the bad guys (Score:3)
Because it has more bugs? No. Because it is closed source? Noooooo. Because Microsoft owns it? Of course not.
Because Unix is much more manageable than Windows. That is what it makes Unix more secure. Even Linux has some ENORMOUS bugs on what concerns security. But here the reaction time is tremendously more faster than Windows. Even in times when Solaris was purely closed source, people managed to react more rapidly to any security threat.
Windows possesses a dumb interface that pretends to be "complete". However tons of backdoors/bugs are concealed inside this interface. You can't reach them in most cases because Windows interface is too restricted to allow control of many inner systems. So if one breaks in you can only face the fact.
Sincerly I was admired for a situation I fell in. When Windows ruled here, 1/3 of our Internet population played only one thing: "Hack Windows!" Because many found a series of backdoors and we couldn't do anything against that. Now, on Linux there was a HOLE that remained for approximately 6 monthes. You know? No one ever noted it. Why this? Because in the first month of Linux Era people got real hassled, as we reacted momentarly to any break. In the end, only 2-3 people out of 700 "crackers" remained. Btw ee don't touch them as we are afraid of the full extinction of this species...
Now most of this work is made 80% on the basis of analysis/studies/implementations of security systems. And this includes scanning & testing break-ins. Only a 5% are real "healing after the fire". If this law comes up, all this goes into the trashcan...
There's No Such Thing as a "Hacking Tool".... (Score:3)
Re:This is so ridiculous. (Score:3)
My suspicion is that any politician who clearly states that the state cannot usually protect you -- there are always people who will not be deterred -- but can often only help clean up the mess afterwards, is going to lose a LOT of votes.
Never mind that, if memory serves, courts have ruled that you are not entitled to the expectation of comprehensive police protection; you cannot sue the police for failing to proactively protect you.
After alleged Crisis X, the question posed by reporters / worrying parents / etc is usually something like, "What will you do to make sure that Crisis X never happens again?". The clause "...while preserving our individual rights" generally doesn't come into play. We've seen it again and again -- after Columbine, the OK City bombing, and so forth.
Oh god. (Score:3)
You can compare an exploit to a fully-loaded weapon.
No you can not. A loaded gun will kill someone. Death, ends existance, heart discontinues to function. An exploit is used by script kiddies to change a webpage, piss off an admin.
This article pisses me off, it supports security through obscurity and that idea is horrible. Ugh. If I continue ranting anymore this will be -1 flamebait.
A posible suggestion. (Score:3)
I came up with the statement listed below. Let me know what you think.
Sirs and Ladies,
I have read much of your proposal and found that while it takes into account many things that should be done to aid in the arrest of parties engaged in illegal access and destruction of computer data, it does not mention or protect the need for corporations and individuals to attempt to access data on their own computer systems so as to determine their systems vulnerability to attack.
There is concern that normal security checking software and knowledge of common or popular systems used to defeat security would be made illegal by the provisions of your treaty. I and many others feel that only with thorough knowledge of the weaknesses and strengths of any computer or system of computers, can those computers or systems of computers be made more secure. If provisions of your treaty make the use of security checking software legally questionable then only those with illegal intent will use such software.
I ask that you make provisions within your treaty for the use of security checking software by individuals and corporations. I would ask that you make clear that it is the intent to do damage or cause harm that is illegal, not the means by which that harm is caused.
Sincerely,
David P. Zimmerman Bachelor Of Electronics Engineering Technology
Letter from the Commisar of Security (Score:3)
As the officer in charge of enforcing the new anti-hacking laws it is my duty to inform you that you are in violation of the law. No action will be taken at this time as we are trying to be nice and allow people an adjustment period. This note is part of that adjustment process. In the future you will have no warning.
To wit: you have been observed walking around your house seeking open windows and doors. Such activity can now only be legally done by a trained and licenced professional. Seeking possible illicit entry points into an abode is an obviously nefarious activity and will be prosecuted vigorously.
It has also come to our atttention that you possess not one, but several criminal devices known to the criminal world as "keys." Such devices whose only function is to circumvent high security mechanisms are blatently evidence of criminal intent and their possession * will not be tolerated.*
In the future you may call upon you local licenced security professional for dealing with such devices. Simply show your security access papers and proof of ownership of the security device and the dwelling to which they are attached, provide said security professional with fingerprints, and for a nominal fee he will " unlock" your security device.
Please be warned that we will be making followup calls on all persons employing such security professionals to make sure that everything remains on the up and up.
We appreciate your cooperation in these matters, but we're building a lot more jails just in case.
You have been warned.
Re:Don't forget... (Score:3)
I'd like to think that racism has gone away in this day in age, but considering that fully 11 percent of black males in their 20s and early 30s are incarcerated, its easy to see that it hasn't.
Not to mention that our prisons are so bad a popular movie like Office Space can refer to them as "pound me up the ass" prisons - and no one questions the joke.
The war on drugs has turned this country from a country I was proud to be a citizen of to the most opressive, human-rights-violating nation in the world.
I watch the sea.
I saw it on TV.
Re:Thank goodness! (Score:3)