Slashdot Mirror
'Hacking' To Be Declared Illegal
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.
to tell industry and our political figures that we WILL NOT stand for such things, and will fight them
every step of the way!
That's the problem, though. We need to do this and we need to do that, but, when it comes right down to it, how many of us actually get off our fucking asses and do anything? How many people who constantly whine and bitch as their freedoms are slowly usurped from them also support the EFF through donations? How many write (not email, WRITE) their congressman every time a boneheaded bill is introduced? Judging by the outcome of trials and the passage of various and sundry laws in the past few years, I'm willing to bet the number is pretty damned low.
If bitching could really solve problems, slashdot would have ended world hunger by now.
- A.P. (and, yes, I support the EFF. You should too.)
--
* CmdrTaco is an idiot.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
A loaded gun will kill someone.
No, a loaded gun might kill someone, as will any number of other tools. I'm sure any enterprising individual would be able to find a way to kill someone with the contents of, say, a kitchen. Or a game closet. Or a pencil case. Or their car. Or a thimbleful of water.
This brushes one of the things that really torques me off. A lot of people, whether they realize it or not, ignorantly assume that bullets have some magical property that causes them to instantly kill someone if they're hit with them. (Case in point, UPS guy to the front desk of my apartment complex when delivering a couple cases of ammo: "Whoever that guy is, you sure don't want to piss him off.")
This simply isn't true. Yes, if you're shot, there's a chance you'll die. But unless it's a well-placed shot, it isn't likely. Especially when using non-hollowpoint bullets.
Not to mention, all of my gun-weilding friends are some of the most responsible people I know. They're well aware of the potential for abuse that owning a firearm has, and always practice safe handling techniques, and pass on this knowledge and concern about safety whenever they introduce a new person to how much fun it is to blow away a paper target or go plinking. (You have no idea how satisfying it is to shoot surplus tax forms on Tax Day.) Coincidentally, these very same people are almost all highly skilled technically, and most are concerned with computer security in one way or another, and use knowledge of exploits and "hacking" tools to accomplish their day jobs.
A loaded gun is probably less dangerous than a fueled-up car. And as far as children are concerned, less dangerous than any of: a pool, stairs, household cleaners, bicycles, a busy street.
One of the problems, as I see it, is that there are just too many script kiddies out there who act without thinking. They have no sense of responsibility, so they have no way of realizing the harm their actions cause, or worse, delight in it. This doesn't mean that the rest of us should be prevented from using the same tools for useful purposes. It means we should make the victims less likely to be victims, through empowerment. That means publishing exploits, pressuring vendors to release fixes, and being constantly vigilant against future threats. Sticking our collective heads in the sand and loudly proclaiming there isn't a problem will just make it easier for the more pragmatic, less socially responsible to sneak up on us from behind.
(damn, I didn't think I could pull that back on topic)
--
It's pretty pathetic when karma can drop when you do nothing
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken
There's something that some of y'all are missing here. The distinction between what a treaty is, and what a law is. Note that my use of the word "state" is synonymous with "nation" vis a vis "nation-state".
Basically: a treaty is an agreement between nations that amounts to a contract such that if X happens, then Y will occur. For example, one of the provisions of the NATO treaty is that if -any- member state is attacked, then retaliation is expected of all other members (ie: if Russia were to invade Germany, we'd be essentially obligated to wage war on Russia). Treaties can -also- state that each member state will agree to pass laws that will do X,Y,Z. That's what this one appears to be.
A Treaty -is not- a law. However, due to it's nature as a contract, it can seem like it.
A law, on the other hand, is legislation passed by the government of a given state. So, if the US were to sign on to this treaty (which thus far looks like it's primarily a European thing), we would be obligated by treaty to pass laws that meat the treaty's demands. The wonderful thing about the US signing treaties is that a treaty must be ratified by the Senate BEFORE the US will recognize our signature on the document as valid.
IANAL, but this is what I seem to recall.
The only thing that is objectionable (but is pretty damn objectionable) in the treaty is the two lines making illegal:
"the production, sale, procurement for use, import, distribution or otherwise making available of a device, including a computer program, designed or adapted [specifically] [primarily] [particularly] for the purpose of committing any of the offences established in accordance with Article 2 - 5;"
Everywhere else in the treaty actions are qualified so that you must also have had the _intent_ to break the law (breaking the law in this case is essentially causing criminal damage).
If that qualification was added to this particular clause the whole thing would be pretty unobjectionable, viz:
"the production, sale, procurement for use, import, distribution or otherwise making available of a device, including a computer program, designed or adapted [specifically] [primarily] [particularly] for the purpose of committing any of the offences established in accordance with Article 2 - 5, with the intent of causing such an offence;"
The lawyers would (as usual) have a field day with proving intent, though, but researchers/hobbyists/security specialists would be safe.
(Associated Press - Alcatraz) Today, in an effort to end the pampered style of geek prison life that so many convicted criminals have been accustomed to, The Rock was reopened for service today.
"Hey, these guys managed to get T3 lines into every cell, and the guard door system was a joke, we think that they managed to hack the system so that it would let the doors open whenever they wanted.", said Red Bull, the head of HACK (H)ackers (A)re (C)riminals (K)ill 'em.
"I wished that we could have continued using the death penalty against these evil terrorists and child pornographers, but the ACLU felt it necessary to defend these scumbags. Something about 'the punishment not fitting the crime' or other such nonsense"
"Look, these felons have it better in prison, hell, their cells are over 4 times as big as a typical cubicle is, and they get in house laundry, THEY DONT EVER HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT DOING LAUNDRY AGAIN, and look this doesnt seem like a big point, but I've been to busts on these evil hackers, and their laundry piles up to huge amounts before they decide to do it. It's inhuman, I tell you.
"I just wanted to make this prison term as much of a punishment as possible, so we are cutting these geeks off of their lifeline, and going back to all old-style technology. No computers, no net access, barely electricity.
Maybe now these felons will get what they deserve.
Ignorance is Strength!
Freedom is slavery!
Peace is War!
Hacking is Evil!
tagline
... hi bingo
Washington, D.C. - In a stunning development just announced today, the United States, along with twenty other European nations, will soon make 'yo mama' jokes illegal. Without any regard to issues of free speech or free thought, representatives at the meeting have decided to make the words 'yo mama', when used in a joking context, a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison and/or a $100,000 (or 100.000 Euros) fine.
One stunned joker was quoted as saying "No way, dawg! Ain't no way they gonna take away my right to laugh at yo' mama!"
Neither US or European representatives from the summit could be reached for comment.
Please stay tuned for updates to this breaking story.
-----
Check out the text to the actual treaty here. Looks like the newest revision is only available as a Word doc, although there's a slightly older version available in HTML. Something worth noting, though: contrary to the implication of the article, the word "hack" or "hacking" does not appear anywhere in this draft. The "Illegal Access" section contains the phrase "A Party may require that the offence be committed either by infringing security measures or with the intent of obtaining computer data or other dishonest intent." IANAL, but I think this pretty much outlaws all white hat stuff.
One of the interesting things about this, also, is the fact that it's a treaty. It basically says that all nations who sign/agree to it will create a set of a laws that accomplish the goals laid out in it. The actual laws themselves will be created by the countries affected by it, and those are what are really going to make "hacking", "cracking" or anything else illegal.
End of lesson. You may press the button.
Do you really, really want to do something about this?
Then take off your asbestos underwear, sit down at your computer, read the actual draft treaty in it's current form, think about exactly why you feel this is a bad idea, write it out, revise it, proofread it, and send it to daj@coe.int for review by the people who are actually working on the treaty itself.
This is the wonder of the Internet, folks. They want your input on this one.
I can assure you, though, that they aren't scanning through Slashdot "this is so fscking typical" posts to get that feedback.
If you care about this issue, save your flames, write out a thoughtful letter, send it to the commission, and post it here for others to read and expand upon. But for crying out loud, do something that actually has some chance of making a difference.
Obliteracy: Words with explosions