Aussie Bill Would Ban Hacking Tools, Virus Code

rtscts writes: "The Australian govt. is at it again: 'Under the bill, which proposes seven new computer offences carrying jail terms of up to 10 years, it is illegal to possess hacker toolkits, scanners and virus code.'" The bill is called the Cybercrime Bill 2001; according to this article, it "does allow the Defence Signals Directorate (DSD) and Australian Security Intelligence Organisation(ASIS) to hack legally. It also forces companies by law to reveal passwords, keys, codes, cryptographic and steganographic methods used to protect information."

Comments

Define 'tools'

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't this sort of make Unix illegal? I mean, every unix I've heard of pretty much comes with a suit of network utilities, of which scanners are a usual componenet.

Interesting...

[dr_labrat]

By owning a DVD you can theoretically go to jail, because you can be ordered to reveal the key that encrypts the data...

That puts most people between a rock and a hard place, because then they would have to use hacking tools (DeCSS) to get the key...

No, its still a problem

[werdna]

Most crimes have both a factual component (actus reus) and a state of mind component (mens rea). The Mens Rea for a crime may be intent, knowledge, recklessness, negligence and at times (such as for statutory rape) strict liability.

In theory, a state of mind must be proved just as the factual elements, beyond a reasonable doubt. In practice, a jury is instructed by the judge that they may infer intent from any of the circumstances in which the crime was committed. Unless the defendant takes the stand in her own defense and convinces the jury to the contrary, and thereby submitting herself to a blistering cross-examination, the prosecutor will simply ask the jury to ask themselves any number of rhetorical questions.

Mens rea is a non-issue. With enough stuff on your disk, intent can be "proved" by twisting circumstantial evidence to the satisfaction of the jury. To a jury -- the mere fact of the trial is taking place evidences (which would not otherwise be admissible) the proposition that the government thinks the defendant is guilty.

"with intent" is better than strict liability. But in practice, its grievously dangerous. Anyone possessing tools is ultimately at the mercy of the whim of the authorities. The cost of a criminal defense (which no intelligent person, however good an advocate, should attempt to do by themselves) will never be compensable and can itself be more ruinous than any fine.

In short, this law an authoritarian nightmare -- it serves no good purpose, will actually chill productive anti-hacking technology.

Re:Anyone have a copy of the bill?

[skware]

These are the 2600.org.au mirrors of the bill, they are probably available somewhere on http://www.austlii.edu.au/ Australia's awesome law resource with searchable case law and legislation, reportedly the best law site in the world.
http://www.2600.org.au/misc/cybercrime/cybercrime- bill-2001-firstreading.pdf
http://www.2600.org.au/misc/cybercrime/cybercrime- bill-2001-explanatory-memoranda.pdf

The Australian government are clueless

[wolvie_]

The current Liberal government in power don't understand technology, and have been making this evident for years in every piece of legislation relating to the Internet. They fail to consider the technological, privacy, or fair competition implications of anything they do. A few examples:

• Legislation they cannot realistically enforce. Banning Internet gambling, attempting Internet censorship, making web caching illegal, making PlayStation mods illegal. Censorship laws have so far been a complete failure, with people circumventing them. Internet censorship is said to have cost $2.5 million, while providing no benefit. It's genuinely frightening that the people writing these laws have no knowledge of what they are trying to control.

• Partially privatising the previously Government-owned telco (49% so far) for political purposes, which has made them give clear priority to profit and share price over service. Access to affordable telecommunications in rural areas is getting gradually worse (though the private sector is helping). They restrict their broadband net access to 3Gb/month after selling it as unlimited, while ensuring they are the only available broadband provider for many Australians. They were force to give other carriers access to their DSL network, so they now sell wholesale network access at $69/month, while selling broadband DSL net access to consumers at $70/month (line + access + equipment), and placing limits on the service. Just today, they are refusing to give any rebate to a broadband customer who had a 13 day outage. Somehow the government don't see any of this as a problem, and still plan to sell the rest of Telstra.

• Various laws with no regard for the privacy of citizens, like allowing spies to crack systems, and remotely tap and alter data.

For what it's worth, even Microsoft realise they are hopeless. Hopefully they'll be voted out at the next election (probably later this year?), and this insanity will end.

Calm down people *please*

[cthugha]

Okay, from my reading of the Bill (PDF), it seems that the new offence is possession with intent (Schedule 1 lists the relevant amendments to the Criminal Code, you're looking for Part 10.7, Division 478.3). Means they have to prove you were going to commit a crime with the tool. It's a bit hard to prove that a sys admin who uses a particular tool for legit purposes was going to commit a crime.

As a matter of fact, given the legitimate usefulness of most 'cracker' tools, it seems that it would be quite difficult to prove that anyone was going to commit a crime unless you had a smoking-gun e-mail or other clear evidence of intent.

And in other news....

[TheOutlawTorn]

Australian officals have been puzzled by the sudden mass migration of technical personnel off the island continent. When asked to comment, Professor Lambert of Syndey U. stated "Usually we only see this sort of behaviour in rodents; and then only when there is some kind of immediate danger, such as a sinking ship..."

Hmmm...

[perlchimp]

They might need to start a penal colony, maybe on a large island or something, to put all the offenders.