Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Hackers are 'Terrorists' Under Ashcroft's New Act

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the it's-in-the-name-of-freedom-we-swear dept.

Carlos writes "Most computer crimes are considered acts of terrorism under John Ashcroft's proposed 'Anti-Terrorism Act,' according to this story on SecurityFocus. The Act would abolish the statute of limitations for computer crime, retroactively, force convicted hackers to give the government DNA samples for a special federal database, and increase the maximum sentence for computer intrusion to life in prison. Harboring or providing advice to a hacker would be terrorism as well. This is on top of the expanded surveillance powers already reported on. The bill could be passed as early as this week. I feel safer already."

5 of 1,021 comments (clear)

  1. My DNA? by Papa+Legba · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why in the world would they need DNA. I am pretty sure that no where in the specs for DNS or IPv4 is it required that my genome sequence be part of the string being sent out.

    So, who wants to take bets that the RIAA get's copyright violaters termed as hackers?

    --
    Papa Legba come and open the gate
  2. perversion by nodrip · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a perversion of what Ashcroft requested. Hackers who attempt to disrupt key systems that are vital to protecting human life, for example the FAA's radar systems, are terrorists. And they are.

    --


    -- "The best way to predict the future is to invent it."
    1. Re:perversion by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Insightful
      > This is a perversion of what Ashcroft requested. Hackers who attempt to disrupt key systems that are vital to protecting human life, for example the FAA's radar systems, are terrorists. And they are.

      On that, we agree.

      Upon reading the draft bill, I'm not happy with all of the provisions in the bill, but I really don't see anything that says "guy with programming sk1llz == terrorist."

      I do see an expansion of The List Of Bad Things We Can Do To Felons (such as DNA sampling), but that's a far cry from "all [cr]ackers are terrorists", let alone "all Hackers are now terrorists and will have to give up DNA samples".

      Indeed, only crackers who attack "protected systems" (meaning .gov and .mil boxen - not the d00d who hax0rz the average web site) appear to be in line to get their asses handed to them on a silver platter under this Act, and those provisions I can support. (Hell, those are about the only provisions I'd support ;-)

      Earlier, I made a post that said "If you've got programming skills, get the hell outa here." I retract that post. This bill, while odious for many means, is not a declaration that American doesn't want its programmers anymore.

      Serves me right for replying to /. before reading the fscking article ;-)

  3. Re:Here's the story. by ncc74656 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    As a "Federal terrorism offense," the five year statute of limitations for hacking would be abolished retroactively -- allowing computer crimes committed decades ago to be prosecuted today
    This can't be the case...haven't the people who thought this up run across this passage before?
    No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

    - United States Constitution, Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3

    You can't prosecute an action that wasn't a crime at the time the action occurred. Then again, with the body blows the Constitution has taken in recent times (mainly in various parts of the Bill of Rights, especially the First, Second, and Tenth Amendments), maybe the drafters of this legislation haven't run across this passage before.
    --
    20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
  4. This is nothing new... by Hacker+Cracker · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It's nothing more than the same old reactionary garbage legislation that's been coming down the pike. And it's not surprising that this is what congress has come up with either--after all, if it didn't work last year, then do more of it next year...

    As David Quinn put it quite eloquently:
    When the Israelites escaped from Egypt in the 13th century B.C., they were literally a lawless horde, because they'd left the Egyptian list of prohibitions behind. They needed their own list of prohibitions, which God provided--the famous ten. But of course ten didn't do it. Hundreds more followed, but they didn't do it either.

    No number has ever done it for us. Not a thousand, ten thousand, a hundred thousand. Even millions don't do it, and so every single year we pay our legislators to come up with more. But no matter how many prohibitions we come up with, they never do the trick, because no prohibited behavior has ever been eliminated by passing a law against it. Every time someone is sent to prison or executed, this is said to be "sending a message" to miscreants, but for some strange reason the message never arrives, year after year, generation after generation, century after century.

    Naturally, we consider this to be a very advanced system.
    Quite depressing, really. (The whole text can be found here, BTW)

    But what can you expect when the whole world has bought into the idea that there is absolutely nothing that any one person can do to change things?

    -- Shamus

    Bleah!