U.S. Considering Ratifying Cybercrime Treaty

waytoomuchcoffee writes "SecurityFocus has a new article on the Council of Europe's "Convention on Cybercrime". The U.S. has already signed the treaty, but it has not yet been ratified by the Senate (although President Bush has written a letter urging the treaty's passage). This treaty, among other items, would require the U.S. to "cooperate with foreign authorities" in conducting surveillance on American citizens who have committed no crime under U.S. law, but may have broken another country's law (selling historic Nazi posters on Ebay? Germany might have you wiretapped), prohibiting the "production, sale or distribution of hacking tools", whatever that means (would Nmap be illegal?) and require the U.S. to pass laws to "force users to provide their encryption keys" and the plain text of their encrypted files. Canada is a signatory as well."

Comments

Re:Isn't this redundant?

[LostCluster]

That's because murder is already against the law in Mexico, asshat. Suppose it weren't.

Then the USA would finally get around to building that wall we need between us and Mexico...

Re:Now where?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just send you and your "liberal loving types" to Antarctica... freeze your asses off and, maybe, you'll learn that socialist politics only works in... Spain.

Why should I bust my ass to pay for some lazy bastard to sit and collect a check? I shouldn't. Once China opens up its markets, we'll all be out of a job, including many of those folks in India who have taken American jobs.

Maybe, leaving China alone to its socialism, and moving you liberals over there, the world would be a much better place.

Re:The threat posed by treaties

[Anne Thwacks]

If they complain that we sign the treaty, and they sign the treaty, then they keep their side of the bargain, but we dont keep ours, we just bomb the f*&@ out of them.

That way we retain our prestige on the world stage?