Slashdot Mirror
PI License May Soon Be Required for Computer Forensics
buzzardsbay writes "The good folks over at Baseline Magazine have an intriguing — and worrisome — report on a movement to limit computer forensics work to those who have a Private Investigator license or those who work for licensed PI agencies. According to the story, pending legislation would limit the specialized task of probing deep into computer hard drives, network and server logs for telltale signs of hacking and data theft to the same people who advertise in the Yellow Pages for surveillance on cheating spouses, workers' compensation fraud and missing persons. Those caught practicing computer forensics without a license could face criminal prosecution."
Nerd rage aside here, the programs in question aren't dangerous, nor do the operators necessarily have to have expertise to use them. What purpose could this legislation possibly serve?
(rot13) rpbzbab@tznvy.pbz
Sorry, but I don't see how another inane 'licensing' will do more good than bad. Just because someone is licensed does not mean they're honest. Heck, all care repair shops in NY have to be licensed. Do you REALLY thing that keeps them honest?
A license if just a scrap of paper that means you paid someone for it. Perhaps you passed a test too. That means about as much as that 10th grade biology final that you crammed for the night before and then erased from your brain after the next morning. I'm much more interested in holding people ACCOUNTABLE for their actions than having the government "protect" me.
You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
A guy who comes home and finds his door kicked in does not get to collect finger prints from his house to prove who did it. Frankly, there is no reason why the CEO's nephew should be allowed to pick through a log file like he picks his nose and, upon seeing an IP address with 66.6 in it be allowed to declare 'This is who hacked our computer.'
Yes, it's another unneeded tax, but it's not as bad as the summary makes it sound. Right now, any one can claim to be a computer forensics specialist.
Let me give you an example of South Carolina professional licenses. I am an engineer, a PE, licensed as an engineer by the state. My degree is in Chemical Engineering, yet my PE license says nothing about chemical engineering... it is no different from a mechanical engineer, electrical engineer, or structural engineer, or any other engineer. I can officially stamp the blueprints for your house, despite the fact I have absolutely no experience in construction or building practice whatsoever. Tne only thing that stops me is ethical guidelines and my own conscience -- neither of which stop a PI.
What a load of crap. My job requires us to perform such checks on a regular basis. These requirements are required by Government agencies in order to work on specific projects. Requiring some ridiculous license to read log files will only create a glut of "so called" experts much like all those Windows experts a few years back.
Don't be fooled by this. This is yet another attempt of our Government wanting to control access to knowledge.
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable" - JFK
So, when a copyright violator gets away (or tries to) with unauthorized reproduction of other people's artwork by claiming, she was investigated by an unlicensed investigator, the entire Slashdot is cheering for her. And I only picked the posts moderated at 5...
Other times, we are capable of looking at the requirement with a cooler head and recognize it as worrisome. Even if one accepts, that the classic gun-wielding detectives of the Dr. Watson kind should be licensed (and Dr. Watson was not), it should not be necessary for a computer forensics experts.
Licenses in general are a terrible idea, because they are issued (and revoked!) by the Executive branch with very little recourse from the Courts — in fact, this is why the (Executive) government likes them so much. They allow them to twist the businessmen's arms without the troubles of lawsuits. In the city of New York, for example, a driver can not even appeal a driving citation to the real courts — one's only venue is "Traffic Court", where the "judge" is, in fact, a city employee and part of the Executive branch... (That's right — the separation of powers will not help you, if the government of New York City decides to ban you from the "public" roads.)
Making yet another activity require a license is, indeed, a worrisome development.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.