EU Ministers Seek To Ban Creation of Hacking Tools

text editors, compilers by vlm · 2011-06-15 02:55 · Score: 1, Insightful

They mean text editors (as opposed to word processors), compilers, interpreters, etc. Pretty much anything with a command line.

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger

Re:text editors, compilers by binarylarry · 2011-06-15 02:57 · Score: 1

No, what they really mean is: torrents and other p2p systems.

--
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
Re:text editors, compilers by cgeys · 2011-06-15 02:57 · Score: 1

While we're at it, lets outlaw hammers and cars too. They also can be used for illegal activities or even to kill someone.
Re:text editors, compilers by haxwk · 2011-06-15 02:58 · Score: 1

Might as well just ban paper and any form of note-taking while they're at it. We're about 27 years late anyway.
Re:text editors, compilers by chemicaldave · 2011-06-15 03:00 · Score: 1

No. They mean "malicious software designed to create botnets or unrightfully obtained computer passwords." The wording is certainly vague, but that wouldn't include text editor or compilers.
Re:text editors, compilers by betterunixthanunix · 2011-06-15 03:12 · Score: 1

...so in your world, nobody uses a text editor or a compiler to create a botnet?

--
Palm trees and 8
Re:text editors, compilers by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-15 03:14 · Score: 5, Interesting

Penetration testing is a necessary application hardening process that depends on access to the SAME TYPE OF TOOLS that black hats use to break an application. Think of it like viral inoculation: You need some of the enemy code in order to build an effective defense.
Re:text editors, compilers by TrisexualPuppy · 2011-06-15 03:19 · Score: 1

No, what they really mean is: torrents and other p2p systems.
Hey, don't forget nmap!

Let's work to keep IT security admins in the dark so they can't figure out what sploits are out there.
Re:text editors, compilers by MightyMartian · 2011-06-15 03:24 · Score: 2

I think we should have a stupid idea court for bureaucrats and politicians, and when they are found guilty, they are immediately taken out back and shot.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Re:text editors, compilers by haxwk · 2011-06-15 03:26 · Score: 1

It all depends on your definition of malicious. Or more accurately, a bunch of politicians', who know absolutely nil about computer science, definition of malicious.
Re:text editors, compilers by Dayze!Confused · 2011-06-15 03:26 · Score: 1

Or people, people are the most useful hacking tool. A lot of hacks are done with no more than either a telephone call or a friendly conversation. We should just ban people, get it over with, lock everyone up and be done with it all.

--
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." [Thomas Jefferson]
Re:text editors, compilers by Lumpy · 2011-06-15 03:29 · Score: 2

And thus you have discovered what Skynet decided about humanity and started the extermination of the human race...
DRM will be our downfall....

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:text editors, compilers by Zeek40 · 2011-06-15 03:31 · Score: 1

Don't worry, the government is most of the way done implementing this solution. The problem is that the prisons are full, and they can't build any more prisons because the government is broke. The only realistic solution to the problem would be to increase tax rates on the rich back to what they were pre-1980, but that could send the luxury yacht and caviar market into a tailspin.
Re:text editors, compilers by icebraining · 2011-06-15 03:37 · Score: 1

Yes, but they're not designed to create such things. Usually.
Not that I agree with the plan.

--
Dilbert RSS feed
Re:text editors, compilers by TapeCutter · 2011-06-15 03:54 · Score: 1

I see a desperate need for a stupid idea wiki.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Re:text editors, compilers by TheRaven64 · 2011-06-15 04:24 · Score: 1

I'm pretty sure EMACS was designed to create a botnet. If, by botnet, you mean global distributed AI intent on world domination...

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Re:text editors, compilers by LWATCDR · 2011-06-15 04:38 · Score: 1

that is a dangerous rule. I have used password crackers on my own server passwords to see how secure my users are. I have used tools that check for exploits to check my owner servers as well.
Sure I would love to not have hackers but those tools can be used for as a way to test servers as a way to exploit hacks.

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Re:text editors, compilers by Opportunist · 2011-06-15 04:46 · Score: 1

Umm... ok, but you know that would make Stalin look like a saint, at least considering the amount of people shot.
Not that I'm against the idea.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:text editors, compilers by Opportunist · 2011-06-15 04:48 · Score: 1

Phew. So MITM-Phishing is still ok, I guess, as long as I don't take the passwords but only change a few bits of the data transmitted (like, say, the receiving account and amount).
Face it, no matter how you word it you won't even come close to hitting everything without hitting anything that should definitely remain legal.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:text editors, compilers by Opportunist · 2011-06-15 04:49 · Score: 1

Not only normal people, politicians and other loonies don't either, it seems.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:text editors, compilers by Opportunist · 2011-06-15 04:50 · Score: 1

And this is actually the scary part, that "malicious" will change meaning on a whim. You won't know 'til you have been dragged to court and informed that whatever software you considered benign (because you used it for ordinary, legal purposes) is considered malicious in court.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:text editors, compilers by MightyMartian · 2011-06-15 04:52 · Score: 1

We'd have a real trial first, where the accused could defend their stupid idea and point out how it wasn't stupid. I'm not even adverse to an appeal, but at the end of the day, if they create a law or regulation that is stupid and potentially can harm people (like, in this case, secure analysts or, heck, your average decent admin using tools to determine penetration vulnerability), they should be eliminated. Maybe we don't shoot them, maybe we just put them in jail for a while.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Re:text editors, compilers by delinear · 2011-06-15 04:55 · Score: 2

It's a pretty weak law if it can be wholly bypassed by a statement from the software developer saying that it's a security tool and not a hacking tool, though. In reality what this boils down to is yet another law they can use to lock you up if they really want to but otherwise have no good cause. "We assume you're up to no good, we can't find any evidence but... erm... look! you have some software that could be used for naughty stuff. Take him away!"
Re:text editors, compilers by delinear · 2011-06-15 04:57 · Score: 1

Ah, but if they ban the tools the bad guys use, then there's no need for the tools the good guys use - it's obvious! While they're about it, they should ban theft and then make locks illegal because they're no longer required. Oh, wait...
Re:text editors, compilers by bugs2squash · 2011-06-15 05:12 · Score: 2

or make bullet proof vests illegal

--
Nullius in verba
Re:text editors, compilers by dkleinsc · 2011-06-15 05:41 · Score: 2

As Richard Stallman put it in The Right to Read:

There were ways, of course, to get around the SPA and Central Licensing. They were themselves illegal. Dan had had a classmate in software, Frank Martucci, who had obtained an illicit debugging tool, and used it to skip over the copyright monitor code when reading books. But he had told too many friends about it, and one of them turned him in to the SPA for a reward (students deep in debt were easily tempted into betrayal). In 2047, Frank was in prison, not for pirate reading, but for possessing a debugger.
Dan would later learn that there was a time when anyone could have debugging tools. There were even free debugging tools available on CD or downloadable over the net. But ordinary users started using them to bypass copyright monitors, and eventually a judge ruled that this had become their principal use in actual practice. This meant they were illegal; the debuggers' developers were sent to prison.
Programmers still needed debugging tools, of course, but debugger vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only, and only to officially licensed and bonded programmers. The debugger Dan used in software class was kept behind a special firewall so that it could be used only for class exercises.
Yes, it's a piece of dystopian writing, but what makes that so scary is how plausible it all is.

--
I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
Re:text editors, compilers by anyGould · 2011-06-15 05:52 · Score: 1

No. They mean "malicious software designed to create botnets or unrightfully obtained computer passwords." The wording is certainly vague, but that wouldn't include text editor or compilers.
A text editor or a compiler is certainly "software designed to create botnets".
Someone needs to remind these people that when you call the AMA to get you back into your car, they're using the exact same tool that thieves use to break into your car. The tool is just that - a tool, with no more malicious intent than your pencil. [1]
[1] not applicable if you possess a haunted or otherwise cursed pencil
Re:text editors, compilers by anyGould · 2011-06-15 05:55 · Score: 1

But oddly, people have no problems keeping a difference between "freedom fighter" and "terrorist" straight...
Re:text editors, compilers by vgerclover · 2011-06-15 05:55 · Score: 2

They'll ban butterflies too.
Re:text editors, compilers by yomammamia · 2011-06-15 06:01 · Score: 1

Some "hacker tools" are also security tools.
Encryption for example.
I am curious if any EU ministers can define "hacker tool" or give some examples.
Re:text editors, compilers by Opportunist · 2011-06-15 06:06 · Score: 1

I'd already be happy if politicians who accomplish nothing but introduce harebrained law ideas would have to vacate their seat to let it go to someone with two braincells to rub against each other.
But even that seems unlikely.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:text editors, compilers by marcosdumay · 2011-06-15 06:38 · Score: 1

"Hey, don't forget nmap!"

And telnet, and ncat. Those are probably the most used hacking tools.

--
Rethinking email
Re:text editors, compilers by AvitarX · 2011-06-15 06:41 · Score: 1

nmap is the most useful tool ever though.
So many times do I shock and amaze when coming into a small temporary office (read no DNS) and amaze when I am printing in less than a minute (nmap -p9100 192.168.0.2-254, and laser writer driver FTW).
Also used it a lot in an office with static IPs and VNC, where I was too lazy to write-down/memorize IP addresses for computers.

--
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Re:text editors, compilers by nschubach · 2011-06-15 06:42 · Score: 1

It's the same mentality that goes into gun laws. I'm sorry, but the idea of making something illegal because it may or may not have been originally intended to cause harm does not make the person in possession of that tool an "unlawful" person unless they use it for "unlawful" purposes. (Where "unlawful" could be swapped with anti-societal/evil/bad)

--
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
Re:text editors, compilers by kj_kabaje · 2011-06-15 06:43 · Score: 1

Is this a joke? My sarcasm detector is perhaps not working because I don't know how someone who makes statements like this would get positive karma.
Re:text editors, compilers by Zeek40 · 2011-06-15 07:03 · Score: 1

The caviar and luxury-yacht part is said tongue-in-cheek, but the rest is true. Why would I lose karma for pointing out the absurdities of the world around us?
Re:text editors, compilers by querist · 2011-06-15 07:12 · Score: 1

Not just guns... In the USA, there are several states where simply OWNING lockpicks is a crime unless you are a law enforcement officer, locksmith, or P.I.
Re:text editors, compilers by HungryHobo · 2011-06-15 08:23 · Score: 1

depressing bit: I had a copy of ncat on a drive I scanned with an AV scanner.
It threw up a big warning telling me that ncat was a trojan.
Re:text editors, compilers by HungryHobo · 2011-06-15 08:28 · Score: 2

Dan would later learn that there was a time when anyone could have debugging tools. There were even free debugging tools available on CD or downloadable over the net. But ordinary users started using them to bypass copyright monitors, and eventually a judge ruled that this had become their principal use in actual practice. This meant they were illegal; the debuggers' developers were sent to prison.
Programmers still needed debugging tools, of course, but debugger vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only, and only to officially licensed and bonded programmers. The debugger Dan used in software class was kept behind a special firewall so that it could be used only for class exercises.
Fuck stallman and his depressing tendency to be right when he's cynical.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Re:text editors, compilers by HungryHobo · 2011-06-15 08:36 · Score: 1

god damn I posted that above but I just saw you posted this before me.
Re:text editors, compilers by mysidia · 2011-06-15 11:22 · Score: 1

Hex editors are hacking tools, because hackers can use them to edit machine language binaries to manually construct malicious code.
Compilers such as GCC and assemblers such as NASM are hacking tools, because they are used by hackers to facilitate construction of machine code.
Computer keyboards are hacking tools, because they facilitate the trivial entry of commands to computer systems.
Computer RS232 ports are hacking tools, because they facilitate arbitrary serial data connections.
Computer monitors are hacking tools, because they allow an attacker to see their debugger output/terminal window showing them when the hack is successful.
Computer hard drives, CD-R drives, media, and thumb drives are hacking tools, because they allow an attacker to keep a persistent copy of their malware for easy transportation to the victim's location.
Ethernet cards are hacking tools, because they are useful for hackers to facilitate the long range transmission of malware payloads.
SDRAM chips are hacking tools, because they temporarily hold malware payloads as they are being deployed.
CPUs are hacking tools, because they perform computations useful by hackers, and many hackers require CPUs to do their owrk.
Pens and paper are hacking tools, because hackers use them to draw diagrams and sketch out possible designs of attack which then translate into an effective hack.
Re:text editors, compilers by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-15 11:36 · Score: 1

Doubly ironic is that most people actually shot under Stalin were indeed "bureaucrats and politicians": the likelihood of getting a death sentence was much higher for Party members, and even then mostly for mid-rank and above; common folk who got sucked in by the grinder normally ended up doing several years of hard labor instead.
Re:text editors, compilers by KingBenny · 2011-06-15 17:15 · Score: 1

mhm, sounds like another typical eu-overhippie thing is going on here again. make a law about somethign you don't understand because you're scared, make it vague enough so interpretation comes down to semantics ( i think it's called legalism or something in some circles). A generation problem? People who grew up with the microsoft is bad thing so they waste their times forcing software companies to include a pick your own browser screen ? Another possibility here is that you would have to pay to get a license to use certain tools. That way you are registrated and legislated, would be very typical of eu way of handling things. The biggest stupid i see in this is that it would leave the eu indeed very vulnerable to the outside (again), if all these 'evil' tools are available anywhere but here. Someone hasn't been thinking or someone doesn't have a clue what they're on about, or maybe someone just felt like it would have made a great speech. Sometimes (a lot of the time) i don't get the way these people think, all i can see is that they react blindly out of fear. (Or ... maybe someone got scared his porn passwords might be revealed ...)

--
Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
Re:text editors, compilers by Opportunist · 2011-06-15 17:58 · Score: 1

So just like in capitalism, just without shooting the bureaucrats?
Glad we managed to create a more humane system, at least for some.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:text editors, compilers by kj_kabaje · 2011-06-16 02:29 · Score: 1

Nope--you shouldn't lose karma. Like I said, my sarcasm filter was failing. Chau amigo.

Goddamn by amalek · 2011-06-15 02:56 · Score: 1

When will we get some politicians who have backgrounds in what they're actually working in. Zzzz

Re:Goddamn by Bing+Tsher+E · 2011-06-15 03:41 · Score: 2

like requiring all programmers to register with a government authority
Better yet, we can set up the Operating Systems so they can only run programs that have been downloaded from special App Stores! Hey! What an idea!
Re:Goddamn by suutar · 2011-06-15 09:28 · Score: 1

Politicians don't have time to get backgrounds in what they're legislating on, it takes too much time to get a background in how to legislate at all.

Don't worry... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-15 02:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

They'd never abuse this law by using it against people using legitimate software for legitimate purposes.

Re:Don't worry... by jellomizer · 2011-06-15 03:19 · Score: 1

While seeing your sarcasm in your statement. The problem goes beyond people abusing a law (AKA, I don't like person X or Group Y and I want to get them in trouble so I will sue them because they use or made some tool which may be commonly used for hacking, while their use for illegal activity is unproven). It is an issue that a tool made for hacking then gets reused as a productive tool in legal usages.
Secondly Illegal hacking (The bad kind) is well umm... Illegal, so these people wouldn't really be morally compromised to make an illegal tool to do an illegal job. It is like banning guns, then that means the only people with guns are the ones who are not afraid to break the law and obtain them, if they are unafraid to break the law then they are possible to break more laws, and with a gun they could be more effective in doing it. So all this law will do is just a sneaky way of increasing a sentence on a convicted hacker. or if found innocent of the original crime a second charge to go against them with. It is like getting 2 Ticket for going across a stop sign because 1 is for improper maintenance of your car, the second is for running a stop sign.

--
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Re:Don't worry... by Opportunist · 2011-06-15 04:52 · Score: 1

What makes you think this law could not actually get passed? Where have you been the last decade that you think that completely insane law proposals cannot become law?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Don't worry... by marcosdumay · 2011-06-15 06:46 · Score: 1

Except for the fact that correlation doesn't imply causation, I would be able to agree with you. But in reality, I can't.

--
Rethinking email
Re:Don't worry... by Isaac+Remuant · 2011-06-15 07:16 · Score: 1

You mean like Canada? Or Switzerland? (and I'm sure there's more)

--
"Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
Re:Don't worry... by querist · 2011-06-15 07:27 · Score: 1

Banning guns (or "hacker tools" or anything like that) seems to be mostly for the purpose having an additional thing with which to charge someone when arresting them. It's much like "resisting arrest". That way they can negotiate the suspect's cooperation and confession by offering to drop some of the "lesser" charges while they keep the charges that really matter. They're mostly "secondary enforcement" concepts even though they can be considered primary offenses. (A "secondary" offense is something for which you cannot be ticketed or arrested if that is the only thing but you can be charged if you're charged with something else, too. Seatbelt laws in many states in the USA are secondary offenses.) Honestly, when are they going to find out that someone is carrying a gun or has "hacker tools" unless they're already investigating the person for something else? I'm not aware of police (yet) doing random checks on people to see if they're carrying firearms without a permit. And, as may others have already pointed out, if someone's decided to commit a crime, the decision to break the law has already been made. Do you really think they're going to think "oh, no! I could be charged with illegal possession of a hacking tool when I use the hacking tool to break into the bank's computer."?
Re:Don't worry... by semi-extrinsic · 2011-06-15 07:27 · Score: 1

I completely agree. Don't get me wrong, I do think this suggestion is stupid, but I also found the GP's analogy to be lacking.

--
for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
Re:Don't worry... by semi-extrinsic · 2011-06-15 07:38 · Score: 1

Of course correlation does not imply causation. But the fact that I would have to go to really extreme lengths in my country to get my hands on a gun, causes it to be much less likely that I could shoot someone. By really extreme, I mean having to steal a gun from a shooting club or a licensed hunter, all of whom are legally required to store weapons in approved steel plate lockers bolted to the wall, and the striker must be stored in a separate location. This legislation is routinely enforced.

--
for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
Re:Don't worry... by jellomizer · 2011-06-16 00:18 · Score: 1

Yes us Rural folks have a greater need for guns (and more "good" reason to shoot things). Although I don't own a Gun myself I could see the advantages to having one.
In a City you have an armed police force close by. If there is a problem they can be there in 10 minutes. vs. in Rural areas where if there is a problem it could take a half and hour to an hour before they arrive.
In the City large animals are not really a threat. In the country you get Bears, Moose and other aggressive animals who can cause damage to yourself, your family and your property.
Next Stealing a gun form a licensed hunter isn't really all that hard... Because there are very few if any (inspections) of the gun owners home, chances are many/most will not fully comply with laws. Because security isn't convenient. Unlicensed guns can be sold on the black market. If Mr. Johnson get a gun from his father who passed away, needs money to pay off estate taxes, sell off his old gun, and report it missing. There are so many ways to get guns into the black market.
I much rather see money going towards gun safety then to outlawing them. Because State/Federal laws on Gun control are insane. Even New York state has a huge Rural area, you know Upstate NY, that area West/North West of CT, MA, VT. A key part of the violence is due to the lack of respect for guns. And use it more of a tool, then a show of power.

--
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.

Lets just make owning a computer illegal by phrackwulf · 2011-06-15 02:58 · Score: 1

Oh, wait...

--
What would Richard Feynman do, if he were here right now? He'd do some math and he'd follow through!

Re:Lets just make owning a computer illegal by Hartree · 2011-06-15 03:17 · Score: 1

No, you'll just have to buy a computer that has lots of hardware based DRM and will only run "approved" apps and OS's.
Oh wait. We've already got some of those and people are willing to wait in long lines and pay a premium for the newest models.
Re:Lets just make owning a computer illegal by idobi · 2011-06-15 03:27 · Score: 1

Banning computers would put too many companies out of business. We should just ban operating systems. That way all these other tools won't work, and we only put a handful of companies out of business... none of them from the EU.
Re:Lets just make owning a computer illegal by Bing+Tsher+E · 2011-06-15 03:44 · Score: 1

We've already got some of those and people are willing to wait in long lines and pay a premium for the newest models.
Only a small subset of the populace is like that, however. The Rest Of Us (tm) find them amusing to observe.

Errrr... by t20alex · 2011-06-15 02:58 · Score: 1

An axe?

Re:Errrr... by haxwk · 2011-06-15 03:02 · Score: 1

I don't think axes are considered "software"
Re:Errrr... by Hartree · 2011-06-15 03:13 · Score: 1

A.X.E
Advanced Hex Editor. Definitely software.
They'd probably consider it a hacking tool, too.
Re:Errrr... by kvvbassboy · 2011-06-15 03:36 · Score: 1

Just an inquisitive question. Can good hackers read hex code? Or at least a part of it, once they have narrowed something down?
Or are there hex-to-assembly converters? I know for a fact that most hacks take place at this level, just curious about how they do it.
Re:Errrr... by Bing+Tsher+E · 2011-06-15 03:46 · Score: 1

Real hackers write their code using a little wire cutter. They cut the appropriate diodes out of the array.
And to answer your second question: No, there is no such thing as a disassembler. Once the code is converted to binary, it's gone, baby, gone.
Re:Errrr... by Megane · 2011-06-15 04:46 · Score: 1

What weapon is it alleged that Hans Reiser used? Yeah. Whatever that is, ban it NOW. For the chuldrrrrrren.

--
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
Re:Errrr... by Opportunist · 2011-06-15 04:55 · Score: 1

Yes, to some extend I can actually read hex and convert to asm in my head. It is something you learn practically as a side effect when writing a software emulation for a CPU. Calculating addresses is a hassle, though, and I wouldn't do it unless I have to, but it is entirely possible, just very time consuming.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Errrr... by mjwalshe · 2011-06-15 08:37 · Score: 1

yes my boss could read the hex code of an X.400 mail exchange session and point out the bug in Sprints implementation - I was a beginner and had to use a decoder that dumped it to ASN.1
Re:Errrr... by pacinpm · 2011-06-15 23:39 · Score: 1

And to answer your second question: No, there is no such thing as a disassembler. Once the code is converted to binary, it's gone, baby, gone.
You are wrong. http://www.hex-rays.com/idapro/
There are also specific decompiler for programming languages. They can produce pretty readable code. I used one for Java and got nice compilable source code. You are losing all variable/procedure names of course which can be a problem for more complicated code.
Re:Errrr... by f()rK()_Bomb · 2011-06-16 02:29 · Score: 1

he was clearly joking, the amount of people who can't see humor or sarcasm in text blows my mind

--
"The space elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing." - Arthur C. Clarke ~1980
Re:Errrr... by pacinpm · 2011-06-16 02:48 · Score: 1

Sorry, I'm not native English speaker and sometimes I miss jokes or sarcasm.
Re:Errrr... by f()rK()_Bomb · 2011-06-16 03:09 · Score: 1

oh sorry

--
"The space elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing." - Arthur C. Clarke ~1980

Wow, what a great way to hurt security by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-15 02:58 · Score: 2, Insightful

Not a professional security researcher (as narrowly defined by law?) You're not allowed to possess or create tools that help find security vulnerabilities. That means you, Joe Blow who writes webapps -- you can't run attacks against your own server because the tools are illegal, and you can't build your own tools either. I guess you'll have to release that software untested in certain ways, then hope the black hats decide to follow the same laws as you.

Re:Wow, what a great way to hurt security by Opportunist · 2011-06-15 04:58 · Score: 1

Thank god it's in my job description, so I might actually get the hazmat endorsement. But what about the next generation of security researchers? Will we only get the garbage that gets out of "security colleges"? People who "learned" security research but never "felt" it? Who are used to learning by the book instead of hunting down flaws, who never learned how to actually find the resources needed?
Security is all about NOT going by the book, pushing the envelope and thinking outside the box. And all that is not really something colleges excel at...

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Wow, what a great way to hurt security by lennier1 · 2011-06-15 06:05 · Score: 1

Some states have already been that stupid. IIRC in Germany they already have a law which makes some uses of Wireshark within in your own damn network illegal.

No clue by gx5000 · 2011-06-15 02:58 · Score: 2

They obviously don't understand even the elementals of coding. Now if they really want to get these guys there are better ways of doing it. But trying to stop Axe murderers by taking them away from all Firemen is just retarded.

--
End of Line.

Re:No clue by MickyTheIdiot · 2011-06-15 03:03 · Score: 2

This is people in management positions in all levels of society. They are mentally incapable of differing to anyone smarter to them because, in their mind, they are the best and the brightest. It's not hyperbole to say that western civilisation is in crisis because of the hubris at the top (in the boardroom and in the legislatures).
Re:No clue by spidercoz · 2011-06-15 03:04 · Score: 1

But trying to stop Axe murderers by taking them away from all Firemen is just retarded.
good one, I have to remember that

--
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
Re:No clue by betterunixthanunix · 2011-06-15 03:06 · Score: 2

But trying to stop Axe murderers by taking them away from all Firemen is just retarded.
Or perhaps just requiring anyone who owns an axe to register with the government? Even further, perhaps only allowing people who work for a particular agency (the fire department) to own an axe? You already see this approach taken with things like guns, and with people refusing to shut about about "cyberwarfare," it is only a matter of time before they start equating programming and debugging tools with firearms.

--
Palm trees and 8
Re:No clue by modecx · 2011-06-15 03:23 · Score: 1

If I understand correctly, this is more analogous to banning lathes, milling machines and drill presses, since a machinist could use these things to build firearms, and any other tools needed in pursuit of that end.

--
Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
Re:No clue by Dog-Cow · 2011-06-15 03:27 · Score: 1

Why wouldn't you want to take axe murderers away from firemen?
Re:No clue by Lumpy · 2011-06-15 03:36 · Score: 1

"is just retarded."
you now understand politicians.. ALL OF THEM are retarded. Every word out of their mouths. WE only elect the ultra rich, and for some reason all ultra rich that have political aspirations are retarded.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:No clue by Hatta · 2011-06-15 03:43 · Score: 1

for some reason all ultra rich that have political aspirations are retarded.
That's easy enough to explain. If you're ultra-rich and smart, you'll spend the rest of your life on an island getting blown by native chicks. If you're ultra-rich and still human enough to feel guilty about what you've done to get that way, you'll be a philanthropist. Only the ultra-rich, sociopathic, AND stupid end up in politics.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Re:No clue by mlts · 2011-06-15 04:02 · Score: 1

Here in the US, we already had that happen. ITAR classified cryptosystems as munitions, and the same criminal penalties applied back then as exporting nukes.
Same crap all over again... we had discussions of exactly this on the cypherpunks list in the mid 1990s. The only difference was that the Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse were theories for the most part, not something happening in reality.
Sad thing is that pulling "hacking tools" will not stop the intrusions. They will still happen -- only the whitehats will be punished.
Re:No clue by metlin · 2011-06-15 04:08 · Score: 1

The analogy fails because guns can only do one thing -- hurt. Their primary (and often, only) purpose is to kill and maim. That they may be a deterrent is an epiphenomenon because first and foremost, they are weapons with one intent.
Tools are different. That they can be used to harm is incidental. Their purposes are many and varied, but often productive.
A better analogy would be knives. You regulate those in areas where they could be used to cause harm (e.g. planes), but allow them elsewhere (e.g. kitchens). Even so, less powerful versions are allowed even on planes (e.g. first class dinners).
Re:No clue by Rogerborg · 2011-06-15 04:22 · Score: 1

Dammit, I've been missing all the maiming and killing in the biathlon and modern pentathlon events in the Olympics?
Jocks can and do enjoy the skill involved in target shooting without wanting to kill or maim, in exactly the same way that nerds can enjoy the skill involved in white-hat hacking, without wanting to steal and destroy.

--
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Re:No clue by TheRaven64 · 2011-06-15 04:30 · Score: 1

If you can't trust a fireman with an axe murderer, then who can you trust with one?

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Re:No clue by TheRaven64 · 2011-06-15 04:34 · Score: 1

Why do you only elect the super rich? The MEP that I voted for (and who got in, and is now serving her third term) is an active member of the FFII and campaigns against this kind of crap. She's the only one of my elected representatives that I don't feel that I need to chase to actually represent my interests - whenever I write to her with concerns about EU decisions, I get a brief reply saying 'already working on it'.

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Re:No clue by Opportunist · 2011-06-15 05:03 · Score: 1

Oh, I do not assume that management people are "dumb". I certainly do not want to trade with them and they would most likely blow me out of the water in anything related to marketing, legal or business administration. I dabble in those three fields to some degree (ok, at least the latter two, I only have to "sell" security to my manager), but I certainly wouldn't hold a candle in these fields to them.
I'm not smarter than my CEO. But I have a different field of expertise, and luckily, he knows that, understands that and most of all honors that. I'm well aware that I'm in a rare and fortunate position in this case, but don't think managers are stupid. Many are not. Ok, many are and only got their seat by kissing the right butts at the right time, but there are pretty bright managers out there.
You can tell by the questions they ask and whether or not they are interested in the answer.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:No clue by delinear · 2011-06-15 05:08 · Score: 1

Even that's a poor analogy. These same tools are used to ensure security and prevent hacking. By saying only government licensed vendors could use them you will price many smaller companies out of their security solution. The ones who intend to use the tools for crime won't care that they're illegal - their actions are already illegal and it's not stopped them. All you will do is reduce security for lots of small to medium businesses while making it more expensive for everyone else (and recent events show even massive corporations are skimping on security, the last thing we need is more associated costs).
Re:No clue by delinear · 2011-06-15 05:12 · Score: 1

Why does anyone elect the super rich? They control the media, either directly, or through advertising, or through the old boys' network, and the average person doesn't read much beyond the headlines in their tabloid of choice before deciding which way to vote. The handful of people who do weigh up all the available evidence (and even there it's skewed by those with the money to get their message out) are not present in sufficient numbers to prevent the distorting effect of everyone else.
Re:No clue by betterunixthanunix · 2011-06-15 06:40 · Score: 1

Guns can also be used for hunting and pest control, which are far more common uses than injuring human beings.

--
Palm trees and 8
Re:No clue by anyGould · 2011-06-15 07:05 · Score: 1

Why do you only elect the super rich?
Obvious answer - only the super rich can afford to run. They also have the connections to parlay their position into future earnings once they're out of office.
Hell, just to run for mayor in town here ends up costing about $100K, alderman runs about half that. Either you're rich enough to pay all that outright (in which case, why are you screwing around in local politics?), or you have to take donations and loans from people who expect their "interest" to pay paid in favors once you're in.
The older I get, the more I see that being elected is a sucker's bet - far better to spend that money on the guy who *will* be elected, and call in the favors later.
Re:No clue by DamnStupidElf · 2011-06-15 11:17 · Score: 1

Some people need killing and/or maiming. It's a good thing there is an effective tool for doing it.

Uhh.. by betterunixthanunix · 2011-06-15 02:59 · Score: 1, Interesting

How does one define "hacking tools?" Debuggers are pretty useful for hackers, as are things like netcat/socat, any of dozens of programming languages, and just about anything that lets you work at a low level. This does not even get into the legitimate uses of pen testing tools.

Oh, wait, let me guess: people will have to register with the government to use any of the above?

--
Palm trees and 8

Re:Uhh.. by Bing+Tsher+E · 2011-06-15 03:51 · Score: 1

I'm sure the EU will come up with a special agency empowered to be the only ones using said dangerous tools. You aren't anti-social, are you? Don't you trust the commissioners to do the right thing?
Re:Uhh.. by Zerth · 2011-06-15 04:22 · Score: 1

Just do it the same way we define "burglary tools". If you have it on you and you are committing burglary, it's a burglary tool. Otherwise, no big deal.
I can carry a flashlight most of the time and not get hassled. But if I'm walking out of a business late at night with a sack of computer bits that don't belong to me and get caught, I'll be charged with theft and possession of burglary tools(the flashlight).
Software that is the equivalent of lockpicks(dunno, wardriving kit?) should still be legal, but some governments have made it so you can have lockpicks for fun, but you can't just be walking around with them without a locksmith's license.
Re:Uhh.. by delinear · 2011-06-15 05:20 · Score: 1

This doesn't say being found in use of the tools is to be made illegal, though. It says creation of them. If you shut down all the flashlight manufacturers then the people who intended to use them for legitimate purposes suffer as much as those who intended to commit crime.
Re:Uhh.. by mjwalshe · 2011-06-15 08:40 · Score: 1

so we are going to have the crime of carying wireshark while black then :-)

if they ban emacs, i'm all for it by decora · 2011-06-15 03:04 · Score: 1

i mean, clearly, emacs is a threat to national security.

Re:if they ban emacs, i'm all for it by dkf · 2011-06-15 03:21 · Score: 1

i mean, clearly, emacs is a threat to national security.
Trouble is, they'll ban vi at the same time. Would you want to have to write code in Microsoft Word??? (Shudder)

--
"Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
Re:if they ban emacs, i'm all for it by PhilHibbs · 2011-06-15 03:29 · Score: 1

I've been saying for a long time that any code in italics should be treated as a comment, and anything in bold should be an assertion. Rather than insist that it all be indented the same like Python does, just colour your lines in the same colour as the condition or loop.
Re:if they ban emacs, i'm all for it by McNihil · 2011-06-15 03:42 · Score: 1

Why not. Even MS Office... because then they can ban it too. Libre Office and all the like as well. ...a mass of reasoning discarded... They need to ditch IPv4 so that they can impinge a total control IPv6 on the populace.

Pointless and harmful by Ptolom · 2011-06-15 03:04 · Score: 5, Insightful

You can't just ban software. There is absolutely no practical way to stop people from sharing code, and there fucking shouldn't be. If you ban these tools, the only people seriously affected will be the white hats.

Re:Pointless and harmful by betterunixthanunix · 2011-06-15 03:15 · Score: 1

The end game may be more sinister. The goal is not to ban software, but to make a legal requirement that people register with the government to use certain kinds of software. This is naturally a good thing for large software companies, who will face less competition from smaller organizations and open source projects. It will also give law enforcement agencies one more way to arrest people who dare to write scripts or use debuggers without the proper paperwork.

In the end, everyone except the general public will win.

--
Palm trees and 8
Re:Pointless and harmful by Ptolom · 2011-06-15 05:11 · Score: 1

Yes, of course, you /can/ criminalise it. That hasn't stopped people owning lockpicks if they want them.
Re:Pointless and harmful by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-15 11:42 · Score: 1

You can't just ban software. There is absolutely no practical way to stop people from sharing code, and there fucking shouldn't be.
You can't stop people from sharing the code, but what good does the code do you when it won't run on your computer (er, I mean, "appliance") without being signed by a unique key that is provided to individual developers by device/OS manufacturer, and which requires registration (and a contract which penalizes sharing said key?). Throw in a TPM chip to enforce this all in hardware and ban sales of any devices without such chip, or with OS that doesn't use it to enforce the laws on the books, and bingo.
Re:Pointless and harmful by mgiuca · 2011-06-15 13:06 · Score: 1

Once again, Richard Stallman, zany as he is, predicted all of this fourteen years ago. The Right to Read may be one of the most spot-on predictions of future technology I have ever read.

In 2047, Frank was in prison, not for pirate reading, but for possessing a debugger.
Dan would later learn that there was a time when anyone could have debugging tools. There were even free debugging tools available on CD or downloadable over the net. But ordinary users started using them to bypass copyright monitors, and eventually a judge ruled that this had become their principal use in actual practice. This meant they were illegal; the debuggers' developers were sent to prison.
Programmers still needed debugging tools, of course, but debugger vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only, and only to officially licensed and bonded programmers. The debugger Dan used in software class was kept behind a special firewall so that it could be used only for class exercises.

They want to ban "Creation" of hacking tools by rossdee · 2011-06-15 03:04 · Score: 1

So would evolution be ok then?

(Since most coding of such programs is more of an evolutionary thing than created in 6 days and then stays the same for over 6015 years

Re:They want to ban "Creation" of hacking tools by arth1 · 2011-06-15 04:00 · Score: 1

So would evolution be ok then?
Obviously not, as you can use it to send e-mails with malicious content.
Re:They want to ban "Creation" of hacking tools by yarnosh · 2011-06-15 04:15 · Score: 1

Microevolution of hacking tools is OK. Macroevolution of hacking tools just doesn't exist.

What? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-15 03:05 · Score: 1

How would this help? It would only make the illegal actions more illegal while preventing good security audits, thereby making security problems worse!

"Hacking Tools" by bsDaemon · 2011-06-15 03:08 · Score: 4, Insightful

They mean "hacking tools" like tor and pgp/gpg, right? Of course, first they'll come for metasploit, then nmap, then... but we all know what the end game is.

Re:"Hacking Tools" by Kamiza+Ikioi · 2011-06-15 04:02 · Score: 1

They mean "hacking tools" like tor and pgp/gpg, right? Of course, first they'll come for metasploit, then nmap, then... but we all know what the end game is.
If their end game is to get everyone to get on Blacknets, they're doing a good job.

--
I8-D

Including (but not limited to) by Tei · 2011-06-15 03:11 · Score: 1

Compilers, Dictionaries, Debuggers, Keyboards, Computers, Internet, ... and whatever revision system the kernel hackers use.

--

-Woof woof woof!

Re:Including (but not limited to) by rubycodez · 2011-06-15 03:26 · Score: 1

certainly any OS that comes from "open source" should be banned as it can modified to do bad things. Why, I happen to gentoo can even do bad things to a network right out of the box just by typing in an address already in use. Good people would never use such a system

Ok buddy.... by PPH · 2011-06-15 03:11 · Score: 5, Funny

Put that compiler down and step back. Slowly!

--
Have gnu, will travel.

Re:Ok buddy.... by haxwk · 2011-06-15 03:33 · Score: 2

He's going for command line! TAKE HIM OUT!!!
Re:Ok buddy.... by ComputerGeek01 · 2011-06-15 03:36 · Score: 1

Talk about having your finger over the button. Has there ever been a time in history when politicians were more afraid of 'F9'?
Re:Ok buddy.... by Bing+Tsher+E · 2011-06-15 03:55 · Score: 1

Alt-F4 is the best, though. When you walk up and take over the keyboard of the typical Windows user, just hold down Alt and punch F4 a bunch. As windows close on the screen, they go into such a panic attack while gripping the mouse helplessly that they often pee themselves.
Re:Ok buddy.... by GameboyRMH · 2011-06-16 01:41 · Score: 1

I'd hit Win-L (which I also have set as the "lock screen" command on my Linux machines.)

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:Ok buddy.... by Bing+Tsher+E · 2011-06-18 02:36 · Score: 1

That's fun, too, but it doesn't one-by-one close the windows of programs they are running. My main point concerns the gripping-of-the-mouse panic attack. Said users seldom know any of the keyboard shortcuts at all.

The forresters are going to go nuts over this by CokeJunky · 2011-06-15 03:13 · Score: 1

No more axes! Not only do they hack at trees, they could be used to break into a co-lo.

--
More Caffeine. NOW

In other words... by PoochieReds · 2011-06-15 03:15 · Score: 4, Insightful

"Let's ensure that only those willing to break the law will have access to these tools."

Re:In other words... by VzXzV · 2011-06-15 03:48 · Score: 1

Yes lats make it illegal to have access to perfectly useful tools that push development in all fields of technology and help produce real physical products. I for one have always wanted to experience the dark ages for myself. Or I don't know we could just leave it as it is and enforce the laws we have. you know the ones that basically say the illegal use of software/anything is illegal.
Re:In other words... by lpp · 2011-06-15 04:03 · Score: 1

This. It amazes me that people still think that registering folks for access to what are considered dangerous tools or even worse, banning them altogether, is some sort of panacea that will magically protect everyone from the presumed harmful effects. If I ban guns, then only criminals will have guns. If I ban "hacker tools" (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean), then only criminals will have hacker tools. If I ban bad car analogies, well, you get the picture.
It comes down to laziness on the part of legislators and prosecutors. Rather than stipulating the sorts of actions which are criminal, which can become bogged down in specific terminology, it's much easier to just say that in order to have the typical tools required to perform the act in the first place, you must register. Not registering but still having the tools then becomes a criminal offense, and that's ever so much tidier and easier to prosecute.
We need to force legislators to define what constitutes a criminal act properly, rather than letting them get away with laziness.
Re:In other words... by mpe · 2011-06-15 18:50 · Score: 1

It comes down to laziness on the part of legislators and prosecutors. Rather than stipulating the sorts of actions which are criminal, which can become bogged down in specific terminology, it's much easier to just say that in order to have the typical tools required to perform the act in the first place, you must register. Not registering but still having the tools then becomes a criminal offense, and that's ever so much tidier and easier to prosecute.

It also leads to situations like someone who simply has a tool (such as a gun) getting a more severe sentence than someone who's actually killed.

Re:So NSA's Trubulence project by Eulogistics · 2011-06-15 03:16 · Score: 1

You mean Canada invading the US? I'm all for it; it's been a minute since we had a war on American soil.

Well, lets see. . .. by mallyn · 2011-06-15 03:18 · Score: 1

TIG welding equipment (stuff like the Miller Dynasty 200cx solid state welding power supply); can do stuff like weld locks to data center closed permanently

Screwdrivers, pliers, wrenches (can take servers apart and remove disk drives)

Drills, saws, punches (can cut holes in locked server cabinets to remove individual machines

Water jet equipment (such as those from Flow Industries; can cut holes in data center walls to get into server rooms)

Jack hammers; air hammers; diamond rock cuttings saws (can be used to cut holes in the walls of data center buildings

Bulldozers; front end loaders; heavy trucks with snowplows attached (can be used to tear off the corner of a data center building and expose sensitive servers

Trucks, trailers, trains, boats, barges, airplanes, blimps, bicycles, backpacks (can be used to carry stolen servers from broken in data centers

Your human body and mind (can be used to initiate hacks)

God (who invented all of us and gave us the ability to hack)

--
Most Respectfully Yours Mark Allyn Bellingham, Washington

I'm still amazed by naasking · 2011-06-15 03:19 · Score: 2

It still amazes me how people seek legislative solutions to what are purely technical problems. Hey politicians: you're doing it wrong. If you're going to legislate something, then legislate the use of memory safe programming languages and proof carrying code. Security problems would be mostly solved, and software would have fewer bugs overall to boot.

--
Higher Logics: where programming meets science.

Re:I'm still amazed by merreborn · 2011-06-15 03:49 · Score: 1

If you're going to legislate something, then legislate the use of memory safe programming languages and proof carrying code. Security problems would be mostly solved, and software would have fewer bugs overall to boot.
That'd drive up the cost of software development. People write buggy, insecure code because it's fast and cheap, and that's all the end user is willing to pay for.
Re:I'm still amazed by naasking · 2011-06-15 04:02 · Score: 1

That'd drive up the cost of software development. People write buggy, insecure code because it's fast and cheap, and that's all the end user is willing to pay for.
I doubt very much that this cost would be less than creating legislation, enforcing it via criminal investigations, trying the accused in our overburdened courts, and housing these criminals in overflowing prisons. Legislation should always be the *last* recourse, not the first one.

--
Higher Logics: where programming meets science.
Re:I'm still amazed by TheRaven64 · 2011-06-15 04:47 · Score: 1

Depends. I wouldn't object to a law requiring formal verification for financial systems, because the banks just pass the costs of compromises on to their customers and so the people making the purchasing decisions are not the same as the ones who will pick up the bill for bugs. For consumer software, it just wouldn't make sense.

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Re:I'm still amazed by StripedCow · 2011-06-15 07:49 · Score: 1

And those banks will not pass the extra development costs on to their customers?

--
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
Re:I'm still amazed by Kjella · 2011-06-15 08:52 · Score: 1

It still amazes me how people seek legislative solutions to what are purely technical problems. Hey politicians: you're doing it wrong.
If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Politicians pass laws, thus the solution to any problem is to pass laws. I just had the same today from an IT guy who wanted to use an IT solution to solve an error, without realizing it would make the system work but the data utterly useless.
Extra funny that he likes to say "assumption is the mother of all fuckups", yet his solution to that is going so fast you don't even realize the assumptions are flying by. It works much like ramming your head into a brick wall rather than find your way around it.

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings

If you can't catch the users... by zbrook · 2011-06-15 03:19 · Score: 2

Can't find the people who are smart enough to download and use My First Password Cracker, but I'm sure you'll totally catch the people who were smart enough to create it.

I thought Europeans were more pragmatic by bogaboga · 2011-06-15 03:19 · Score: 2

Why do these bureaucrats waste people's time? Instead of focussing in things that really do damage, like pollution or financial fraud with an example of an agency that sabotaged investigations, they waste time on non-issues.

Hacking can [sometimes] be good for the society at large.

For example, I would like to delete all information from one social networking site but I cannot. Hacking would be my only 'rescue'. And that's bad?

Re:I thought Europeans were more pragmatic by dmgxmichael · 2011-06-15 05:11 · Score: 1

Why do they waste time? Because Politics is about emotion.
Let's be clear here folks. By and large the majority of the readers here are programmers before any political affiliation is factored in. That puts us all in an uneasy tension with politicians because we and our industry are, at heart, antithetical to everything they are and stand for. Understand this please -- political science is a study of emotion, and the use of those emotions to sway mindless masses of people. Programming is a study of logic, and the use of that logic to control mindless machines.
With that in mind it should be little surprise to anyone how little politicians understand us, our industry, or our needs. Logic and emotion are entirely antithetical to one another. The two mindsets are utterly opposed, even more than the usual "art major" / "science major" split.

Legislative solutions to technological problems by spinkham · 2011-06-15 03:21 · Score: 1

Yes!

Lets make sure professionals can't test their own security, and only people in foreign countries can attack our infrastructure!

This is such a good idea, I wonder how nobody has thought of it multiple times every year for the past 15 years!

--
Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.

Of course by CruelKnave · 2011-06-15 03:23 · Score: 1

"but [the draft] goes no further in attempting to clarify what 'tools' might be subject to criminal sanctions". Why would it? By leaving it open ended, they're free to enforce the ban whenever they feel it's fitting for them; picking and choosing any "offending" software when they feel it's warranted.

Banning hacking tools is a way to lower security by __aancvu2993 · 2011-06-15 03:23 · Score: 1

It's common knowledge that people and companies only do the minimum effort they can get away with so I expect systems to become weaker over time if this is enforced.

So please bring it on.

They don't get it... by itchythebear · 2011-06-15 03:26 · Score: 1

Criminals will not be affected by this law at all, they are already breaking other laws, they aren't going to care about breaking one more. Meanwhile, people who follow procedure and legitimately need to do penetration testing on their own systems and services will be handcuffed. The result of this will be criminals tools will only get better, and "hacking" tools, used for legitimate purposes will be left in the stone age as developers have to jump through hoops just to get any security tests done.

Here is the real solution: Spend the time, money, and effort to make your shit secure, and hold people accountable who store sensitive information in a careless way. Almost anything could be considered a hacking tool, good luck enforcing that.

--
If what I just said sounded like a troll, it was probably just a failed attempt at humor.

If using them is illegal... by Nethemas+the+Great · 2011-06-15 03:26 · Score: 1

and it doesn't stop their use, why would banning their possession stop them? I fail to grasp how anyone can come to the conclusion that someone intent on criminal activities would mend their ways simply because another facet of their operation is made illegal. Guns aren't the problem, network security tools aren't the problem. People are the problem. If you want to solve the problem you're going to have to ban them.

--
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.

Re:If using them is illegal... by silky1 · 2011-06-15 05:57 · Score: 1

and it doesn't stop their use, why would banning their possession stop them? I fail to grasp how anyone can come to the conclusion that someone intent on criminal activities would mend their ways simply because another facet of their operation is made illegal. Guns aren't the problem, network security tools aren't the problem. People are the problem. If you want to solve the problem you're going to have to ban them.
Amen brother...Governments are only interested in banning "tools" AKA inanimate objects. This is easier than holding people personally responsible and therefore affecting the ability of said government officials from being re-elected. Inanimate objects don't complain and protest against them. They just like to say..."Hey look we banned [Insert inanimate object du jour"], everything is going to be ok! We really care!". Your mention of guns is a perfect example, only affects law abiding citizens who cannot protect themselves from the real criminals.

No need, just put a software whitelist in the OS by elrous0 · 2011-06-15 03:27 · Score: 1

If the Apple iOS/app store model is any indication of things to come, pretty soon PC's will be as locked down as consoles and cellphones. You won't have to worry about running any unauthorized code because the good folks at Apple, Dell, etc. will force you to get all your software through their app store.

--
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.

do not judge tools, by IZN0GUD · 2011-06-15 03:29 · Score: 2

judge deeds. it's utterly stupid and unproductive to focus onto the tools instead focusing onto the deeds.

--
.Play.Open.Minded.

So only criminals will have hacking tools by Shivetya · 2011-06-15 03:29 · Score: 1

I wonder how long before they decide my keyboard is a weapon too.

--
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.

Re:So only criminals will have hacking tools by arth1 · 2011-06-15 03:51 · Score: 1

I wonder how long before they decide my keyboard is a weapon too.
You have an IBM Model M keyboard too?
Re:So only criminals will have hacking tools by NotQuiteInsane · 2011-06-15 04:13 · Score: 3, Informative

If you've got a steel-backed IBM Model M, it already is.

No more MS Word by slapout · 2011-06-15 03:33 · Score: 1

Microsoft Word contains a macro language so I guess it'll be banned too.

--
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad

Re:Thanks to Citibank, this means NO WEB BROWSERS by Dog-Cow · 2011-06-15 03:33 · Score: 1

Now we know why Google is removing the bar from Chrome!

New slogan! by wall0645 · 2011-06-15 03:33 · Score: 1

Sorry if this has been thought of already...

"If hacking tools are made illegal, only criminals will have hacking tools."

Slashdot's Quote of the Day (aka fortune) by arielCo · 2011-06-15 03:37 · Score: 1

Today is a good day to bribe a high-ranking public official.

--
This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.

I for one hope they approve it! by Lifyre · 2011-06-15 03:40 · Score: 1

Just so we can time how long it takes for the entire IT Industry in the EU to collapse so completely scientists will be studying it for singularity effects.

--
I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"

He must be the the guy from the credit card ad... by jd2112 · 2011-06-15 03:42 · Score: 1

"Read My Lips: No New AXES"

Seriously. Banning the creation of 'hacking tools' will only stop the 'cybercriminals' who obey the law.

--
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.

Security Professionals by djowatts · 2011-06-15 03:46 · Score: 1

These tools that people use for hacking can also be used by security professionals to test the security of the network. I assume that most security companies do use them, and so these governments pushing this through the EU will have to put all of their security contractors in jail. Hackers will have a field day then, and WikiLeaks will have more information than it knows what to do with!

Now this is a slippery slope by Coisiche · 2011-06-15 03:50 · Score: 1

So if you successfully pull this one off, then what's next?

Companies not allowed too manufacture... weapons because they can be used maliciously... vehicles because they can be used maliciously...

Retarded idea.

And in other news of the ignorant... by Kamiza+Ikioi · 2011-06-15 03:51 · Score: 1

... EU Ministers ban the production of wire clothes hangers, screwdrivers, and hammers to stop car stereo thefts.

--
I8-D

And whats a hacker tool? by blanks · 2011-06-15 03:55 · Score: 1

The concept of banning "hacking tools" is just silly. What would these people consider a hacking tool? SSH terminals since they allow people to connect to compromised systems or to connect to machines with "hacker tools"? Or what about IRC servers since many bot networks have used them or offer the ability to let people talk about hacking?

Even some of the biggest "hacker tools" are used for real network and server analysis like winshark and the like.

This is simply the wrong approach to fix a problem. This is in fact the worst way to approach the problem. The real solution is to charge software companies for making insecure software. Don't fine the hackers for finding the exploits, fine the developers for not finding them. The software developers are the ones making money off the software, if they cause people to lose data or have their systems compromised they should be the ones that should be held responsible, not the person who found it.

Instead of trying to remove the ability to make "hacker tools" why not remove the ability or need of these tools by making more secure software. I guess that would be too easy though.

--
TruePunk | Games

Re:And whats a hacker tool? by pclminion · 2011-06-15 04:34 · Score: 1

Don't fine the hackers for finding the exploits, fine the developers for not finding them. The software developers are the ones making money off the software
In what bizarro world are you living? Most developers make money by collecting salaries, not selling software. Do you think our income is tied to revenue? I WISH! If you want to hold companies responsible as a whole, great. You want to impose penalties on companies for security problems that affect people, great. You want to impose fines on me, personally, as a developer working for a company? I'd be okay with that only if A) companies were forced to give me the time and resources necessary to do the sort of testing you are talking about, and B) my income is actually tied to revenues from the software (which they are not, presently), or if you simply increased my base pay by, say, 5x. I'm not going to take risks like that for free.
You want me to take big personal, legal risks? Then you're going to pay me in big stacks of greenbacks. Look at other professions where people can be sanctioned: medicine, law, finance. Notice anything in common among those? Any of them making $50k a year?

Re:No more debuggers. by digitig · 2011-06-15 03:56 · Score: 1

Why should the public be allowed to have software/web development tools? Where are the tax revenues in that? Where are the profits for big business? Writing your own software and designing your own website are like theft!

--
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?

Disband the EU by SimplyGeek · 2011-06-15 03:59 · Score: 1

Ah yes, the EU. Bringing freedom to the people of Europe.

Yeah, that's the ticket...retards. by MacGyver2210 · 2011-06-15 04:00 · Score: 1

These people are complete morons. Anyone with Firefox and a couple HTML dev addons can perform the exact same hacks that have been going on against Sony, Software Companies, and FBI contractors. Who the fuck lets people with no understanding of the issue legislate it?

The onus of the hack rests SOLELY on the person managing the network, and not at all on the people who stumbled upon a URL that lets them see passwords and usernames. The problem part of 'hacking' is that you assume unauthorized access to a computer system. All of the information gained thus far has been gained through publicly-visible pages which requires no unauthorized access. By making a publicly-visible page(often indexed by Google) containing your sensitive information, it is YOU who should be going to jail for improper security measures.

Trying to make out like the hackers are evil geniuses is bullshit. I taught my 14 year old little sister how to modify a URL for directory traversal or SQL injection. It's simple shit that the developers should have taken care of, but were too lazy or understaffed/underpaid to complete. You should be thanking these people for pointing out your security shortcomings instead of knee-jerking all of the potentially useful development and anti-hacker tools out of existence.

--
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits

Canada has that law by nebular · 2011-06-15 04:06 · Score: 1

We have a law like that in Canada, only it has a provision that if you have a legal reason to create or use those tools you are fine.

So it must be proven that the tools are being created or used for criminal purposes in order to be prosecuted.

Pre Crime by SimplyGeek · 2011-06-15 04:08 · Score: 1

Another angle to this story is that it's yet another attempt by government at pre-crime.

The cops should stick to arresting people for the actual crimes they commit when hacking, like: unauthorized intrusion, damage to service, theft of data, etc. They don't need to ban tools that can be used for good or for bad. That's silly. Stay away from banning things further up the pipeline and focus on the actual crime itself. That gives the highest degree of freedom to the people, while giving government the narrowest and least necessary power.

This is akin to banning guns, for example, instead of sticking to the laws already on the books against assault or murder. Stick to the action that harms another party, and not whatever inanimate objects are involved.

Re:Pre Crime by bugs2squash · 2011-06-15 05:27 · Score: 1

The reasoning over banning guns is far more nuanced than you make out. For example, preventing accidental gun-related injuries or reducing low-level crime with guns involved.
I agree, there is already a law to make murder illegal as there should be, but not all gun deaths are murder. There is also a law to make robbing a 7-11 illegal, but because guns are so prevalent, practically every 7-11 robbery involves one.
Also there is not just criminal law, but I don't hear of so many people that were financially ruined permanently when they accidentally shot someone by dropping their concealed-carry gun that they just had to have to make then feel safer.

--
Nullius in verba

Didn't I read about this before? by QID · 2011-06-15 04:11 · Score: 1

"There were ways, of course, to get around the SPA and Central Licensing. They were themselves illegal. Dan had had a classmate in software, Frank Martucci, who had obtained an illicit debugging tool, and used it to skip over the copyright monitor code when reading books. But he had told too many friends about it, and one of them turned him in to the SPA for a reward (students deep in debt were easily tempted into betrayal). In 2047, Frank was in prison, not for pirate reading, but for possessing a debugger.

Dan would later learn that there was a time when anyone could have debugging tools. There were even free debugging tools available on CD or downloadable over the net. But ordinary users started using them to bypass copyright monitors, and eventually a judge ruled that this had become their principal use in actual practice. This meant they were illegal; the debuggers' developers were sent to prison.

Programmers still needed debugging tools, of course, but debugger vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only, and only to officially licensed and bonded programmers. The debugger Dan used in software class was kept behind a special firewall so that it could be used only for class exercises."

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html

keyboards? by Gripp · 2011-06-15 04:16 · Score: 1

i mean, that's where it all originates from in the first place! what about command prompts? most hacking wouldn't possible be possible without those. but then again.. neither would my job...
besides, most of these tools double as IT and development aids (e.g. wireshark). further, what a few people use for malicious attacks other people use to understand where the loopholes are and close them. all this would accomplish is fewer people being educated about security and those who already know to operate with less obstacles...
yay for politicians who can probably barely use email making app dev laws!! ...

This will do nothing to improve security by andymadigan · 2011-06-15 04:20 · Score: 1

In physical security, you should always assume everyone has a lockpick. Likewise, in internet security you should assume everyone has metasploit, nmap, wireshark, etc. Building systems that are secure from cracking is not hard (protecting against a DDoS attack effectively is much more difficult). If you hire the cheapest external developers and contractors you can find to build your financial services website, don't be surprised if it's easily hacked. Good engineers should have no difficulty analyzing systems to find holes like this. If they understand the protocols and software they are working with, and avoid adding layer upon layer of "security software" that ends up obfuscating real holes while blocking non-existent problems (why would virus scanning text input be useful? Is your software really stupid enough to execute it?) then they'll have no problem writing secure software.

The problem from a business perspective, I think, is that an executive can't simply buy a product to secure their software. They instead must hire good engineers (potentially at a higher salary). In fact, there's a plethora of tools on the market for executives to buy which haven't been tested for security, and which can't be verified by internal developers but which are sold as speeding up development. Plus, of course security testing (like all testing) will always get shaved down to the minimum so that you can meet arbitrary release dates set by those who couldn't manage a Hello World program but think they understand development.

--
The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.

Anybody else think this is the government? by sunyjim · 2011-06-15 04:23 · Score: 1

Seems to convenient that LulzSec is attacking so many big name and government websites all of a sudden, Seems more likely that it's a little covert government intervention to make sure some new laws against hacking get passed by Europe, Canada, Japan and the USA. I don't put it past them. I have foil at home, but really, I didn't make a hat out of it....

Not again... by eth1 · 2011-06-15 04:23 · Score: 1

Dumbass legislators: "Let's make posession of $THING a crime to prevent $BEHAVIOR!"

Sorry, it doesn't work, and it fscks over law abiding people for any values of $THING and $BEHAVIOR that I'm aware of.

oh noes! by Errtu76 · 2011-06-15 04:27 · Score: 1

Now nmap, tcpdump, telnet and the like will all be banned! :|

Oh, they said hacking tools. Great, no more C(++), java, assembly etc.

Well, i'll go back to lego now.

BackTrack by MoldySpore · 2011-06-15 04:40 · Score: 1

As a network engineer and someone who uses BackTrack at least once a week for penetration testing, it is obvious to bme that the people who come up with these laws have no idea about anything related to the field of network and server security. Why are these morons making the decisions?

--

"I hope you know how very lucky you are to know me, because I am so incredibly incredible."

Re:Script kiddies suppliers by Opportunist · 2011-06-15 04:44 · Score: 5, Insightful

That's maybe what they have in mind, unfortunately that's not what they have in the law proposal.

That's the problem here, politicians try to make a law concerning something they don't even have the foggiest clue about. They imagine some CSI-esque "click here for big kaboom" Flashgame interface, but the law they propose would hit a lot of tools used to actually secure networks. The problem here is that the same tools that tell me whether I'm secure (from nmap to wireshark) are also the tools used to compromise that security. Making the tool illegal and not the use is a slippery slope at best.

"If you outlaw X, only criminals will have X" has rarely been more apt than this time. Because if I'm out to break a much more serious law, why'd I bother to worry about illegal possession of the tool? If I planned to rob a bank, would I care about illegal possession of firearms? If I wanted to hack the European Central Bank, would I worry about the slap on the wrist I'd get if I was found in the possession of nmap? If I want to secure my network, I certainly WILL worry about that slap, because my job as CISO hangs on my police record being spotless.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Ban Bricks! by oldmac31310 · 2011-06-15 04:51 · Score: 1

Thieves use them to smash shop windows.

--
http://www.acetonestudio.com

Great idea!!! by thrillbert · 2011-06-15 05:02 · Score: 1

Because banning handguns worked so well, as we all know.

Knife: a weapon or a tool? by Damnshock · 2011-06-15 05:02 · Score: 1

Which one it would be?

Will I be a criminal for using nmap or wireshark? those are clearly hacking tools...oh wait... now they're weapons!

I just find this situation ridiculous

Regards

Article needs a better title by xednieht · 2011-06-15 05:03 · Score: 1

"European Ministers Are Morons".
Software developers are now illegal?

--

Hope is the currency of fools

They are going to be pissed... by warGod3 · 2011-06-15 05:04 · Score: 1

When their ban includes every existing programming language and these guys can't play their Farmville...

--
"Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet." General James Mattis

Already have a workaround... by turbclnt · 2011-06-15 05:07 · Score: 1

From TFA:

'The draft mentions "malicious software designed to create botnets or unrightfully obtained computer passwords," but goes no further in attempting to clarify what "tools" might be subject to criminal sanctions.'

So, it seems like this bill is only focused on computer proggies running on a laptop, not hardhacks. In other words, the Bus Pirate, Chumby, Arduino, etc. crowds are all safe. Oh yeah...and I'm sure no one has ever written hardware executable code on any of these devices that could interfere with computer operation.

Man do I love it that governments are about 20 years behind the times when it comes to tech.

Re:Too late by Golddess · 2011-06-15 05:32 · Score: 1

1) Ask legislator what would keep their opponent from using the law in an unjust way.
2) ???
3) Profit?

--
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-

Use of Visual Studio... by Dahamma · 2011-06-15 05:57 · Score: 1

...is now a felony. Whereas before it was just a misdemeanor.

Is fucking now illegal? by roman_mir · 2011-06-15 06:25 · Score: 1

I thought that the most important tools in this was always a brain, so if 'creation of hacking tools' is going to be made illegal, will it immediately extend to the real 'creation' of hacking tools and make fucking without protection illegal as well?

--
You can't handle the truth.

Scope by DarthVain · 2011-06-15 06:25 · Score: 1

Yes if it is handled badly it will be a farce. Anyone can make something with Notepad, let alone any sort of programming language environment.

However I do recall back in my university days seeing things like VML (Virus Mutation Labs or something like that), which were basically just programs that would create virus based on what the user wished to do. Anyone with a mediocre knowlege could use it. This sort of thing is where script kiddies come from. Which is exactly the thing that commercial grade security and antivirus can defeat pretty easily (Norton and the rest).

Most other "hacker" tools such as "sniffers", and other network inspection tools have legitimate uses also and should not be targeted. To be honest, I don't anything they do will be of much deterrence to an actual hacker, as their knowlege is actually their weapon, not some tool or suite. Realistically many of the hackers probably work within a related field such as security or networking and as such would have ample tools and knowlege to do as they please.

This would likely help reduce the nuisance script kiddies, but really they are not the problem that is trying to be addressed, so then why even bother.

Re:I'm still amazed - its tools! ( or toolz ) by kubitus · 2011-06-15 06:39 · Score: 1

please first forbid the development of weapons!

then you may consider tools!

a tool is a tool is a tool

somebody no knowing this is a fool

with a tool you can create and destroy in contrast to a weapon!

So dear minister, concentrate on weapons!

sendmail by zieroh · 2011-06-15 07:18 · Score: 1

So would this make sendmail illegal?

--
People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.

Germany did it before by crossmr · 2011-06-15 10:28 · Score: 1

Didn't germany once ban wireshark? I think they quickly reversed that

Browser Ban? by skartek · 2011-06-15 12:17 · Score: 1

Does that mean Web Browsers will be banned. In a lot of cases thats the only "tool" needed now. I suggest actually training these "leaders" to some level of technical proficiency.

oh crap by hesaigo999ca · 2011-06-16 00:41 · Score: 1

Here comes the worst decision possible.....can you make hack stuff using visual studio, of course you can, guess what, you now have made the use and selling of visual studio illegal.....they are such dolts its not funny! I hate politicians that have no knowledge of technology! They should have specialists following them around explaining them these things....we would have less wasted time at our costs (tax payers) over stupid things like this.

On cue is the knee jerk reaction from governments. by lexsird · 2011-06-17 02:20 · Score: 1

Why on Earth would they want to shut down those silly enough to publish such tools? These are wonderful education tools for those working the industry, fighting to keep hacker punks at bay. This would be like during the cold war if the Soviets published all of their weapons technologies, or the US for that matter. It would be giving the opposition a golden chance on a silver platter to gain quite the advantage.

Surely the intel people are going to advise these ministers STFU.

--
Take the Red Pill.

Slashdot Mirror

EU Ministers Seek To Ban Creation of Hacking Tools

191 of 248 comments (clear)