An Interview With Hacking Team's CEO

Alastair Stevenson writes: I talked to the leader of the world's most hated surveillance company about its path to recovery and morals, following a massive attack on its systems. CEO David Vincenzetti, as you might expect, thinks that his company "deserves the protection of law and order," and disclaims (also as you'd expect) responsibility for what its clients do with the privacy-unraveling software it provides: Law enforcement must have a way to do what it has always done, that is to track criminals and prevent or prosecute crime. With the development of global terrorism and especially the ‘lone wolf’ terrorist, this requirement is even more important. Hacking Team has helped fight crime by providing a surveillance tool to law enforcement. The company believes this is a small step toward a more secure world for all who wish to used the Internet and digital tools lawfully.

Comments

Deserves the protection of law and order?

[ArcadeMan]

How about normal people who deserve protection from law and order? Politicians are corrupt, laws mean money instead of justice and governments all over the world are turning into dictatorships where elections are pointless and leaders do whatever the hell they please against their own citizens.

Hacking Team is as guilty as the people building bombs. Sure they're not the ones launching them, but you know that's all they're going to be used for.

Re:Deserves the protection of law and order?

[Anonymous Coward]

You say that is if any of it is new. What you are lamenting is how the world works, and how it has always worked.

The primary function of law is to ensure that the aristocracy can maintain their authority over the proletariat. The primary function of the police is to protect the aristocracy from the proletariat. Any benefits instilled upon the proletariat are secondary, and there primarily to placate in an effort to avoid rebellion.

Revolutions accomplish nothing. You unseat one group of aristocrats in order to replace them with another. No one remains loyal to the proletariat once they attain wealth and power, and no one ever will.

The best thing you can do for yourself is figure out how humanity moves and breathes, and then conform. Doing anything else will just create a lot of suffering for you and others.
 

Re:Deserves the protection of law and order?

[grumpy_old_grandpa]

Although it is true that power corrupts, and that "the new boss is the same as the old", there are just as many or more examples throughout history where resistance and revolution did change things in a positive direction. To take a few examples close to home: the American revolution and later the civil war, universal suffrage, black's rights, gay's rights. The list goes on.

If you lean back, hide, and let the powerful get what they want then they will corrupt. That will most certainly lead to a net negative for society as a whole. You might live a comfortable life, but you will die a coward.

Besides the eternal class struggle you mentioned, today's fight is about a free society vs. total corporate and government power, and there are many fronts. Some examples, in random order: Never-ending wars on abstracts (drugs, crime, terrorism); excessive military spending; Internet communication, privacy and freedom of expression; copyright vs. cultural heritage; government transparency vs. secrecy; police abuse, cops-gone-bad, no-knock raids.

It is of course ironic how the latter problem is more or less the same as where we started, with "writs of assistance" before the Revolution. So yes, I guess it's moving slowing, but overall we are moving in a positive direction.

Re:Deserves the protection of law and order?

[grumpy_old_grandpa]

I recommend the book "Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces" by Radley Balko. It goes into detail on why and how we got the police we have today. It's not a coincidence and it's not about "a few bad apples".

Since the 1960s, there has been a systematic top-down development towards a more violent, heavier armed and more excessive police force. This has been achieved through government grants, incentives, and case-law favoring and encouraging the police behavior we see today. No-knock raids gone wrong where innocent people get hurt is now a regular occurrence. Forfeiture without a court charge is a major source of income for all law agencies, to the tune of billions a year. The wars on abstracts (drugs, crime, terror) has made our society more violent and less safe.

If we continue down this path, the next step will be the people having to defend themselves against their government and police.

Re:Deserves the protection of law and order?

[DRJlaw]

Yes, because an unarmed black man running *away* from you is an immediate threat requiring discharge of 8 rounds in the back

The forensic evidence showed that Brown was facing the officer when he was shot, not that he was running away. The only question is how far away he was when the shots were fired.

Not the only one. Because another question is why you're confusing a clear reference to Walter Scott with a reference to Michael Brown.

The foresic evidence showed that Scott was facing away from the officer when he was shot. The video showed that he was running away.

Try again.

Sure dude

[Earthquake Retrofit]

"...especially the ‘lone wolf’ terrorist, this requirement is even more important"

They do an enormous amount of plotting with ... themselves?

There are laws for unreasonable search and seizure

[sims 2]

There are laws for unreasonable search and seizure.
Shouldn't they apply to your electronics as well?

SOB David Vincenzetti

[PopeRatzo]

If his company hadn't been hacked, and their filthy dirty laundry thrown in the street for everyone to see, would he still be talking about their need to find a "path to recovery and morals"?

I wish him nothing but a lifetime of regret and penury.

Really?

[koan]

"Alastair Stevenson writes: I talked to the leader of the world's most hated surveillance company"

The NSA?

David Vincenzetti should go and ...

[nomad63]

He needs to go and "F" himself. He claims law should protect his company but his company can break any law, as long as it helps his company make money. Hypocrisy anyone ?

Unfortunately

[waspleg]

sociopaths don't feel remorse ;)