Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'User Submitted News' started by coolness, Jun 15, 2011.
We will have to wait and see the consequences o.o.
That article is from Australia. Why not use a European one.
Good grief, we're going back in time to 1984 . . .
Urgh. Hopefully the relevant people will see the lessons of Germany (the UK has similar but they are considerably weaker) and kick this in the head. Of course that depends on politicos knowing something about computers and if Germany's can not do it I hold out little hope of most others with the possible exception of some of the Nordic countries.
Also another article that might be of interest
The law should indeed be better specified. Are there exceptions? Can the government or professional hackers use them?
Does this also apply to ethical hacking?
That's what I asked.
ethical hacking = hacking ? cracking
Or am I mistaken?
That is the problem, the laws are so woolly they can make them fit whatever scenario they want.
i will miss you on cold nights
It stands to reason that Universally, the people making the laws have no idea what they are trying to ban.
does that mean we cant use axes to chop wood?
There is not even really a way to call yourself a professional/chartered computer engineer (compared to the likes of medicine, more traditional engineering and other sciences) and hacking courses although starting to appear are not all that formalised or even respected. Although you did not mention it would ask does one have to be a professional hacker- I could just be a network admin (my port scanner is used to see if I accidentally left something open) or even an enthusiastic amateur (calling oneself an engineer and being able to do engineering tasks are quite different).
As for government I hate to break it you but they more or less do what they like.
As for specificity I see it somewhat like drug laws- you can only really ban things as they come up and that is so ineffective it is not funny. I have avoided the phrase dual use technology thus far as well- my hex editor has hacked many things and solved problems many other times, my debugger had hacked many things and solved problems in code, my computer remote control software has been used to fix/use things remotely and can just as easily be used for malicious purposes.
All this "misuse" is arguably covered by existing laws and this is before we even get into the grey area stuff- my debugger has also helped reverse engineer protocols of proprietary technologies which depending on how I gain information and what I do with it can be highly illegal or actually explicitly covered as legal in other laws ("reverse engineering for interoperability" being the choice phrase here).
Because of all this a badly worded law would be a terrible drag on things and that has serious knock on effects.
if this law is allowed i see only a difference......
torrent sites will be more frequented
I think he means that that thanks to Lulzsec hacking sites this is happening.
it has nothing to do with lulzsec. although what they are doing is getting ridiculous..
I would have wagered money on that being the logic used there but that would then making this attempt at legislation a reactionary law to a current bogeyman which err see history. I will note that thus far I have not seen anything from the people responsible for this spelling out or even inferring a link to them which is a good thing in my book although whether it means they have a clue or just have good speed writers/advisers I will leave to others to debate.
I swear, people with power are just sacks of skin drying out waiting to die.
The only thing this law will affect is legitimate security companies; people like lulzsec do not care if it is against the law, they will do it anyways. However, businesses are more out there and any attempt to use these tools to test their own vulnerabilities won't be able to do it.
Sack of skins...