Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
News Your Rights Online

Cybercrime Treaty Signed 137

lam0r writes: "I can't find a newslink for this, but CNN had on their news ticker that 37 nations, including the United States, had signed a treaty designed to make tracking and prosecuting 'hackers' easier and more efficient. What exactly is defined as 'hacker' is something I haven't been able to find out. ... Why was the public not made aware of this until it was done? Anyone know more about this item than me?" This is the Cybercrime Treaty, which was signed today by 30 nations and which we have posted about before. This analysis is probably the best so far - it might be a little out of date since the treaty has been revised once or twice since it was written, but the basics are still the same.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cybercrime Treaty Signed

Comments Filter:
  • by doofsmack ( 537722 ) on Friday November 23, 2001 @11:07PM (#2605589)
    This makes hacking WITH permission illegal. Does that mean a company can't hire me to test their security? Can they test their OWN security?
  • Big Suprise (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Moonshadow ( 84117 ) on Friday November 23, 2001 @11:07PM (#2605590)
    Nothing new. Just another way for government to steal personal privacies. Anyone NOT see this one coming?

    This is just an extention of the government's basic idea in relation to technology: give no one any privacies, anonyminity, or rights, and we can catch all the bad guys. The only problem is, the cure's worse than the disease. How much are we willing to compromise until there's a severe backlash?

  • by hillct ( 230132 ) on Friday November 23, 2001 @11:15PM (#2605625) Homepage Journal
    It's scary that so many lawmakers in so many countries can make mistakes like this. It just goes to show the power of ill-informed people in large numbers. Blind agreement to treaties like this serve to establish a dangerous trend in international relations.

    No longer is the United States leading in introducing new freedoms to people throughout the world, who are subject to governments offering less freedoms that are available in the United States. Instead, the rights (to due process, etc) available in the United States are gradually eaten away to become 'consistant' with the processes of other countries. No longer is America leading the way with regard to international policy. America's leadership durring the Cold War facilitated application of a degree of incluence which is so longer evident. Perhaps the 'war on terrorism' will manifest as the new cold war, and propel the United States into a leadership position once again.

    Then again, it can be legitimately argued that that the United States played a leadership role in stripping it's citizens of their civil liverties on an international stage.

    --CTH
  • notable exceptions (Score:2, Interesting)

    by windows ( 452268 ) on Friday November 23, 2001 @11:40PM (#2605707)
    In reading over who signed this treaty, two important nations that were left off were Russia and China. Recently, China and Russia have tried to conform to pressure from western nations, especially the United States, in cracking down on things such as distribution of intellectual property. They've shut down warez and music download sites operating in these countries with pressure from the west. Does anyone know why China and Russia didn't take part in this?
  • by WanderingEyes ( 538646 ) on Saturday November 24, 2001 @12:02AM (#2605762)
    From the text of the treaty: 1. Each Party shall adopt such legislative and other measures as may be necessary to empower its competent authorities to order: a. a person in its territory to submit specified computer data in that person's possession or control, which is stored in a computer system or a computer-data storage medium; That being said, I submit the following scenario: Police: Hand over the data on your hard drive which links you to [Criminal Act X]. Innocent Citizen: I have no such data, since I was not involved in [Criminal Act X]. Police: Since you did not hand over the data, you are in violation of the CyberCrime Treaty. You are under arrest. Come with me.
  • Re:Directv??? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 24, 2001 @01:00AM (#2605880)
    Its broadcast. If you broadcast something.. You can blame only yourself if it gets intercepted. If you didn't want it intercepted, you shouldn't have put it into the air. Now selling modified equipment in a means to defraud a company of business certainly is punishable by law. However, I have every right to intercept, descramble, and or monitor any broadcast signals that are directed to me. The gubment spys on its own people and other countries by intercepting all forms of communication. Every person should for there own security, be able to do the same so long as it is not a physical act.

    Next your going to tell me I can't listen to a specific radio frequency, or my neighbors cordless phone calls, or law enforcement with a scanner. You are ignorant if you do any of these things and you don't think people are listening. Accept the fact, or find another way but keep your ignorant laws off my body.

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...