UK Moves to Outlaw 'Hacker Tools' 308
twitter writes "New guidance rules for the UK's controversial Computer Misuse Act do not allay fears of impracticality, or of the banning of legitimate IT software: 'The government has come through with guidelines that address some, but not all, of these concerns about dual-use tools. The guidelines establish that to successfully prosecute the author of a tool it needs to be shown that they intended it to be used to commit computer crime. But the Home Office, despite lobbying, refused to withdraw the distribution offense. This leaves the door open to prosecute people who distribute a tool, such as nmap, that's subsequently abused by hackers.'" Somewhat similar legislation recently became law in Germany.
I better take down... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I'm almost done downloading...
Re:I better take down... (Score:4, Funny)
IDEs too? (Score:3, Insightful)
These laws are just retarded knee jerk reactions made by people who have no idea about what it is they are legislating on.
-Rick
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder if we showed the stupid leaders in parliament, this fact, then would they ban microsoft all together for creating such devious tools....
Re:IDEs too? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, not a chance. What they really mean is if you wear tee shirt and create a dual-use tool in your basement, is contraband. But the same tool created by a person wearing a suit and tie in a corporation then it's okay.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:IDEs too? Oh yes, and what about OO Design? (Score:2)
Will it actually come down to arresting me for code pieces like a TCP/IP transport routine that I contributed to an open source application - that somehow has been tied to whatever crime committed because they copied my source?
When did my peers and people of my parent's age become such softcore fascists?
Re:IDEs too? Oh yes, and what about OO Design? (Score:5, Insightful)
When they got scared.
The real truth is that there is no bogeyman, and that there's nothing to fear but fear itself. Even my four-year old knows that. ("[Girl Name], what do we have to be afraid of?" "Being afraid.")
And now, some "crimes" are nearly impossible to prosecute. How can someone in the UK file suit against a "cracker" from Atiqua or Afghanistan? They could potentially steal your bank account information and steal your life savings, buy a handgun, rob a bank, and put you on death row. Now, when you assume - note that word - that the backwards savages outside your home country have to have help to break in, then clearly someone with brains - I mean a white guy - er, I mean someone from the homeland - er, someone reachable by our police - must have helped them. That's complete junk, but to some the point is valid. The bad guys must have help, so let's go after the help. Never mind that the "bad guys" get paid more than I do.
And people are scared because they think things are the worst they've ever been. The fact is, the good old days were never here. Terrorists have been around since at least the Romans. We survive. The day of judgment will never come.
But that's not enough. You can't tell people to calm down - you have to show them that you're doing something, anything.
Seriously - people are attempting to legislate abstract concepts that they don't know about. I've seen laws suggesting watermarks in A/D conveters. One of the US Senators honestly thinks the Interweb is a series of tubes. He might not even be familiar with the concept of electricity. Imagine Ancient Greeks trying to pass legislation on the use of titanium in groundwater near nuclear power plants. If I give an opinion on civil engineering, I could be fined up to $25,000. If a politician does, he gets rewarded.
Instead of demanding the removal of the clueless, people just revote for the same guy as last time - if they even voted - or "stay the course". When those in charge have literally no consequences for their actions and get paid to pass legislation from special interest groups. Is copyright theft something that ordinary people really care about? Are there people who are thinking, "man, I'd love to go to work today, but I'm afraid that someone, somewhere, is copying a DVD to take the ads out. If only our government would pass some laws to fix that problem." Okay, maybe if the guy works making DVDs, but that's not a normal guy.
When the victims became criminals. Look at identity theft - it could be prevented with 100% accuracy if the credit bureaus updated their computers. All they have to do is add a picture to your report and require an automatic phone call to the last known phone number any time you want a change. That's it. It's now impossible to steal someone's ID. Of course, it's your fault for not buying title insurance, paying Equifax $25 a month for credit checks, and using your "internet thing" for banking.
When people started getting used to the idea of "I have nothing to hide". You do. Everyone does. I have skeletons in my closet, and I want them to stay there.
So what it really boils down to is that people are in general afraid of something, but they don't know what it is. So, they turn their wrath on anything that can possibly hold their ire. Immigrants, Hackers, ID thieves, the Russians, terrorists, etc. As long as the eye isn't on them, then they're fine. Torture the sandnigger or the hacker. They're the ones who made the world such a fucked up place. It's all their fault.
They're really afraid of themselves. How long will it be until the bank comes calling, or the boss cans them, or the spouse will leave with the kids?
It's a scary thought - we're lead by clueless, corrupt, whores who run the place by tacit consent from people who are too afraid to interrupt their routine.
This isn't exactly what I meant to say, but I think the power here has become unreliable. There's a lot of wind outside.
Re:IDEs too? Oh yes, and what about OO Design? (Score:4, Insightful)
"One of the US Senators honestly thinks the Interweb is a series of tubes. He might not even be familiar with the concept of electricity."
No, one of our Senators used a clumsy analogy. None of them really think the net is composed of tubes. Yes, they are legislating issues they don't understand... but they aren't retarded. I'm quite sure the majority of congressmen have above average IQs. They may be corrupted or arrogant, ignorant of tech issues, but not stupid.
I'm not really arguing with you, I just think you're passionate and letting some of your rhetoric get a little carried away. Take your own advice: "We survive. The day of judgment will never come."
"This isn't exactly what I meant to say, but I think the power here has become unreliable. There's a lot of wind outside."
I spent a moment trying to figure out what your metaphor meant... is "Wind" our political climate? Then I realized you're literally talking about 'power' and 'wind.'
Re:IDEs too? Oh yes, and what about OO Design? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not sure most people honestly think they have nothing to hide. They've been trained, however, to think that failure to act like one has nothing to hide will reveal what they have to hide.
I think it's likely a result of a culture obsessed with cop fantasy shows in which the cops can do pretty much anything they want to solve the crime, justified by depictions of the people the fantasy cops zero in on as nearly always guilty.
Re:IDEs too? Oh yes, and what about OO Design? (Score:4, Insightful)
When you build your code by hiring the lowest bidder with the least qualifications, then you should be liable. If a bridge building contractor didn't keep blueprints and didn't hire a qualified crew, then they would be sued or imprisoned. I can't just go and build a stadium or an overpass just because I think there should be one there.
If you do that with software - even software potentially worth billions of dollars - you get more contracts. Of course, it's not like anyone died as a result of bad software... oh, right. Any idiot can grab a book on teaching yourself programming and think they're an expert in 24 hours.
I have the knowledge to visit your reservoir and shut it down. (I'd have to actually visit it in person, but it's not like it's under guard.) That's just damned irresponsible programming on the part of the SCADA guys. Oops, your fecal chloroform count is way too high. Passport applications in Canada were compromised by bad coding, and last year the Canadian tax system shut down due to a glitch.
It is damned irresponsible to punish someone for making an nmap program publicly available when the institutions don't put on basic security measures. The cops say it's my fault if I don't lock my car. Why is this any different?
Re:IDEs too? Oh yes, and what about OO Design? (Score:4, Interesting)
Or maybe your logic just isn't.
Re:IDEs too? Oh yes, and what about OO Design? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
But the Home Office, despite lobbying, refused to withdraw the distribution offense. This leaves the door open to prosecute people who distribute a tool, such as nmap, that's subsequently abused by hackers
According to such a law, as long as the IDE was used to develop a piece of software that was subsequently used in a computer crime, they want to make the IDE developers liable. Now, the law may of course have exceptions for programming environments.. the article doesn
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Another thing that always pops into my mind when I read about such a proposed bit of legislation... let's say that they did make nmap illegal, but not IDE's (or at least not compilers). I *can* write my own (admittedly inferior) version of nmap with a little bit of time, based on the knowledge I've gleaned from reading "TCP/IP Illustrated". As stupid as outlawing the distribution of nmap is in and of itself, I wonder (seriously wondering, not "what's next are they going to ban cars?" slashdot-style hyperb
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine that if you did that, they would really come down on you if they ever managed to catch you.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:IDEs too? (Score:4, Insightful)
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
Still available for legitimate use? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And what happens when some enterprising criminals decides they want to get a license to look legit? Do we raise the license fees so anyone wanting to possess a programing IDE has to have a backer and a multi million dollar bond on them like some areas require for explosives work? Then all the software can come from large companies and we will be happy with whatever they innovate?
Requiring registration and licensing is only going to create a m
Re:IDEs too? (Score:4, Informative)
Time to flee the Fascist State of America... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Time to flee the Fascist State of America... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Idiots... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, the ironing.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think most people believe the government has no role in regulating some aspects of technology, they just wish any such assertion of power is done with the consultation of experts and the consent of the people.
As for health care, if I had to choose between control by government or the current control by corporations that place profit above the provision of actual care, I would go with the government. They at least have some small accountability to the public.
Re:Idiots... (Score:4, Insightful)
If the UK's system is anything like Australia's (and it is) then health care proffessionals "control the industry". Over the past 3 decades those politicians who have tried to dismantle our universal system and hand it back to corporate interests have felt the wrath of the 80+% of voters who like it the way it is.
The problem with the US is that despite decades of experience and a mountain of evidence to the contrary, a lot of people still hold a deep-seated belief that UHC is a socialist plot to take over their wallet.
Re:Idiots... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well that's the problem, politicians have to make choices on topics they don't understand all the time. Do you think they really understand economic theory well enough to pass many of the laws they do? Do they understand health care? Do they understand military strategy? Hardly. Sure they listen to "advisers" but basically you'll always find people arguing about if things will really work or not. This is magnified many times over in the U.S. where we only have two parties.
The best you can hope for is people yelling loud enough to stop government stupidity from passing things like "anti hacker tools" type laws. Unfortunately there's always SOMEONE yelling trying to stop everything which is part of the reasons governments do so little.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Wahey - Good news :) (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At the moment that seems our (UK) governments favourite game. Looks like they are getting bored and are looking for new and exciting ways to play the game.
Obligatory (Score:2, Funny)
IRC and Windows (Score:5, Funny)
Re:IRC and Windows (Score:5, Funny)
For once, I can feel good as an American (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Not surprised (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is not that they got copies. It is that they were so clueless and/or malevolent that they read it and instead of understanding that the book was railing against these practices, instead thought to themselves, "Hey, that's a great idea." Pretty much the same way most fascist policies get put in place.
It is human nature to fear things outside one's control, and it is the nature of sociopaths to gain more control over their own environments by preying upon those fears in others by promising "co
Re: (Score:2)
It's not about security. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
"No Unauthorized Innovation in Oceana", around para 6 or 7.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Instead they just criminalise the capability to commit a crime. No matter whether there may be a legitimate use for something, or whether there may be enthusiasts who take pleasure from understanding how security works. Of course, they're not going to actually prosecute people who they think probably aren't going to commit a real crime. Just those
Re: (Score:2)
seriously (Score:4, Funny)
Yes, ladies and gents, that was sarcasm.
Outlaw politicans who make stupid laws about tech (Score:4, Interesting)
Whilst the law was going through Parliament the Home Office suggested that "likely" would be a 50% test.. Anyway, that guidance is now out -- and there's no mention, surprise, surprise, of "50%"
If over 50% of the laws they make are nonsense, can we ban the politicians?
Reminds me of the middle ages (Score:4, Interesting)
Hopefully this mistake won't take 400 year to remedy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And, sure enough, it wasn't long after affordable printing and widespread literacy that Roman Catholicism headed steeply into its ongoing decline. (No, I'm not saying the enlightenment was a bad thing, just that it's exactly what the Church feare
legal system (Score:2)
The judicial system really is great, because the laws politicians pass to buy votes or appease contributors/lobbyists are, for the
Re: (Score:2)
Just for the sake of argument- (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, this would mean our having to get certified as at least minimally competent at what we do, much like hairdressers and engineers.
The idea is analogous to how, in New York at least, it's illegal for random people to carry lockpicks.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
New IT professionals officially 'apprentice' grade or somesuch until they're take the same exam and perhaps some mandatory formal education.
Re: (Score:2)
This change to the law is more aimed at distribution of software.
You won't get prosecuted for downloading nmap and running it (especially on your own systems), nor even for distributing it since it's a widely used tool. If you were to download some other port scanner that wasn't very widely used and start distributing it then you could fall foul of this law.
It's not in force yet so get writing your MPs!
Re:Just for the sake of argument- (Score:4, Insightful)
In both those cases, the requirements are based on the assumption that there is a risk to the customers, that customers cannot readily evaluate. (The free market can't solve problems, like safety in some cases, that are very difficult for consumers to evaluate.)
I'm firmly against the idea of making ownership of lockpicks illegal, for the same reason as I'm against this law. As I understand the law here in North Carolina about lockpicks, I rather like it. You're allowed to own them, but if you're breaking and entering, tresspassing, or doing something similar, and carrying lockpicks then they automatically count as burglary tools. I rather like this policy -- it adds harsher penalties for those who go about acquiring tools and skills for illegitimate purposes, yet allows people like myself to own lockpicks purely because we like understanding how locks work. The analogy to computer security tools is a very good one, I think.
Requiring certification of people representing themselves as computer security experts might make sense (I'd withold judgement until I knew more about how it worked, personally). But restricting the tools doesn't. Adding something analogous to possession of burglary tools, though, does make sense to me. (Well, somewhat -- it's complicated, and since you can't really break into a computer without some level of software tool, the analogy gets strained.)
Re: (Score:2)
Guns are licensed in the US. Does that stop gun crime?
Yes, this would mean our having to get certified as at least minimally competent at what we do, much like hairdressers and engineers.
This licensing is about ensuring competence so that if you hire a hairdresser or engineer you won't have all your hair fall ou
Re: (Score:2)
I own a set of lockpicks. I use them to pick locks. Both are perfectly legal (where I live, as I understand it). The locks I pick are locks I purchased for the purpose. I made the lockpicks myself. In the process I learned a bit about the world around me (locks, metalworking, etc). It's a fun and perfectly geeky hobby and it trains my manual dexterity and intellect. I see nothing wrong with this.
Now, in my jurisdiction, lockpicks automatically count as burglary tools if you're carrying them in comm
Please don't use my state as a paragon of freedom (Score:4, Insightful)
Certifications don't protect the public. They protect the certified against competition.
Re:Please don't use my state as a paragon of freed (Score:2)
Certifications don't protect the public. They protect the certified against competition.
Good idea! In that case when they (the government) ask us to check the security of a network we can just say: "sorry I can't legally do that, I'm not certified. cya later".
OK being a bit sarcastic there.
Re:Please don't use my state as a paragon of freed (Score:3, Insightful)
Certifications provide a baseline clue as to whether or not your has proven at some point to meet certain minimum requirements of knowledge and/or skill.
I agree though that certifications don't protect the public- such professionals would have to be bonded for that.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Setting up a private network to learn and experiment should be legal.
Re: (Score:2)
And that law is stupid too.
Criminalizing the potential to do wrong is a dreadful thing for freedom.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How about if such tools were only legal for licensed/certified IT and Information Security professionals?
The 9/11 hijackers had pilots licenses. I'm sure there are other similarly licensed terrorists. And paedophiles.
The Idiots are at it again... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, they may as well outlaw all of software development, because any software tool can be put to malicious purposes.
What they should focus on instead are the actual actions taken by individuals to compromise someone's computer or network, not the tools they use to do it with. For instance, there's already a number of tools on the market and in FOSS that can do DDoS attacks -- but they are normally used to stress-test a web site or some other network application.
The whole "intent" bit is always a slippery slope, ready for Kangaroo Court time. Obviously, these idiot politicians never saw or read "Minority Report", where going after "pre-crime" turnned out to cause more problems than it solved.
Yes, the governments of the world are not unlike a bunch of monkeys with dangerous toys -- total unbridled power, without the wisdom nor the precision to use it properly.
What about..... (Score:3, Insightful)
The solution: ban brains.
Outside the sarcasm tags, I wonder how long it will be before some moron tries that.
'Legitimate' tools? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:'Legitimate' tools? (Score:4, Insightful)
I see no reason to go down this track at all.
Cliche' (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Great Idea! (Score:5, Insightful)
Then we can just arrest everybody who has them, and we'll have our systems broken into by the black hats we missed, while those who would have protected us have their hands tied.
And that's while using the popular meaning of "hacker", rather than the correct one.
Quick! Outlaw Pencils and Paperclips! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Thought Tools (Score:5, Interesting)
WIth 'bad' being relative to the administration in charge at the time in said country.
Will they be outlawing FTP or HTTP as well?
Guidance text- rigged against free/open source (Score:3, Informative)
CMA = Computer Misuse Act
The whole thing seems to be rigged against free software/open source and heavily in favour of security through obscurity. Perhaps we should contact them and ask?
Everything below is copied from the guidance.
Prosecutors should be aware that there is a legitimate industry concerned with the security of computer systems that generates 'articles' (this includes any program or data held in electronic form) to test and/or audit hardware and software. Some articles will therefore have a dual use and prosecutors need to ascertain that the suspect has a criminal intent.
Whilst the facts of each case will be different, the elements to prove the offence will be the same. Prosecutors dealing with dual use articles should consider the following factors in deciding whether to prosecute:
* Does the institution, company or other body have in place robust and up to date contracts, terms and conditions or acceptable use polices?
* Are students, customers and others made aware of the CMA and what is lawful and unlawful?
* Do students, customers or others have to sign a declaration that they do not intend to contravene the CMA?
Section 3A (2) CMA covers the supplying or offering to supply an article "likely" to be used to commit, or assist in the commission of an offence contrary to section 1 or 3 CMA. "Likely" is not defined in CMA but, in construing what is "likely", prosecutors should look at the functionality of the article and at what, if any, thought the suspect gave to who would use it; whether for example the article was circulated to a closed and vetted list of IT security professionals or was posted openly.
In determining the likelihood of an article being used (or misused) to commit a criminal
offence, prosecutors should consider the following:
* Has the article been developed primarily, deliberately and for the sole purpose of committing a CMA offence (i.e. unauthorised access to computer material)?
* Is the article widely used for legitimate purposes?
* Is the article available on a wide scale commercial basis and sold through legitimate channels?
* Does it have a substantial installation base?
* What was the context in which the article was used to commit the offence compared with its original intended purpose?
Thank God for xen (Score:2)
Historical Precedent (Score:5, Insightful)
Guns don't.... (Score:2)
But always remember :
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Making that argument for handguns is a bit harder.
I am all for shooting criminals in self-defense. Go Joe Horn. Hang em all in the city centre and let their bones hang there for months.
However, allowing the population to have handguns causes problems. Not least because, unlike hunting rifles, handguns can be concealed easily. At the moment in England, two drunken idiots get into a f
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree handguns are not really dual use though. A better example would be 4x4s (SUVs). One of them was recently used to ram-raid a post office near me. There could be an argument made that only farmers etc really need a 4x4, and the rest of us could cope with ford fiestas.
When hacker tools are outlawed... (Score:2)
They can have my ping client .... (Score:5, Insightful)
Conflicting laws? (Score:3, Insightful)
IN SOVIET RUSSIA (Score:5, Insightful)
That just doesn't seem funny any more... :-(
Seriously, though, we're seeing a lot of this: the notion that any funny stuff, be it computer software, electronic goodies, chemistry, what have you, is a priori for bad purposes. Somehow due process has gotten lost in the shuffle, the user is apparently guilty until proven innocent, and must be dealt with accordingly.
Tragic.
...laura
\o/ (Score:2)
Yay, now I can feel it! The day they outlaw knives, crowbars, stethoscopes, matches and sleep pills is nigh!
And the most useful Hacker tool is... (Score:3, Interesting)
if you have the software foo to roll your own??? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I use these 'myminicity links' (Score:2, Interesting)
Also,
Re:I cant believe this word "hacker" is misused he (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I cant believe this word "hacker" is misused he (Score:5, Insightful)
Get over the semantic drift already, we're not all mired in some rose-spectacled view of the technoutopia where you have to have hacked solenoids under a model railway at MIT in order to qualify for the term.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Which is actually its original meaning, which is why the word has changed ;) Apparently it is from Middle English "gai" meaning "lighthearted or brightly coloured" (source [reference.com])
That's why you get lots of kids at school sniggering when old stories are read: they mention being "happy and gay" using the old meaning of "happy and joyous" rather than being "happy and homosexual".
Re: (Score:2)
You have to figure they already have laws on the books covering computer crimes. Maybe it gives them some sort of British-only satisfaction:
"Don't make us pass more laws saying it's illegal to do X! There! We did it! Shall we give all of you another, miscreants?"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I have basic DHCP server that gives out dynamic IP addresses. I also have a couple of machines without monitors which I can connect to via VNC or SSH such as a G4 Mac which I use for running OS 9 applications which never got ported to the Intel OS X world, on boot it starts the VNC server. I can then use nmap to find out the IP address and log into it graphically from my main Linux computer.