Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
United Kingdom Government Privacy Your Rights Online IT

UK's GCHQ Admits To Using Vulnerabilities To Hack Target Systems 57

Bismillah (993337) writes "Lawyers for the GCHQ have told the Investigatory Powers Tribunal in the UK that the agency carries out the same illegal Computer Network Exploitation (CNE) operations that criminals and hackers do. Except they do it legally. GCHQ is currently being taken to court by Privacy International and five ISPs from UK, Germany, the Netherlands, Zimbabwe and South Korea for CNE operations that the agency will not confirm nor deny as per praxis."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

UK's GCHQ Admits To Using Vulnerabilities To Hack Target Systems

Comments Filter:
  • will not confirm nor deny as per praxis.

    What does an explodey Klingon moon have to do with this?

  • Something is illegal when there are laws or treaties adopted by the country in question that render the actions illegal. If there is no law or treaty that interdicts the GCHQ from hacking third parties then it cannot be illegal.

    Timothy & the people he likes to promote often use words like "unconstitutional" & "illegal" using their own private definitions of the words -- but all they do is render their utterances meaningless hype.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      " If there is no law or treaty that interdicts the GCHQ from hacking third parties then it cannot be illegal."

      They have already been found to have broken the law in UK jurisdiction.
      https://privacyinternational.org/?q=node/482

      There are plenty of laws. And GCHQ are not protected by Jurisdiction, Belgacom can prosecute for the Belgian telephone hack as can everyone else. The bit we know from Snowden shows its far worse than IPT are admitting, they did bulk collection, and defined British telecoms as foreign si

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I look forward to those responsible being identified and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

        Or past offences ignored and new laws enacted to make future actions legal or new laws enacted and applied retrospectively.

        • by phayes ( 202222 )

          I see that anonymous cowards are still abysmally stupid. If you can look forward to laws that retroactively make some behavior that you dislike illegal then you open the doors to all retroactive laws, like one that I would prefer that would find all the AC's posting dumb comments like yours and neutering them.

    • @phayes: "Something is illegal when there are laws or treaties adopted by the country in question that render the actions illegal. If there is no law or treaty that interdicts the GCHQ from hacking third parties then it cannot be illegal.

      Computer Misuse Act 1990 [wikipedia.org]

      'Sections 1-3 of the Act introduced three criminal offences:

      unauthorised access to computer material, punishable by 6 months' imprisonment or a fine "not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale" (currently £5000);

      unauthorised acces
    • by Sique ( 173459 )
      Just because a police officer in the UK has the right to arrest and interrogate suspects, it is not legal for him to arrest and interrogate people in other countries too. And the lawsuits are in other countries.
      • by phayes ( 202222 )

        That also depends on treaties signed between the two countries. As for lawsuits brought in country B on the sovereign government of country A, they almost always die a quiet death (Civil suits brought by victims of terrorism upon the Iranian government being an example in which the US State department has been arguing that the suits should be thrown out).

    • There are plenty of laws prohibiting GCHQ from hacking third parties, e.g. they are in direct violation of European and German law (both civil and criminal law). That's why ISPs have sued them.

      The problem is just that it's damned hard to prove it, since GCHQ is somewhat sneaky and backed up by a corrupt and fascist government.

      • by phayes ( 202222 )

        Snort, "corrupt and fascist government". You're either an anarchist opposed to all government or the hypocritical supporter of your own local flavor.

        Every government has it's own spies. Germany's BND in particular having been shown to perform the same mass & targeted data collection that German politicians were claiming that only the NSA & the GCHQ were doing.

    • by ledow ( 319597 )

      This is why almost every law is covered by an exemption for the purposes of law enforcement (police pretending to be someone else in a sting operation, for example) or national security (which is what GCHQ hide behind).

      Like the "Google not paying UK tax" thing - what they did was ENTIRELY legal, or else they'd be before the courts. But it's considered morally "wrong" so the law gets changed over time to match with the expectation (the "spirit" of the law and not just the "word" of the law).

      Almost by defini

  • Hmm (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cascadingstylesheet ( 140919 ) on Thursday March 19, 2015 @05:57AM (#49290233)
    "Police carry the same projectile weapons that criminals do. Except they do it legally."
    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

      Good job the police never accidentally shot anyone. Good job that no-one else will ever discover these exploits and begin quietly using them to screw the people that GCHQ is supposed to be protecting.

  • Oh, my! Hah ha ha, please forgive me! Ha ha ha ha That's a good one!

  • I'm sorry but did anyone even think that they DIDN'T already do this?

  • So are they responsible for the breach just before Christmas 2013 that exposed millions of credit card details?

    Target should sue them, and there could be a class action lawsuit from the affected customers.
    And the 1700 workers that were fired in the Twin Cities the other day should get some of the damages too.

    • I guess I need more coffee, I can't tell if you're joking, trolling or stupid.

      If it was a joke you really need to work on that.

  • by koan ( 80826 )

    the agency carries out the same illegal Computer Network Exploitation (CNE) operations that criminals and hackers do. Except they do it legally.

    LOL, So... it is a crime, not because it is morally and ethically questionable, but because you told us it is, and you told us it's OK for you to do it.

  • "it is not illegal if the president does it"

People who go to conferences are the ones who shouldn't.

Working...