Germany Declares Hacking Tools Illegal 299
dubbelj writes "Germany has updated their computer crime law to declare 'hacking tools' illegal. This will place most of the professionals in the network admin and computer security fields in a sort of legal grey area. 'The new rules tighten up the existing sanctions and prohibit any unauthorized user from disabling or circumventing computer security measures to access secure data (see the law, sections 200 and following [in German]). Manufacturing, programming, installing, or spreading software that can circumvent security measures is verboten, which means that some security scanning tools might become illegal.' We discussed a similar measure in January when Australia considered the same kind of legislation. How will this affect Linux distribution in Germany, as most standard Linux distributions come with these kind of 'hacking tools' installed by default?"
Lock Hacking (Score:5, Insightful)
I certainly have found a locksmith to be very useful in very legal ways - but then again, I'm the kind of person who has key problems
So.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait, what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's something legislators never learn (Score:2, Insightful)
what made the list? (Score:5, Insightful)
On another note, expect little in the way of secure software innovation out of Germany in the next few years.
RMS is right (Score:5, Insightful)
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html [gnu.org]
Re:Lock Hacking (Score:5, Insightful)
Hacking tools are more like guns: make them illegal and only the criminals will have them.
Our brains... (Score:3, Insightful)
So they've outlawed brains.
Brilliant. =)
Re:Lock Hacking (Score:3, Insightful)
Not at all. If you are against the prohibition of network security analysis tools you must also be against the prohibition of locksmithing tools.
End of Days||Daze (Score:5, Insightful)
The commission communication "towards a general policy on the fight against cyber crime" [europa.eu]
There is no agreed definition of "cyber crime". From a strictly legal point of view, it can be questioned whether there is any need for the term at all - it could be argued that "cyber space" is just a new specific instrument used to commit crimes which are not new at all. The term may thus be most interesting from an operational point of view, i.e. the operational instruments and procedures to fight against this type of crime must be developed.
With that said, as an American, I can almost indicate any connection to me as being an illegal one and cost the German taxpayers a bucketload of money with false claims. Let's consider the following scenario.. Ping. Simple administrative tool, can also be used for DoS attacks. Suppose I start a business
Let's take it a step further into XSS (cross site scripting)... The browser IS THE TOOL. Should all browsers be banned now. Oh those Germans. I know... What about a German, with a shell on a server in America developing tools. Now those tools don't reside ANYWHERE in Germany then what. I would have laughed that law all the way to the bitbucket. But... You're likely dealing with e-Incompetent lawmakers driving Beamers and Benz' who care little about the advances in LIFE as a whole thanks to computing both good and bad (malicious hacking has forced companies to improve themselves).
Sounds good on paper (Score:2, Insightful)
Knives are tools that can be used to stab people, but we do not make them illegal. If we *did* make them illegal (defining the item as "tools that can be used to stab people") then in actual practice the law will only be used to increase the charges already leveled against someone, or to target someone who has otherwise broken no law but is doing something of which the powers-that-be disapprove (such as...i dunno...criticizing this or that government official or policy).
Re:Lock Hacking (Score:0, Insightful)
That is sooooo untrue. In countries where guns are illegal, criminals don't use guns very often. In countries where guns are legal, deranged college students use them to kill their fellow students.
If you pick a metaphore, pick one that works.
Reply: Well, no phreaking problem folks...HAVEFUN. (Score:5, Insightful)
In a MAD dash governments globally will make all "Hacker Tools" illegal. Zoll Gestapo will be contracted and trained by the US Government, then deployed to Russia, China, USA, France, Canada... All heidi-holes, small/large dark crevices, and generally anything that can be screwed will be looked into.
"Hacker Tools" from telnet, ping, TFTP
Luddites love politics; because they are not required to know or do, anything right, and are paid anyway. Politics has become a form of welfare for the wealthy incompetent of the US, EU, Iran, Saudi, Russia, China, Egypt, India, Sudan, Mexico.... Politicians in any country are a pitiable basket of low intelligence, corrupt ethics, and fetid morals.
US, EU, and many others are in troubled/stupid times.
Re:Wait, what? (Score:3, Insightful)
Finally, a question which even I am qualified to answer.
It's simple -- who provided the tool?
If I install a rootkit on your computer, it's a hacking tool.
If Sony installs a rootkit on your computer, it's a perfectly legal way of enforcing their digital rights.
In simpler terms, it's a combination of gross annual income and number of legislators purchased.
Coordinated International Effort (Score:3, Insightful)
Most policy wonks that deal with this sector have already spread the word that computers are dangerous tools in the wrong hands. So, step 1 is to make the tools illegal. For example, "Your honor we found hacking applications wireshark installed on the defendants computer." No questions about approved uses are allowed because that makes things too complicated.
Don't bother with legal challenges, the objective is to make computers a content delivery device. Anything else is too threatening to governments, regardless of their borders.
Best case scenario as other posts have pointed out, the government gives out licenses that allow you to use/own "hacking" software. In the U.S., probably a process similar to getting a clearance would be required. This is happening internationally.
Since this is the
Required reading for Americans unhappy with their political process: http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/
So called malicious software (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Lock Hacking (Score:3, Insightful)
He is perfectly right, by definition if you make guns illegal the only people who own guns would be criminals (and law enforcement but then its not a total ban on guns). There may be many or a few of them but by definition his statement holds true.
Anyway in some of those places they use knives instead and kill more people than they did when they had guns. After all, why would they bother with a gun when they know their victim doesn't have one? Not only is the knife perfectly legal unlike a gun (convicted criminals can't legally own guns in most if not all of the US) but in a knife fight the criminal is probably much better off than in a gun fight. Remember that criminals are in better shape, younger, less prone to fear and are free to train with knives as much as they want (unlike guns which they can't train much with) compared to their victims.
In other places they all use guns since the main source of crime is gangs and they escalate the weapons used accordingly (their "victims" have guns in that case). Washington, DC bans almost all guns and there are tons of shootings there, the highest murder rate in the US by far actually.
So please heed your own advice and don't use statements that don't work.
Re:Here's something legislators never learn (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Problem Solved (Score:2, Insightful)
Any questions?
Sometimes I wonder if politicians are descendants from a certain Golgafrincham space ship's inhabitants
Re:Here's something legislators never learn (Score:3, Insightful)
How is that not a positive use?
Bullshit law (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Lock Hacking (Score:3, Insightful)
Unenforceable (Score:2, Insightful)
When will politicians ever learn? sigh...
Re:man ping (Score:2, Insightful)
The Facade of Law (Score:5, Insightful)
1. The lawmakers mean well, but don't understand the technology or the implications of this law.
2. They are deliberately transferring power from the Judicial Branch to the Executive Branch in order to appear "tough" on crime. When it's impractical to enforce a law that is broken by many people, the Executive Branch doesn't enforce it, unless they need an excuse to bust someone they don't like, or to search someone they're suspicious of. This gap between what is commonly enforced and what CAN be enforced, I like to call "The Facade of Law" as opposed to "The Rule of Law".
As long as the masses believe they are safe and the system is just, they won't riot/revolt. "Justice" is just an illusion to provide political and economic stability to a group of social (and hence moral) animals. (In my opinion)
Re:Lock Hacking (Score:3, Insightful)
Also mass killing are so rare in the developed world that they're only important to those people who are so media crazed as to be nearly brain dead which I must admit is most of the developed world. Not to mention that some of the most memorable mass killing in the US (and the world as a whole, look at the middle east) were not done at once or were done using explosives.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walther_P22 [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock_19 [wikipedia.org]
It's odd how people keep wanting to ban all these weapons because of the VT shooting which were not at all involved in it.
Re:man ping (Score:3, Insightful)