Re: Civil Disobedience

From: Kevin L. Poulsen (klpat_private)
Date: Mon Oct 15 2001 - 09:23:27 PDT

  • Next message: VeNoMouS: "Re: Civil Disobedience"

    By way of an update, the Senate bill, and the House clone, both include as
    terrorism offenses a much narrower range of computer crimes than what
    Ashcroft wanted. To qualify, an intrusion or attack would have to cause one
    of the following:
    
    1) the modification or impairment, or potential modification or impairment,
    of the medical examination, diagnosis, treatment, or care of 1 or more
    individuals;
    2) physical injury to any person;
    3) a threat to public health or safety
    4) damage affecting a computer system used by or for a Government entity in
    furtherance of the administration of justice, national defense, or national
    security;
    
    Virus launchers will almost certainly qualify as terrorists, since every
    successful virus or worm hits many dot-mil sites. And there's no telling how
    "threat to public health or safety" will be interpreted. But the life
    sentence is gone for these lesser terrorism offenses. Unless the attacker
    actually physically harms someone, they won't face special penalties beyond
    DNA sampling, civil forfeiture of assets under RICO, and a slightly longer
    statute of limitations (eight years).
    
    Kevin L. Poulsen
    Editorial Director
    SecurityFocus
    650.655.6340
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 15 2001 - 13:40:48 PDT