the simple fact is, with out freedom of information we arnt gonna process very fast, things will go under ground again we will just be doing the whole 80's fbi vs hackers thing again. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Blue Boar" <BlueBoarat_private> To: "Joel Rivers" <riversat_private> Cc: "John Thornton" <jthorntonat_private>; <declanat_private>; <ahat_private>; <vuln-devat_private>; <othat_private> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 8:11 AM Subject: Re: Civil Disobedience > Joel Rivers wrote: > > > > What civil liberties are we giving up? Since when is hacking, > > virus-writing, and website defacing a civil liberty? > > We have the right to research whatever we like. If code > is speach, then virus writing is a civil liberty. Defacing > someone else's website without permission is a crime, and > should remain so, with a reasonable punishment attached. > As always, people should be punished after they do something > wrong. Not because they have tools that might enable them > to do so. Not because they know how. Not because the > want to. Only when they do, IMNSHO. > > > I > > will agree that life imprisionment is a little harsh for defacing > > a web site but I think that harsher penalties hopefully will serve as a > > deterent for this type of behavior. > > So, if speeding, jay walking, and giving an MP3 to a friend are > declared terrorist activities, retroactively, you won't mind > turning yourself in when the bill is passed? Are you deterred > yet? Mind if we slap a GPS on your rental car, and send the > feds around if you do 66 in a 65 zone? > > > > > I'll say that the "increase in government surveillance authority" is the > > primary area of concern in regards to "losing civil liberties" in this bill. > > If anything, this is the area we should be focusing our concern, not on > > harsh penalties for those who are attempting illegal behavior. > > There are several areas that could be argued there. First off, > is harsh punishment a deterrent? For computer break-ins, there > seems to be little evidence to say that it is. Second, are the > punishments appropriate? Does anyone really think a web site > defacement should get a worse punishment than a murder? Third, > is anything being made illegal that isn't already? I think you'll find > that it is. No one should put up with something they should have a right > to do being made illegal. Fourth, is there a chilling effect that will > cause more harm than good? I think you'll find there is. > > Now, a note about this discussion from my position as moderator... > > This is clearly a political discussion, and it is off-topic except > at the moderator's discrescion. Some I allow, some I don't. This > one is pretty bad, and deserves some discussion. It's also timely. > I apologize in advance to those who simply want the technical discussion, > as your mailbox will be flooded for a day or two. I wish I could > say that this is simply a US problem, but the US has an unreasonable amount > of influence on other countries in these areas. > > People may have noticed that vuln-dev has been unusually quite for > a week or two. There are obviously many reasons this might happen, and > it does happen normally from time-to-time. I have to wonder, though, > if current legislation doesn't play a small part. > > BB >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 15 2001 - 13:49:05 PDT