Home page logo
/

pen-test logo Penetration Testing mailing list archives

Re: Why do we vote these people in?
From: Hiro Protagonist <admin () gridlocked net>
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 18:44:02 -0500 (CDT)

Yeah, The Australian government just love passing in computer laws, we
already have the censorship and ASIO one. Ontop of that we have crap
bandwidth, but...it's the governments own ignorance that saves us from
these stupid laws. Protecting computers and keeping people safe online can
only be done by professional hackers,  government sure as hell aint gonna
do it. It's only bright minds with the right skill and vision that can. In
this bill you notice the ignorance standing out so blatantly:

"the Cybercrime Bill 2001 was introduced by the Government in July, and
proposes seven new hi-tech offences, covering hacking, denial-of-service
attacks, website vandalism, spreading viruses, and using computers in
offences such as stalking, fraud and sabotage."

Going through the bills the term hacking is used to represent the offense
of breaking into a computer without being authorised, but they didn't
define it.  They use hacking all over the place too, which really is
pretty stupid, because as we know a hacker is actually a highly skilled
computer specialist/prgrammer and not a cracker. . They don't mention
about cracking and they don't mention any current terminology at all,
actually. Like whitehats, security engineers, etc. Most professional
security engineers can get around this bill ok. The badest part about it
is, the government can get a court order, come to our very home and make
computer professionals in Australia assist them in crimes. Ontop of that,
we have the censorship laws, and a law making it legal for our CIA
equivalent ASIO to be allowed to break into any computer in Australia. AND
now, more laws telling us we have to assist the goverment in computer
crimes. Ontop of all that again we have really bad bandwidth too! So I
guess you may notice alot of Australians moving overseas if the Austraian
government doesn't lighten up a bit and actually take the time to research
into technology. In these times restrictions placed upon people and
evolution itself, pisses people off that can actually come to understand
change in society and how to keep harmony the right ethical way . Poor
Australian networks are going to be a sitting duck in the future of war if
they leave it upto our government to PROTECT them and not the actual
PEOPLE that can.

That's my two bucks worth.

Best regards,

Michael Korolew
IT Security Engineer/Hacker          Secured Networks
E-Mail: admin () gridlocked net    "Lock onto Secured.com.au"
http://www.gridlocked.net       http://www.secured.com.au



Luke Potter wrote:

This may be a bit off topic, but here goes,

The passing of this Bill has been likened to a knee jerk reaction on the
governments part, and will greatly influence how security engineers in
Australia go about their business.

http://australianit.news.com.au/common/storyPage/0,3811,2944524%5E442,00.htm
l

Sorry about the size of the quote, but this is an extract from the
explanatory memoranda for the new bill...

This offence is designed to cover persons who possess programs or
technology
designed to hack into other peoples computer systems or impair data or
electronic communication. For example, a person will commit the offence if
the person possesses a program which will enable him or her to launch a
denial of service attack against a Commonwealth Departments computer
system
and intends to use the program for that purpose. It would also be an
offence
for a person to possess a disk containing a computer virus that the person
intends to release over the Internet in order to impair data in infected
computers. In both instances, the person would also commit the offence if
he
or she intends to provide the program to another person for the purpose of
enabling the other person to impair electronic communication or computer
data. There will be many occasions where that intention will be evident
from
the content of the data.

There is no requirements or set conditions which must be met in order for
a
prosecuting body to determine how 'intent' is to be determined which means
that it could be extremely hard to defend yourself if there is a motive
(regardless of whether or not you would actually carry it out).


Regards

Luke

------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail may be confidential. Any opinions expressed herein are the
opinion of the writer unless there is an express indication to the
contrary.
If you are not the intended recipient of this communication please delete
and destroy all copies and immediately reply by return e-mail. Ipex ITG
disclaims all liability and responsibility for any direct or indirect loss
arising from this e-mail and/or any attachments.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is provided by the SecurityFocus Security Intelligence Alert
(SIA)
Service. For more information on SecurityFocus' SIA service which
automatically alerts you to the latest security vulnerabilities please
see:
https://alerts.securityfocus.com/


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is provided by the SecurityFocus Security Intelligence Alert (SIA)
Service. For more information on SecurityFocus' SIA service which
automatically alerts you to the latest security vulnerabilities please see:
https://alerts.securityfocus.com/


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]