Australian Law Enforcement Wants The Right To Hack Computers
from the the-modern-wiretap dept
As technology changes, so does the demands of law enforcement officials to figure out better ways to spy on your use of that technology. For example, efforts to wiretap Skype conversations has been a popular subject among law enforcement around the world. Down in Australia, the police are now looking for the right to hack your computer. At the very least, it would require a warrant, but a judge could authorize the police to hack into your computer and monitor it for up to 7 days at a time and not tell the owners for up to three years (depending on the circumstances — and it would require several approved extensions for it to last that long). Not surprisingly, this is rather controversial, and security companies in particular have made it clear they want no part of this (i.e., they won’t create backdoors) and fully expect their products to block such hacking attempts. How long until new legislation is proposed that forces security vendors to change their minds about that as well?
Filed Under: australia, hacking, law enforcement
Comments on “Australian Law Enforcement Wants The Right To Hack Computers”
How long until new legislation is proposed that forces security vendors to change their minds about that as well?
About two days less than it takes someone to create a virus or malicious monitoring service that will exploit said back doors.
Does Australia make it a point to recycle the US government’s bad technology ideas?
This sounds rather like the intent of the (thankfully killed) Clipper chip.
Re: clipper chip
haha..maybe they just told you it was killed???
Re: Re: clipper chip
Will their backdoor clipper chip rootkit be able to spoof the likes of ethereal/wireshark?
Re: Re: Re: clipper chip
Are you seriously asking if Hardware can lie to software?
Re: Re: Re:2 clipper chip
As I recall, the clipper was for encryption, with a back door.
If the cops are going to hack your box so that they can look at all your porn, then you should be able to detect the additional traffic – no? How is some hardware encryption going to spoof the amount of traffic being monitored by a sniffer?
These fools (Australian Law Enforcement) are making the classical mistake of unforscene consequences. They are assuming that computer systems are Windows not realizing that their action will advance Linux, BSD, and a dozen of other less known systems who great advantage is that not only are they not known but that they are almost impossible to hack. In the realm of data transmission there are codes and then there are codes within codes all of which can be employed within a network that to all outward viewers looks to be nothing but a simple Windows system.
Re: Re:
they are almost impossible to hack.
That’s pretty false. Scripting in some kernal commands on Linux is a lot easier than trying to land on a running Windows box and figure out where the right DLLs are in memory. Not, as you’ll note, that that’s stopped anyone from hacking Windows. You’re saying Linux etc. are better because “no one knows about them,” but security through obscurity is doomed to fail.
Re: Re: Re:
“but security through obscurity is doomed to fail.”
and this is why microsoft is doomed to fail
Who ?
Ha !
They just assume that such a feat is possible.
Never mind that some computers are more difficult ot hack than others …
So who are they going to get to do this for them ?
I have one thing to say to them: Please, do – that would convert 90% of windows users to GNU/Linux users – which is uncrackable unless your deliberately cripple yourself.
Good fucking luck cracking SELinux!
Re: Re:
90% of those 90% wouldn’t even be aware of what happend to them.
Dont be so confident about your OS. Given enough resources, your precious box will fall, but who is going to do it – cause certainly the cops do not the expertise.
Re: Re: Re:
Ever hear of Tin Hat linux? Look it up. Oh, and yes, I can statistically prove how impossible it is to break into it. Naturally, I don’t use javascript of flash on it.
The other alternative is to run linux on an old box with a few megs of ram – their viruses wouldn’t run on it 😛
Using a different chip architecture will help too.
But you might be right about those people not being aware – I have no experience with Australians, although I hear their elections are all won by FUD.
Re: Re: Re: unhackable
“I can statistically prove how impossible it is to break into it.”
Do not be so naive. It would take quite a bit more resources than a simple winbox, but it is not impossilbe. Even the hardened versions of *nix can be overcome. The only truely secure box is one that is powered off and locked up in a vault to which there is no key, and even then …
Re: Re:
More likely IMO, it’ll spell the end of all computers. 95% of the computer owners will quickly destroy all their machines and storage devices. The remaining, will be laughed at, just as horse-and=buggy users are today.
VRP
might this be another attempt by the “majors” to see who downloads what? hum….
I have heard of such a box
“Oh, the Aussie Law is the power in these waters, true enough. But there’s no box as can match my OS for security.”
“I’ve heard of one, supposed to be very secure, nigh unhackable… The Black Boxen.”
“Well, there’s no real box as can match my OS.”
“About two days less than it takes someone to create a virus or malicious monitoring service that will exploit said back doors.”
No kidding, how could anyone argue that exploiting said backdoors would even be illegal, considering they were put in place for the explicit purpose of allowing outside access. Afterall, it isn’t illegal to enter someone’s house if the door is unlocked (it’s illegal to take something though).
If you are going to do that, lets just do away with security altogether and just say it is illegal to enter someone’s computer without permission.
Re: Re:
“it isn’t illegal to enter someone’s house if the door is unlocked “
Are you sure?
Are you providing legal advice?
What would you do, uninvited in a someones house, if you heard the slide action of a pump 12 gauge chambering a round?
You might need a change of shorts?
Re: Trespass
> Afterall, it isn’t illegal to enter someone’s
> house if the door is unlocked
Umm… yes it is. You can’t just go walking around other people’s homes merely because they don’t lock the door.
Try it and see how fast you get locked up for breaking and entering, and then listen close as your lawyer explains to you that the “breaking” part isn’t really about physically breaking a lock or door or window as most people think. It’s a holdover from old English which means “breaking the close”, the close being the threshold of a residence. So even if a door is wide open, if you cross the threshold without permission, you’re breaking and entering the residence and you can– and most likely will– do time for it.
Re: Re:
“No kidding, how could anyone argue that exploiting said backdoors would even be illegal, considering they were put in place for the explicit purpose of allowing outside access. Afterall, it isn’t illegal to enter someone’s house if the door is unlocked (it’s illegal to take something though).”
Wrong. That is illegal and called trespassing.
Just put up a Honeypot for them, lol
So the security companies might be forced to build backdoors…but what about open source? What if I do my own security? Sure, it’s probably far from perfect, but it’d mess with the police newbs running keylogger installs remotely…
I suppose it all could end up being very entertaining =D
It is illegal to enter a persons home, property or premises uninvited, regardsless of whether or not a door is unlocked… It’s called Trespass…
Re: Re:
“It is illegal to enter a persons home, property or premises uninvited, regardsless of whether or not a door is unlocked… It’s called Trespass…”
and in Texas it will get you killed. Really. A homeowner can use deadly force in many, many situations.
Almost right
“Breaking the close” only refers to trespass of land: The common law trespass of unlawful entering upon the land of another. 187 S.E. 349, 350
“Breaking and entering” however does involve moving ANYTHING in order to enter a residence.
n. 1) the criminal act of entering a residence or other enclosed property through the slightest amount of force (even pushing open a door), without authorization. If there is intent to commit a crime, this is burglary. If there is no such intent, the breaking and entering alone is probably at least illegal trespass, which is a misdemeanor crime.
Re: Almost right
Some schools teach that every state sets their own [criminal] laws. And many judges in each state have their own independent interpretations thereupon. Even precedents get rev’d., or ignored, particularly by juries. So much for citations and common law!
VRP
Moving to australia
Sounds like I need to move to Australia and work for the law down there, a White-Hat would be in high demand.
Think I’ll move there. seen britian?
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/01/uk-approves-pol.html
“The UK’s Home Office is supporting a proposal that would allow British police or MI5 agents to hack home, office and other private computers without a warrant to intercept e-mail traffic and monitor a user’s other computer activities.”