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?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: australia, hacking, law enforcement
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
About two days less than it takes someone to create a virus or malicious monitoring service that will exploit said back doors.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This sounds rather like the intent of the (thankfully killed) Clipper chip.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: clipper chip
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: clipper chip
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: clipper chip
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: clipper chip
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?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
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.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
and this is why microsoft is doomed to fail
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who ?
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 ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Good fucking luck cracking SELinux!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
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.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The other alternative is to run linux on an old box with a few megs of ram - their viruses wouldn't run on it :P
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.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: unhackable
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 ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
VRP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I have heard of such a box
"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."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
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.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
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?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Trespass
> 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.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Wrong. That is illegal and called trespassing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I suppose it all could end up being very entertaining =D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
and in Texas it will get you killed. Really. A homeowner can use deadly force in many, many situations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Almost right
"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.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Almost right
VRP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Moving to australia
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
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."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]