Hang out on ATS chat and get aressted for it. This is scary folks!

How Obama's Hacking Laws Could Make You a Criminal

I haven't been hanging around ATS much lately, but when I saw this, I knew I had to post.

Computer-security researchers fear President Barack Obama’s proposed changes to federal hacking laws could put them out of business, could make computers less secure overall, and could put some of them — and maybe even you — in prison. "Under the new proposal, sharing your HBO GO password with a friend would be a felony,"

A felony!? Really?

Would this also mean that if my husband and I purchased one account under his name for convenience, we could both be in trouble if I had the password and used it separately from him? That is quite terrifying. We know each others password for many account, asking one to check the others e-mail, or do something on a paid game account is not uncommon in my household.

Now, here is the real kicker

The RICO addition is likely directed at the type of organized cybercrime that emanates from Russia and other former Soviet-bloc countries, but if it becomes law, it could just as easily be applied to anyone affiliated with any kind of suspected hacking group. "Even if you don’t do any of this, you can still be guilty if you hang around with people who do," said Robert Graham, CEO of Errata Security in Atlanta, in a blog posting last Wednesday (Jan. 14). “Hanging out in an IRC chat room giving advice to people now makes you a member of a ‘criminal enterprise,’ allowing the FBI to sweep in and confiscate all your assets without charging you with a crime.”

So, if I am hanging out in ATS chat, and I give advice to someone having a computer issue that if used in a different manner could be seen as hacking, I am now considered part of a criminal enterprise? That terrifies the daylights out of me. It scares me because just normal computer chat, especially involving pc performance for gaming, could be easily seen as hacking conversations.

I am so glad i live in the land of the free

If it is law then it can be any IRC. Why name ATS?

Your OP suggests that you can get arrested for the simple act of being on ATS Chat.

Not so.

Peace

a reply to: calstorm

No. Rico's are complicated and hard to prove. You wouldnt and xouldnt get tied up in one for offering advice.

Sine this just happens to be ATS, ATS chat is relevant to this law. Titles have limited space, however, in the body of my post I felt i was quite clear that ATS was being used as an example. If more people are having issues with my post not being clear on that, I am more than happy to edit it though.

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

The article is specific about giving advice. Two lines from the article i would like to highlight.

"Even if you don’t do any of this, you can still be guilty if you hang around with people who do,"

And

“Hanging out in an IRC chat room giving advice to people now makes you a member of a ‘criminal enterprise,’

Bold emphasis mine.

I think the government feels the internet is too powerful a version of free speech. I works too well. They can't let that stand.

Since when is sharing a password considered part of hacking. Oh wait, law makers today are not known for their understanding of reality. I suppose there will be a blanket exception of all of the NSA.

originally posted by: roadgravel
I think the government feels the internet is too powerful a version of free speech. I works too well. They can't let that stand.

Since when is sharing a password considered part of hacking. Oh wait, law makers today are not known for their understanding of reality. I suppose there will be a blanket exception of all of the NSA.

You would have to be giving hacking advice to be part of a hacking group under RICO. The sharing passwords part is more about online content be it movie streaming or Windows product Keys, or Say gaming passwords.. Some people especially like an old friend of mine, or a lot of russians hack games and make them downloadable. You still need a password to get them installed, so they offer long lists of passwords..

My old friend used to hack companies, and just give out passwords to anyone.. He could make you any gamecube xbox or ps2 game. Or he could get you any password.

He can probably teach any number of people how to do what he did, and I am sure hes still under watch by the FBI after what went down, but anyway..

I see why they want laws like this. You shouldn't be able to get those passwords, and he shouldn't share them.

If you are giving your husband your password, you are not "sharing" it in any way they would care about. It's more about the mass password shares, and anything that is illegal.

I havn't read the proposals, but I suspect the article is overstating the facts.

"Even if you don’t do any of this, you can still be guilty if you hang around with people who do,"

Say WHAT ?

No one has any GD idea of who they are 'hanging around' with.

That's not to mention private chats within public rooms.

That makes you guilty ?

Eff that.

Thanks for reaffirming my opinion of the government is akin to a weapon of mass destruction.

ALL laws are taking a nuke to try to kill an ant.

Lots of collateral damage, and you can bet on it they really don't care.

As Montesquieu says Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

Now I understand what that means.

Those 'cyber' laws weaken the highest laws in the land.

The US constitution, and the bill of rights.

Hacking is already illegal.

This new Cyber push is gun control on steroids.

Making something that is already illegal more so.

Another chapter of Government is us, and They're doing things 'right'.

a reply to: calstorm

LINK to actual Proposed changes.

Even in the first bit I just read you can only fall under RICO for felonies.. If it's not a felony it doesn't count. And it has to do with felony fraud.

Hmm reading further this could actually be very bad, but not for what the article was talking about..

Civil Forfeiture including any companies or company property you own that could have been used in hacking or picking up data through "listening devices"


Ahh here we are the part about passwords..

It's for accessing computers you ARE NOT authorized to access.

If you actually read it it's about trafficking HACKED passwords.. It's punishable if it's a government computer, or if you gain access to info worth at least $5,000 or if this hacking is in furtherence of committing a felony

This includes accessing further into a computer you do have authorization to use into areas you are not supposed to access.

These have to be Willful actions to count.


This part is interesting:

(D) violating or about to violate section 1030 of this title where such
conduct would affect 100 or more protected computers during any 1-
year period, such as (but not limited to) by denying access to or
operation of the computers, installing unwanted software on the
computers, using the computers without authorization, or obtaining
information from the computers without authorization;

Meaning death to bot nets... OR people spreading viruses, rootkits spyware..


I read the whole thing. The article is just scare tactics.

originally posted by: calstorm
a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

The article is specific about giving advice. Two lines from the article i would like to highlight.

"Even if you don’t do any of this, you can still be guilty if you hang around with people who do,"

And

“Hanging out in an IRC chat room giving advice to people now makes you a member of a ‘criminal enterprise,’

Bold emphasis mine.

Some sympathy with that, in fact in many ways hilarious. Lets see now, what known terrorist/racketeer could I share my password with that would cause me to be clinked up? Lyndon Johnson..Nah! he has expired, Al Capone, Nope, he died of Circumcision, Gerry Adams? Mmm he's still around, in fact he's in Gubment now along with Martin McG. A Tony Bliar and G.W. Blush forum..there has to be one somewhere, maybe there's one for Bush, "Read my lips" SENIOR.
Hell, this could go on forever!

a reply to: KnightLight

The article did use a bit too broad interpretation of sharing passwords.

originally posted by: jude11
If it is law then it can be any IRC. Why name ATS?

Because it is relevant to the site on which this thread has been posted.

Your OP suggests that you can get arrested for the simple act of being on ATS Chat.

Not so.

Technically, it is possible to be arrested for being on ATS Chat. I would like to reiterate the quotation from the article in which calstrom shared:

"Even if you don’t do any of this, you can still be guilty if you hang around with people who do ... Hanging out in an IRC chat room giving advice to people now makes you a member of a ‘criminal enterprise,’ allowing the FBI to sweep in and confiscate all your assets without charging you with a crime.”

While we would need to actually see the laws to gain a confident grasp of the ins and outs, it does appear that having contact with people who may face future prosecutions relating to hacking could very well get an innocent person into trouble too.

This is a good example of how easily people get bent out of shape and into lynch-mob mode over nothing. KnightLight has perfectly spelled it out for everyone, if anyone cares to read the posts. To believe that people are now going to get busted for sharing their password with someone else or for giving advice over the net is bordering on certifiable paranoia. Whew!

I know it’s a lot more fun to get all worked up and blame Obama for everything, but get real folks. Do you realize how silly this all sounds? It’s downright comical. Get a grip folks...

a reply to: calstorm

Fear mongering not goingg to happen. Unless maybe your advice is a step by step guide to compromise a system or down a website.

There's not even enough prosecutors in the world to go after half the people you are describing, let alone jail cells. Not to mention the uproar.

This is on a par with that stupid guy Cameron, who wants to get rid of encryption on UK internet, making everyones bank details open to hackers, politicians, dumbest people I know of.

Can we please stop making vague repetitive laws?

It's gotten to a point where no individual can be 100% certain if they're breaking a law or not when doing something.

Some of this is probably already covered under this law. I'm not good at legalese, but there seems to be a lotta stuff here they could already get the average person on if they wanted to.

18 U.S. Code § 1030 - Fraud and related activity in connection with computers

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

The US Government has a 98.9% conviction rate.. Why .. because they'll charge you with a high crime carrying a lot of time, to get you to plead out to a lesser crime and only a few years time. They do it every day.

Effectively, everyone is guilty of something at this point.

It's ridiculous- all that has to happen is someone has to want you out of the way enough and they can find something to put you in that profitable prison system for.