3 ms·

The DMCA, in the US. Other statutes in other markets. Hacking computers is pretty prima facie criminal everywhere. It's true that there are inter-jurisdictio

by ajross 3y ago

The DMCA, in the US. Other statutes in other markets. Hacking computers is pretty prima facie criminal everywhere. It's true that there are inter-jurisdictional edge cases (cracking an iPhone in India via an attack from Israel probably isn't illegal in the USA,etc...) which allows NSO to operate more freely than we'd like. But no one seriously claims this is legal activity anywhere in particular, just that we can't catch them. Basically the distinction is one of law enforcement authority, not legality.

kube-system 3y ago
The CFAA is the broadest and most relevant US statute regarding computer hacking. But yes, international computer hackers typically operate outside of the jurisdictional reach of their targets.
PeterisP 3y ago
The point I'm hearing in the parent post is more like that many of the state actors using such attacks against domestic targets actually may be legally allowed to do so, if they have passed laws which permit their own security services to use such software on their residents' phones. Even in USA that likely could be legal with an appropriate court warrant, and many other countries have more permissive constitutions.
- jayrot 3y ago
  > Even in USA that likely could be legal with an appropriate court warrant Can you expand upon this? I'm not particularly familiar but it doesn't seem right. Obviously LEO agencies are allowed to subpoena private information, but can they legally use exploits with a warrant? Are there recorded examples of this? [Based on your reference to warrants, I guess I'm excluding the NSA or other supposed state-level spy agencies that supposedly secretively deploy such tactics]
  - PeterisP 3y ago
    I'm not a lawyer and the proper answer is likely state-dependent, but why not? It's well established that with an appropriate warrant, LEO have always been able to come into your house without telling you and add hidden surveillance bugs to listen on your communications; they have always been allowed to physically modify or replace your phone (e.g. physical phone wiretaps a century ago); Electronic Communications Privacy Act reasserts that this applies also to electronic surveillance and digital communications; so (as a non-expert) I don't really see why that wouldn't apply to smartphone exploits as well. We do see exploits being applied to devices in LEO possession (e.g. https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/14/22383957/fbi-san-bernadino-iphone-hack-shooting-investigation https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/14/22383957/fbi-san-bernadin... for one random example) to recover evidence. The main restriction is the constitutional limits of 4th amendment which requires specific warrants for each case - which is a significant practical obstacle, so the circumstances in which warrantless wiretapping is permitted (e.g. by PATRIOT act) is a contentious issue; however, it's not relevant if a proper warrant is obtained.

by ajross 3y ago

kube-system 3y ago

The CFAA is the broadest and most relevant US statute regarding computer hacking. But yes, international computer hackers typically operate outside of the jurisdictional reach of their targets.

PeterisP 3y ago

The point I'm hearing in the parent post is more like that many of the state actors using such attacks against domestic targets actually may be legally allowed to do so, if they have passed laws which permit their own security services to use such software on their residents' phones. Even in USA that likely could be legal with an appropriate court warrant, and many other countries have more permissive constitutions.

jayrot 3y ago
> Even in USA that likely could be legal with an appropriate court warrant Can you expand upon this? I'm not particularly familiar but it doesn't seem right. Obviously LEO agencies are allowed to subpoena private information, but can they legally use exploits with a warrant? Are there recorded examples of this? [Based on your reference to warrants, I guess I'm excluding the NSA or other supposed state-level spy agencies that supposedly secretively deploy such tactics]
- PeterisP 3y ago
  I'm not a lawyer and the proper answer is likely state-dependent, but why not? It's well established that with an appropriate warrant, LEO have always been able to come into your house without telling you and add hidden surveillance bugs to listen on your communications; they have always been allowed to physically modify or replace your phone (e.g. physical phone wiretaps a century ago); Electronic Communications Privacy Act reasserts that this applies also to electronic surveillance and digital communications; so (as a non-expert) I don't really see why that wouldn't apply to smartphone exploits as well. We do see exploits being applied to devices in LEO possession (e.g. https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/14/22383957/fbi-san-bernadino-iphone-hack-shooting-investigation https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/14/22383957/fbi-san-bernadin... for one random example) to recover evidence. The main restriction is the constitutional limits of 4th amendment which requires specific warrants for each case - which is a significant practical obstacle, so the circumstances in which warrantless wiretapping is permitted (e.g. by PATRIOT act) is a contentious issue; however, it's not relevant if a proper warrant is obtained.