3 ms·
It also has something to do with the so called "Hackerparagraph" [1] under which whitehat hacking is basically impossible in Germany. Even writing a program tha
by foepys 6mo ago
It also has something to do with the so called "Hackerparagraph" [1] under which whitehat hacking is basically impossible in Germany. Even writing a program that could potentially be used for hacking is a crime. If you followed the law word for word the authors of e.g. curl could be charged under this law.
1: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorbereiten_des_Aussp%C3%A4hens_und_Abfangens_von_Daten https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorbereiten_des_Aussp%C3%A4hen... [de]
- PowerElectronix 6mo agoIt'll nevee cease to amaze me how some countries find such creative ways to stifle innovation while they look to be caring about safety or what not.
- JumpCrisscross 6mo ago> some countries find such creative ways to stifle innovation while they look to be caring about safety or what not I'm not sure white-hat hacking is broadly compatible with German culture. Keep in mind that going bankrupt in Germany permanently closes off lots of avenues, from future lending to whether you can be in senior management at a public company.
- dudefeliciano 6mo agoBankruptcy does not usually permanently bar you from loans or holding senior management position, there are temporary restrictions, unless grossly negligent. But your point still stands I guess, when compared to the US
- groby_b 6mo ago> If you followed the law word for word the authors of e.g. curl could be charged under this law. They really couldn't. BVerfG (Germany's constitutional court) has clearly said that dual use tools have a presumption of not being tools to break the law. It's been very clear that mens rea matters. And that a narrow reading of the law is the only constitutional reading. The problem here is taking "word for word" as "by dictionary meaning", which is never how laws are read. It's still a problematic law (together with §202a/b) because it doesn't clearly carve out space for grey-hat activities (white-hat attacks with authorization really don't fall under it even with creative reading). On the upside, Germany is considering fixing that. On the downside, it moves with the speed of classic German bureaucracy and is being "discussed" since 2024.
- arlcode 6mo ago> The problem here is taking "word for word" as "by dictionary meaning", which is never how laws are read. Back in the days of "smart contracts" and "DAOS" this was something many well-meaning technical people struggeled with. Humans and their societies are flexible and therefore laws must be flexible as well (to a certain degree before it becomes damaging). It's also why a lawyer/expert is usually recommended when engaged with legal matters: We as layman lack all the context around seemingly "simple" concepts, procedures and definitions. You can learn all of that or hire a professional.
- throawayonthe 6mo agoWhat Colour are your bits? https://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23 https://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- wil421 6mo agoIsn’t that by design so governments can prosecute citizens they don’t like? For example, curl is probably ok but that one annoying Kim Dotcom guy is probably going to catch a case under some dubious law.
- belorn 6mo agoThe pirate bay case, one of the laws cited by the judges was an law written to target biker bars and their owners. It only takes a bit of creative work to bend laws and prior cases to match an already made conclusion, if that conclusion has enough political support. In that way, I don't really think the government need to design laws to have loop holes in them. With enough political pressure they can get the judges to make any decision they like.
- NewJazz 6mo agoThere's a moxie marlinspike quote about this