3 ms·
FBI Investigating Whether Companies Are Engaged in Revenge Hacking
- sarciszewski 12y agoI am pretty confident I have at least one example of this occurring, but it's all (probably) hearsay. :P Which, in hindsight, is pretty terrifying because engaging in an offensive hacking campaign against, i.e. a foreign government, can allegedly qualify you as an unlawful belligerent (read: terrorist) in the eyes of the Geneva Convention. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EObxvIfdKgo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EObxvIfdKgo
- mindslight 12y agoMaybe it's time to end the charade of pretending that the meatspace tradition of ambient authority works for electronic communications, and come around to accepting that the best form of law on a hostile anonymous network is executable code.
- eat 12y agoThe NSA accepts the reality you've presented. Is that what we want?
- mindslight 12y agoThe NSA accepts reality, period. Most of what they do are mere symptoms of existing insecurity, and the really egregious stuff (eg global passive adversary) have more to do with imposing legacy ambient authority than not. The topics of politically neutering well-funded governmental adversaries (that use gained data to drive "justice") and directly persecuting hacking are orthogonal. We currently have the worst of both worlds - unaccountable governments along with unlimited liability for running nmap or incrementing the number in a url. In general, anonymity is directly opposed to accountability. Proper information security does not rely on after-the-fact accountability, so why should we think it prudent to give up anonymity?
- drannex 12y agoYeah because they /totally/ aren't.
- Paul_S 12y agoSoon we will need a cyberwarfare equivalent of the Geneva convention and I'm being serious. I will probably get to live long enough to see cyberpunk dystopias happen. They will probably suck.