What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
52 Comments
- zeldafan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+71A series of dump trucks... dump trucks right?
----------------------------------THE STORY =D------------------------
WASHINGTON -- The Senate has ratified a treaty under which the United States will join more than 40 other countries, mainly from Europe, in fighting crimes committed via the Internet.
The Council of Europe's Convention on Cybercrime, ratified late Thursday, is the first international treaty seeking to address Internet crimes by harmonizing national laws, improving investigative techniques and increasing cooperation among nations.
ADVERTISEMENT
The convention had been signed by 38 European nations plus the United States, Canada, Japan and South Africa, as of the end of 2005. It was opened for signature in 2001.
"While balancing civil liberty and privacy concerns, this treaty encourages the sharing of critical electronic evidence among foreign countries so that law enforcement can more effectively investigate and combat these crimes," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.
The convention targets hackers, those spreading destructive computer viruses, those using the Internet for the sexual exploitation of children or the distribution of racist material and terrorists attempting to attack infrastructure facilities or financial institutions.
"This treaty provides important tools in the battles against terrorism, attacks on computer networks, and the sexual exploitation of children over the Internet, by strengthening U.S. cooperation with foreign countries in obtaining electronic evidence," Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said. "The Convention is in full accord with all U.S. constitutional protections, such as free speech and other civil liberties, and will require no change to U.S. laws." - UncommonSense, on 10/12/2007, -2/+60Thank god. I thought they were about to ban Japanese midget porn.
- joel2600, on 10/12/2007, -8/+36you people are missing the point. this article was submitted as the world's worst internet law for a reason.
do you think for one second that we would have any problems going after people who commit 'acts of terrorism' over the internet. all we are doing is creating legislation that allows the us govt and whomever else to put a tighter hold on the information that we are allowed access to, effectivley censoring the internet. this may not be how the article is worded, but this is where we are headed.
also, in my own opinion going after virus writers is also retarded to some extent. the fact that a virus can even start to replicate in the first place is a tribute to the fact that there is software out there connected to the internet that has specific vulnerabilites that need addressed. sysadmins often are not proactive enough and don't patch their systems until after something happens. by prosecuting virus writers you are potentially bringing down the number of people who may write them, but you are also promoting the potential vulnerabilites that are out there that will go unchecked. if you don't get hit by a virus, does that mean you don't have a problem with your system? before the code red virus came out, you could literally pick your web servers that you wanted to connect to and have instant shell access to any of them. it was only after the virus started pegging server cpus at 100% before admins had to do something about it.
if anything viruses point out some very obvious things, like the fact that if any of our country's critical infrastructure is ever affected by virus attacks that the douchebags that set up these networks in the first place need to be slapped for letting these systems get any where near the open internet. the internet is not this secure super awesome backbone that we can have all of our communications and everything else completley rely on. by passing legislation that encourages people not to write viruses, we leave the door wide open for malicious users to walk right in to holes that might have been found faster by viruses, and also for tech school graduates to get government jobs and set up some horrible and insecure networks which we can base our electrical, water, gas, air travel, and other systems on that should not be anywhere near the real 'open' internet in the first place.
if you want to pass some legislation how about putting the blame on the people who design the software and the networks that allow this stuff to happen. or how about doing something about the fact that ATT is allowing the NSA to spy on everyone's communications... nobody seems to care about that anymore. - dbpigeon, on 10/12/2007, -5/+30http://www.bugmenot.com/view/www.latimes.com
- pdeco, on 10/12/2007, -5/+27I'm atleast glad its in accordance with our constitutional protectoins. I was afraid the US government was going to use this as way to censor its citizens through other counties laws.
- bightchee, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18I felt like an ass, calling my senators then refreshing the article to find out it had already passed.
- OrangeTide, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19Why does racist material have to be illegal? Why can't I just google my interview candidates and discard anyone that shows up on websites promoting white supremacy, black supremacy, certain rastafari sects, or racial gangs. Why do some countries have to waste time regulating toothless morons that blame all their problems on the Jews? Bust them when they commit crimes, because I don't believe in these "thought crimes". It is unenforcable and violates free speech.
- KenMo, on 10/12/2007, -8/+22I blame Bush. Bad Bush. No Pretzel for you.
- runnerman628, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17well go ahead and blame bush; but give the man his pretzel...he choked on one a while back
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/14/bush.fainting/ - fantasticFlan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12"distribution of racist material"
While despicable, it is protected by the First Amendment. - greywren, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Ars Technica has an excellent discussion, including an explanation of why this treaty might not be as bad as some think:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060804-7421.html - donatj, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Since when has it been illegal to be racist, let alone spread racist material? I thought that was protected by the first amendment.
- diggumjonez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7> the fact that a virus can even start to replicate in the first place is a tribute to the fact...
... to the fact that life begins at compilation? The government is now trying to prevent life? - booc0mtaco, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8WAS protected...
- NZheretic, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9At election time make sure to inform the voters how their Congressman, Senator and President surrendered judicial sovereignty to foreign powers.
- ratrip, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Yeah, like it's never done before. Berne convention anyone? Extradition treaties...
- hardwarehank, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4So, how can it target "distribution of racist material" and still be "in full accord with all U.S. constitutional protections, such as free speech and other civil liberties?" Thats directly contradictory. Distribution of any material, racist or not, is free speech. I'm not racist, but if people want to be that way, that's their choice, not the government's.
Ever heard this one: ''The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.''
- http://tinyurl.com/lykzy - raid517, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3A lot of this sounds like hysteria. International cooperation on combating cyber crime definitely needed to be beefed up anyway, since previously a lot of intelligence failures were down to the failure and a reluctance of international intelligence agencies and police forces (particularly the Americans) to share the data they have with each other. This isn't much more than all of these different agencies saying 'we'll tell you what we know if you tell us what you know.'
As much as you may hate Bush (and I am certainly no fan myself) this has very little to do with the way he is slowly (or not so slowly) eroding the civil rights of many ordinary Americans. It's just police forces and intelligence agencies doing what they should do, which is working closely with each other in order to prevent some pretty nasty stuff.
Unless you are worried that this might lead the cops to uncovering your stash of child porn, I don't see what the problem is? Now I'm sure this will get marked down as most sensible comments are getting marked down - but this doesn't not change the fact that cooperating with other law enforcement agencies in this way is hardly 'the worst legislation on the planet ever!' (or whatever). It's just plain old good common sense. - shig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3So when the LA Times says my constitutional rights are protected I'm supposed to believe them? Last time I checked California had no recognizable 2nd amendment.
- jayc, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7@akhomerun
"yes, blame bush just like everyone else. even though it was the senate.
retard."
It had been lingering in the Senate with even some Republicans skeptical about it. The Bush administration had been trying to push it through.
Who's the retard now? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5jaytech,
Just remember when when have no arguement always quickly attack fictional people and their fictional arguements.
and just remember Bush claims to be the unitary executive, Cant really be the "unitary executive" if the buck doesnt stop there. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -12/+14yes, blame bush just like everyone else. even though it was the senate.
retard. - OficerMantimber, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Watch, now "terrorism" is going to include hacking, modding, sharing files, and sharing personal opinions. The wild west that the internet was has now officially came to a close.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4If only it were a law as the headline says...
- raid517, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's easy. What this means is the US will play along with those bits of international laws and accords that it agrees with - and totally ignore the rest!
Just like always.... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yay my country didn't sign!
- MrObjectional, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2So this means that Sweden is now held responsible for American Copyright laws? Say it ain't so, Piratebay!
- NZheretic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ratrip: The Berne convention, Bilateral Extradition treaties and every other treaty that the USA has signed onto don't allow US citizens to be extradited for criminal acts that are not a crime in the USA.
As far as I know, the Cybercrime Treaty is the first such treaty signed into law by the US Senate which would allow US citizens and corporations to be charge, forced to co-operate and extradited for acts that are not currently a criminal act in the USA. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6Uh oh... I sense a disturbance in the tubes.
- ReikiMaster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I hate it when people submit stories that I have to login to read.
- Advenger, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Lack of knowledge of the Internet is the true threat here. How are they supposed to go after completely anonymous virus writers, whose viruses leave no trace to them? Sure some of them are idiots and leave their name for 'recognition', but you will not find the majority of these people. I'm getting sick of things getting passed in the name of stopping terrorism. You cant stop terrorism if you don't know it's going to happen. Are these terrorists idiots who make it well known on the Internet that they are terrorists? Unreal.
"While balancing civil liberty and privacy concerns, this treaty encourages the sharing of critical electronic evidence among foreign countries so that law enforcement can more effectively investigate and combat these crimes,"
Yeah I know how they balanced them, they pushed them aside like they do all the time. It'll only be a matter of time before anyone with a firewall that prevents the FBI from accessing their computer is a suspected terrorist.
"They want to deliver vast amounts of information over the Internet. And again, the Internet is not something you just dump something on. It's not a truck.
It's a series of tubes.
And if you don't understand those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and its going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material.
Now we have a separate Department of Defense Internet now, did you know that?
Do you know why?
Because they have to have theirs delivered immediately. They can't afford getting delayed by other people."
Thank you and goodnight. - NoOneButMe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's still a bill. It still has to be ratified by the House of Representatives before it gets to become a law.
- bennyboy371, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2In a world where millions of taxpayers money goes towards a program to find terrorist things on the internet, only to turn up a fan-made movie of a video game dubbed with a Team America speech and call it "recruitment" saying the terrorists are modifying the game to get kids... this truly worries me.
- jo42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Welcome to The New World Order.
- buckrogers1965, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2[sarcasm] Yeah, cause if have nothing to hide then you don't care if someone is constantly watching you with no warrant.[/scarasm]
- pgm_01, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2In some European countries it is illegal to buy, sell or posses Nazi memorabilia. Many people in the US collect such things not because they agree with the message but because it is part of history. How many Ebay sellers can now be arrested? Of course the US can now shut down the "child porn" publishers in Europe, any website that has persons under 18 posed in a lewd and lascivious manner. Bad plan.
- Vironex, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Goddamn this country.
- knaps, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I contacted both of my senators. I hope you all did, too!
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm - buckrogers1965, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3[sarcasm] Yeah, think of the children![/scarasm]
- Gizza, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@Oakes. We blame the victims because it is mostly their own fault. The Music industry allowed me to do whatever i wanted with my music, didnt install rootkits on my comp and provided an easy and cheap download service like iTunes then maybe i wouldnt pirate music.
And as Joel was saying, viruses find vunerabilities that may otherwise be found by crackers. And having a cracker in ur system could be a lot more dangerous than a virus.
And as for the parents/children in regards to online predators, R rated games and violent movies etc, theres not way this is every gonne be fully censored, it is up to the parents to make sure their children arent donig anything stupid like giving out their name and address (no number of laws or security fixes can stop this).
In regards to the article however, i dont see how this is the worst law on the internet, seems ok to me. Despite everything i sed above, ppl who write viruses etc should still be caught and punished. - urbanaut, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3The "Worst" Internet Law? Why? Because it protects innocent children from perverts who can't control what they do on the Internet?
- bennyboy371, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3I may not be racist, but when I truly hate someone I play that game with them along the lines of "that dirty _____ son of a..." It may not be the nicest thing to say, but hell, it works for me.
- gaza222, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3I think there is too much hysteria here. In the UK we have had laws for two or three years now aimed at cyber-crimes. They involve a few things but the main legislation is that logs and audit trails are kept for 12 months and that various agencies can gain access to these files upon request and proper authority. So now what is wrong with that? Nothing. I don't think in the current political climate that websites will be banned from viewing, mainly because of the china bashing happening because they are banning websites from viewing in their country.
- idleminded, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Indeed, I was expecting something much more Orwellian.
- spurtle, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1damn, beaten to it.
- Oakes, on 10/12/2007, -12/+7joel2600: "the fact that a virus can even start to replicate in the first place is a tribute to the fact that there is software out there connected to the internet that has specific vulnerabilites that need addressed."
You know, I've figured it all out: you guys are all about blaming the victim. Blame the software industry for malicious virus writers, blame the entertainment industry for pirating, and blame parents/children for online predators.
Here's an idea: Let's encourage more secure software, less invasive DRM, and more responsible parenting - whilst still not neglecting to point out that the bastards who take advantage of each of these weak spots are criminals.
Anybody with me? - zelig, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5The misleading title was designed to get us to read this yawner of a story. No digg.
- akira117, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6"CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL." FrozenIce
- Sage46, on 10/12/2007, -11/+4sites a wash if you have to join just to view. Some people will post anything just to get a number
-
Show 51 - 53 of 53 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is