Yes, this is why the overly broad definition of "terrorist" under some bills speeding through the US legislature is going to cause lots of problems.
Some of the scaling of penalties for criminal hacking has already been on the high side. A number of convicted hackers got stiffer sentences than people who commit aggravated assault or homicide. Now, if a person convicted of computer crimes is deemed a terrorist, they can really face life imprisonment or other nasty measures. Worse, and this is from a quick speculation, groups, publications, etc. that seem to support computer crimes might fall under anti-terrorism provisions. 2600, for example, a magazine that does operate well within the US first amendment could face new hassles. User groups that have some sympathetic discussions of hacking could be sailing into dangerous waters. So on. In the past, measures against "fifth columnists", "anarchists", and "Reds" have been used to suppress the freedom of speech, peaceful assembly, and press as well as other liberties. The Microsoft & Windows angle is one that I think might be going on in the background. Before the terrorist attacks of 9-11, there were some laws and prosed laws that would give Microsoft and other closed code businesses some nasty leverage against open source world. One of them was a bill that, if passed into law, would require all "interactive devices" (what a broad term!) to meet an industry "security" standard to be established. The "security" standard was not for security in terms of reducing denial of service attacks, break-ins, and such but to enforce digital rights management for publishers and vendors. With that Microsoft, Disney, Sony, etc. could try to press a claim that open source software somehow violates this law because the DRM enforcement could be removed or overridden. More problematic is that possibility of hardware firmware changes to comply being encouraged to foul up open source operating systems while Microsoft would be very compliant. (Naw! Microsoft has never played around to trip up competitors in regards to software standards and system calls. <satirical grin>) With the new possibility of sweeping hackers (both criminal and non-criminal ones) under the terrorist & terrorist supporter label might prove very useful for MSC even if the corporation isn't saying much about it. They don't hat to say much. One of the things that open source community can emphasize is the fact that the code is open, it is hard for anybody to sneak things into software that undermines security. While that migh foil things such as backdoors for intelligence agencies, it also foils backdoors or bobby trap code for terrorists and criminals. More later. J.D. Abolins At 10:03 PM 9/26/01 -0400, William R. Mitchell, Jr. wrote: > Not that I have any sympathy whatsoever for hackers, > but just don't see how the punishment would fit the crime. > > Crime with a gun = 3 - 5 years. Crime with a keyboard = Life?!? > > Give me a break! I bet Billy Gates is pushing for this to deter people from > hacking throught the piss-poor security in Wndoze!
