Re: EFF/Bernstein Press Release

[Alan Olsen <alano@teleport.com>]

At 02:52 PM 4/18/96 -0500, John Deters wrote:
>>On Thu, 18 Apr 1996, Mark Neely wrote:
>>
>>> Well, that puts legislation making virus authoring a crime
>>> into a new (and difficult) position.
>
>My understanding is that it isn't illegal to author a virus, but it
>certainly would be to release it.

I think there is a confusion here between source code and object code.

I am sure that the lawyers on the list will correct me on this if I am wrong
here... The way I read this ruling is that it would have not effect on the
laws on releasing viruses in code. (i.e. putting a virus into an executable
and letting it go out to infect the world.) What it would permit would be
publication of virus source and information about viruses.

Publication of information about viruses (including source code) has a
useful purpose.  How can people write anti-virus programs if they do not
know how they work?  If publication of techniques is stopped, the anti-virus
people have to wait until they find a live copy before writing something to
detect and/or remove the offending code.  The virus writers are going to do
this whether or not they can publish.  Letting them brag makes them faster
to stop.

The "let them brag" principle also works with system hacks.  Finding what
techniques are used will let you plug holes that you may not know about.  It
is better to have information than not.

On to another [rant]...

I have been seening a surprising amount of rant from the forces of
Government about keeping information out of "the hands of terrorists".  I am
wondering how this is going to be brought about.  The books are there.  They
can be ordered from a number of mail order firms.  They can also be found in
used book stores across the country.  The information is alos on the net, on
cd-roms and other mediums of storage.  How are they going to stuff the
tentacles back into the can?

Without imposing a very represive police state, they cannot.  It would
require sifting through all of the available data (books, magazines,
libraries, etc.) and removing all "offending" information.  Since weapons
are so easy to make, they would have to remove knowlege relating to a wide
variety of fields.  Not possible without alot of cops and alot of guns.  The
results would not be pretty.

The thing I have not determined is whether they understand the outcome of
the ideas they are wanting to implement.  A good case could be made either
way for cluelessness or totalitarian mindsets.  I am beginning to think it
is a bit of both...

---
Alan Olsen -- alano@teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano@teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon