|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Subject: Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime
From: Mike Black (mblack
csihq.com)Date: Sat Jun 03 2000 - 06:29:40 CDT
- Next message: dhaag: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Previous message: Bill Royds: "RE: article 2"
- In reply to: Bart van Leeuwen: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Next in thread: dhaag: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Reply: Mike Black: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Reply: dhaag: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Reply: Bart van Leeuwen: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Reply: David Dennis: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
I'm not a lawyer either...but...it reads pretty clear to me.
All of us that use nmap would NOT be in trouble...only the author, the
web/ftp site and possibly this mailing list.
Quote:
a device, including a computer program, designed or adapted [specifically]
[primarily] [particularly] for the purpose of committing any of the offences
established in accordance with Article 2 - 5;
The above offense and the definition below would say that making nmap and
putting on a website for download would fit under the definition of "dolus
eventualis" -- also know in Homer Simpson terms as "Doh!". There's no way
that an author or web/ftp site could say "well gee, we didn't think it would
be used for bad purposes". It's only a little bit of a stretch to say that
a mailing list is a "piece of software" that educates users how to do bad
things (note -- I'm not talking about majordomo here...but the specific
mailing list). Hacker websites would most certainly be targeted.
(6) In the understanding of certain members of the Drafting Group, "intent"
may also cover "dolus eventualis". For common law countries, this notion
would be similar to "recklessness", i.e. that a person is aware of the high
risk that a certain result may occur and knowingly accepts it. The Drafting
Group agreed that the interpretation of "intent" should be left to national
laws, but it should not, where possible, exclude "dolus eventualis".
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bart van Leeuwen" <bart
ixori.demon.nl>
To: "Matt Marnell" <coldfuzion
coldfuzion.net>; <nmap-hackers
insecure.org>
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 6:38 PM
Subject: Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime
--------------------------------------------------
For help using this (nmap-hackers) mailing list, send a blank email to
nmap-hackers-help
insecure.org . List run by ezmlm-idx (www.ezmlm.org).
- Next message: dhaag: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Previous message: Bill Royds: "RE: article 2"
- In reply to: Bart van Leeuwen: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Next in thread: dhaag: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Reply: Mike Black: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Reply: dhaag: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Reply: Bart van Leeuwen: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Reply: David Dennis: "Re: Draft Convention on Cybercrime"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]