Call us now:
One to watch closely, what constitutes a hack? A debate which has now been passed to the US supreme court to rule upon given a 4 – 3 split in the lower court circuits. One which may have implications for the way in which security research and testing takes place in the US.
It centres around a recent case of a police officer who used his access to a police database to look up a licence plate in exchange for $6,000. Focusing on the definition in the US Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA – Code § 1030) of ‘exceeds authorized access’. The officer argued that he had authorised access to the data base, although he used it improperly. The ruling could have implications for employers and employees, as well as for security researchers engaged in security testing and the identification of fraud.
When one looks at the current definition of ‘exceeds authorized access’ in CFAA – Code § 1030, and the challenge the supreme court has in interpreting the definition. To broad a definition the court risks favouring defendants and to narrow a definition they may favour cybersecurity practitioners.
The law needs to keep pace with advances in innovation and technology and the complexities of balancing the needs to keep systems safe.
#cybersecurity #parava #legalcommunity #legalindustry
View Original Post
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn%3Ali%3Ashare%3A6739818501571133440