TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Obama Administration proposes adding civil forfeiture to CFAA

8 点作者 rosenjon超过 10 年前

2 条评论

zaroth超过 10 年前
The wording here truly blows my mind;<p><pre><code> any person who intentionally manufactures, assembles, possesses, or sells any electronic, mechanical, or other device, knowing or having reason to know that the design of such device renders it primarily useful for the purpose of the surreptitious interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications, and that such device *or any component thereof* has been *or will be* sent through the mail or *transported in interstate or foreign commerce* </code></pre> What does the phase &quot;primarily useful&quot; even mean in this context? Is the iPhone &#x27;Voice Memo&#x27; app primarily useful for these purposes? Or more pointedly, what about mitmproxy or Wireshark?<p>Forget 3 felonies a day, how about 10^3. Shit, I have in my possession dozens of &#x27;electronic, mechanical, or other device(s) which are primarily useful for [surreptitious] interception of wire, oral, and electronic communications&#x27;. Last time I checked they ship with the OS.<p>I Googled &#x27;primarily useful&#x27; they are almost all links to this law itself. On page 2 there was link with the title &#x27;Subwoofers primarily useful for action movies?&#x27; which was a nice reprieve.<p>What differentiates a design, monitoring, or debugging tool designed for the interception of wire &#x2F; electronic communications from one <i>primarily useful for surreptitious interception</i>? Maybe the later come with cool names like FOXACID and DEEPMINDFUCK. Maybe they should have thought twice before renaming Ethereal to WireShark!
评论 #9061024 未加载
评论 #9061056 未加载
hackerjam超过 10 年前
Given the recent press of how civil forfeiture laws have been &#x2F; are being abused by police departments in this country [1], the idea that the Obama Admninistration would try to float such an idea, much less try to get it passed into legislation is mind boggling. Just shows just how out of touch they really are.<p>1. <a href="http://www.cato.org/events/policing-profit-abuse-civil-asset-forfeiture" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cato.org&#x2F;events&#x2F;policing-profit-abuse-civil-asset...</a>
评论 #9064056 未加载