If I go to a malicious site and infect my lab computer with malware and post the analysis online, in the US, do I have to censor the evidence? It seems some people don't censor evidence, and others do to "protect the innocent and guilty", but is that legally required in the US? If it turns out I post evidence that suggests some company has been hacked, I doubt they'd be very happy, but it doesn't seem any different than domain/IP blacklists, both of which are legal.
I would assume that your research can be legally published as long as it was determined using legal means. However your inference that a particular company has been subject to an attack may not be proved by your research alone and as such your research or test, may not meet the required 'burden of proof' required to indemnify you from litigation.
QIf I go to a malicious site and infect my lab computer with malware and post the analysis online, in the US, do I have to censor the evidence?
A No IMHO, although the definition of 'malware' may be subjective.
Good point, I'll be sure to stick to the facts. I may mention some IPs or domain names, but definitely won't make assumptions as to whether a specific company got hacked… Thanks for your input. )
I would not publish the IP or domain names.
How will you defend yourself against a libel lawsuit? Remember, what is truth and what is law are different.
I would not publish the IP or domain names.
How will you defend yourself against a libel lawsuit? Remember, what is truth and what is law are different.
@jhup I'm a layman and am reading http//
In general, there are four defenses to libel or slander truth, consent, accident, and privilege. The fact that the allegedly defamatory communication is essentially true is usually an absolute defense; the defendant need not verify every detail of the communication, as long as its substance can be established. If the plaintiff consented to publication of the defamatory material, recovery is barred. Accidental publication of a defamatory statement does not constitute publication. Privilege confers Immunity on a small number of defendants who are directly involved in the furtherance of the public's business—for example, attorneys, judges, jurors, and witnesses whose statements are protected on public policy grounds.
People publicly say bad things about people, places, and things all the time. There are even IP or domain name blacklists that identify whether it's blacklisted because of spam, malware distribution, attacking other computers, etc. As long as I just stick to the facts I don't think I can be sued for libel… Unless I'm missing something.
You can be sued for anything.
Unless the civil suit is thrown out, no matter how weird the lawsuit is, no matter how truthful you are, no matter how much you are backed by facts, you will still have to defend yourself - which will cost you.
Figure the cost benefit of publishing the names versus just general information.
And, if you lose, that could be impacting your career in forensics for a long long time.
You can be sued for anything.
Unless the civil suit is thrown out, no matter how weird the lawsuit is, no matter how truthful you are, no matter how much you are backed by facts, you will still have to defend yourself - which will cost you.
Figure the cost benefit of publishing the names versus just general information.
And, if you lose, that could be impacting your career in forensics for a long long time.