Hello. As I understand it, the Police & Criminal Justice act 2006 does not make the possession of these tools a crime unless there is intent to use them to commit a crime.
It is a crime to obtain, make, adapt, supply or offer to supply these tools with intent to commit an offence.
See section 3A subsections 1 - 3.
Exactly. Its all about the intended use of these tools (in the UK at any rate). Any prosecution of individuals in possession of these tools would have to prove their intent to use them for nefarious purposes. Any forensic investigator should have enough argument to protect them from prosecution.
BTW, is it ironic that someone with the name 'McKinnon' provided an answer on hacking tools?
It would have been a good idea, or at least a better one, for the German law to have the bit that says "with intent". That would ensure the good guys are not affected.
Its a funny thing, but those who do not particularly care much for laws have been given free reign because those who helped to put a stop to their activities have been pushed aside. If this law was made to ensure that as many people as possible are brought to book, the lawmaker should remember that it was not easy to catch them when the law did not tie the hands of the good guys. I wonder how easy it is going to be to catch them now. This law might only ensure that a few good men get caught!
Am I missing something? Why the McKinnon question? (I am a newbie.)
Hello. As I understand it, the Police & Criminal Justice act 2006 does not make the possession of these tools a crime unless there is intent to use them to commit a crime.
Somewhat off topic but this calls to mind the story of an old lag up again in front of the Bench, who, when hearing the list of house breaking tools that the Police alleged he was found carrying said,"But them's the tools of me trade, your Honour." To which the Judge replied, "That is, I think, what the prosecution are alleging."
The problem with the matters of intent is that it is not a get out of jail free card, it is a question for the Court. It does not stop one being arrested and processed, just ask Jim Bates.
I personally would much rather see there being criminalisation of the posession of anti-forensic tools, maybe throw in strong encryption licensing while you are at it …
Totally agree with you azrael
Intent is something that can always be questioned.
As far as I know (Police-officer in the German state of Hessen in a HTCU) up to know there was no case just because of the posession of these tools. Only the misuse will be punished. We had some discussions with two prosecuters who are responsible for all computerrelated crime in the state of Hessen. I will ask them and post the newest result to the forum.
Siggi wink
Intent is something that can always be questioned.
Intent, at least in England and Wales, is something which has to be proved by the prosecution.
In Germany the question was cleared in the meantime
A company which offers network-security-scanning has gone to court against the new law.
But the court has refused to start the proceeding by stating that the company is somebody who is not affected from this new law and therefore they are not allowed to complain against this law.
So the conclusion is that posession of hacker-software is allowed for people who use it in a legal way, like administrators or network-security-personnel do.
If somebody is interested email me and you will get the whole decission of the court (in German).
Chris