[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAH8yC8k0PsEQa0y6072euzN6oZHQjJ-mNapX=vc3XabpdFXoPw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2014 04:54:08 -0400
From: Jeffrey Walton <noloader@...il.com>
To: Henri Salo <henri@...v.fi>
Cc: Full Disclosure List <fulldisclosure@...lists.org>
Subject: Re: [FD] Legality of Open Source Tools
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 4:24 AM, Henri Salo <henri@...v.fi> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 05, 2014 at 01:23:51PM +0300, Toni Korpela wrote:
>> Greetings from Finland.
>>
>> I know that here it is illegal to import, manufacture, sell
>> or otherwise distribute such machine or software which
>> are designed to endanger or harm information and
>> communication systems.
> <snip>
>
> Basic examples, which I have personally encountered:
>
> 1) Not allowed to port scan. Some ISPs are already monitoring and warning users
> in case they do port scanning, but the reason for alerting might only be that
> they monitor and try to get rid of malware in their networks.
> 2) Not allowed to list vulnerable systems. I can't for example list all
> non-updated WordPress installations with their version numbers even this
> information is available to anyone.
Item 2 is kind of interesting. Can you cite a reference?
I ask because the US's DMCA has provisions for Security Testing &
Evaluation and Reverse Engineering. So we are allowed to "test" the
system (some hand waiving), but its unclear [to me] what can be done
after the testing.
The ST&E exemption is in Section 1205 (i) SECURITY TESTING. The RE
exemption is in Section 1205 (f) REVERSE ENGINEERING.
Sorry to wander off-topic...
_______________________________________________
Sent through the Full Disclosure mailing list
http://nmap.org/mailman/listinfo/fulldisclosure
Web Archives & RSS: http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists