CYBERSENSE–‘Love Bug’ Overkill Could Make Criminals of Us All

0

Like real-life viruses, computer viruses affect different people in different ways.

Most Net users reacted to the Love Bug and its subsequent Love Children by pledging to avoid suspicious e-mail attachments. If their computers crashed, they rebooted and went on with their lives a little wiser for wear.

But for some members of Congress, these viruses or, more specifically, the attention devoted to them by the news media apparently produced symptoms including fever and full-on dementia.

Sens. Orrin Hatch and Charles Schumer took advantage of the outbreak to build momentum for their “Internet Integrity and Critical Infrastructure Protection Act,” which sounds like just the sort of thing to punish the dweebs who release nasty computer viruses onto the Net.

Problem is, it’s already a federal crime to do what creators of the Love Bug did. And as civil libertarians point out, this new bill would make criminals out of Net users whose behavior falls well short of threatening “Internet integrity.”

The bill would modify existing federal laws that make it illegal to intentionally send harmful computer transmissions or to recklessly damage someone else’s computer. Most significantly, it would eliminate the $5,000 minimum on damage required to invoke these laws.

Really a federal case?

Now, I’m not saying it’s kosher to put a few thousand dollars worth of hurt on someone else’s PC. But there’s nothing wrong with leaving such relatively minor offenses to local criminal statutes or the civil system particularly when you consider just how minor they can be.

Someone who snoops on their co-worker’s computer and accidentally deletes a file could be imprisoned for at least six months under the Hatch-Schumer bill.

A worker who downloads a virus to his office PC while playing an online game could be fined. A kid who plays a trick on a friend by hacking his personal Web page could find himself behind bars for up to three years.

These examples were offered by the Center for Democracy and Technology, a nonprofit cyber liberties group that lobbied against the measure during a recent hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which Hatch chairs.

“The main effect of (the bill’s) criminal provisions would be to extend federal jurisdiction over minor computer abuses not previously thought serious enough to merit federal resources,” the group wrote.

Making something a federal crime means you believe it’s worth the time of the FBI or, in the case of this bill, the Secret Service. Do we really need these guys taking time off from protecting the president of the United States to track down a kid who posts a picture of some guy’s butt on his friend’s home page?

Legislative overkill

When news of the Love Bug broke, Hatch issued a press release touting his bill as a way to restore faith in modern technology as though people were ready to give it up.

“In our new, knowledge-based economy, where the Internet and e-commerce dominate, public confidence in the security and integrity of the system is paramount,” he said. “That is what the Hatch-Schumer legislation would do: restore confidence in the integrity of the Internet and the communications infrastructure.”

But anything bad enough to make us consider returning to messenger pigeons and smoke signals is surely covered by existing law.

Maybe Hatch didn’t hear about the international investigation that tracked the Love Bug back to some kid in the Philippines in a matter of days. But then, maybe he and Schumer would like to see those same resources directed toward rooting out the guy who accidentally crashes his office network while downloading porn.

Sure, viruses can cause serious damage. But that’s no reason to outlaw things that don’t. Passing Hatch and Schumer’s bill in response to the Love Bug is like trying to cure a cold with a series of rabies shots.

To contact syndicated columnist Joe Salkowski, you can e-mail him at [email protected] or write to him c/o Tribune Media Services Inc., 435 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 1400, Chicago, Ill., 60611.

No posts to display