Solon warns of dangers with CyberCrime Act

15 January 2010

Bill will not resolve hacking of gov’t websites

Kabataan Party-list Rep. Mong Palatino today called on the House of Representatives to re-evaluate and stop the passing of the HB 6974 CyberCrime Prevention Act of 2009 which is up for third reading when session resumes.

Palatino said that his opposition to the proposed bill is for similar reasons that he is against the Right of Reply Bill. “The bill may be used to stifle freedom of expression, speech and the press and may violate the people’s right to privacy. The definition of ‘cybercrime’ in the bill is vague and its scope overly-broad that it may criminalize ordinary electronic activities of any Tom, Dick or Harry who uses the Internet, a mobile phone or any electronic device,” he said.

He cited, for instance, Section 4 of the bill prohibiting the “recording, distribution and exhibition of recorded ‘private acts’ and ‘other obscene and indecent acts’ are NOT limited to sexual acts alone and thus not sufficiently defined. “How will this affect the right of citizens to freedom of speech and expression especially with regard to issues of public concern? Will the scrupulous acts of public officials be considered “private acts”? How will this affect media exposes and investigative reportage on corrupt practices in the government?”

On the threat to right to privacy, Palatino pointed to Section 9 of the bill which empowers the government to monitor activities and access private accounts of persons suspected of committing “cybercrimes,” even activities and files that are not related to said punishable acts.

“For example, for the government to pin-point an activity which is criminal in nature according to the Act, it has to monitor all other activities of an individual at a given time, and worse may expose the activities of other individuals using the same computer system or server at the same time. For the government to access a malicious file in an individual’s hard drive, it has to confiscate and search through the entire storage device, thus exposing all other personal files and correspondence to government access and intrusion, even those unrelated to the ‘cybercrime’. This is dangerous because it gives the government an excuse to justify illegal fishing expeditions against ordinary citizens and allows the wanton violation of the strict requirements in criminal procedure.”

Palatino said that he will ask the House leadership to return the bill to second reading to thresh out all vague and controversial provisions. “We should also consult netizens, the online media and other stakeholders before we pass any bill that directly affects them.”

The young solon also said that HB 6974 will not resolve the problem of government websites being hacked. “What the government should do is to strengthen its IT network, improve the IT infrastructure and foster the development of IT in the country in order to empower institutions and individuals against malicious technological infringements. Compromising the rights of citizens in the use of IT is not a resolution.”

2 Comments For This Post

  1. int main(return(255);); Says:

    DISCLAIMER: Everything I will say is for entertainment purposes only. Believe what you wish to believe.

    Destroying privacy WILL attract more phreaking, hacking, cracking, and defacing, if not the other valid forms.

    And how feasible would this be? Scanning the whole traffic of the whole wide port80 requests passing through Philippine border-routers? The data is astronomical in size, and that’s for http alone! And they plan to scour ed2k, bt, smtp, pop3, imap4, and snoop on https? Are they out of their sane minds?

    No more ’search warrant’ needed?

    Costs are ginormous, and the ‘cure’ they think of is not THE end-all solution.

    Even heard just a whiff of ‘green dam’?

    Okay, let’s say they do this. Just where the heck would the funding show up from?

    And what? More ‘hocus-pocus’ included?

    BAH.

    Say hello to government-funded spyware.

    [quote]
    “What the government should do is to strengthen its IT network, improve the IT infrastructure and foster the development of IT in the country in order to empower institutions and individuals against malicious technological infringements. Compromising the rights of citizens in the use of IT is not a resolution.”
    [/quote]

    Government IT infrastructure? Maintenance nga lang, parang joke na. NOT ALL though.

    Got hacked?

    You don’t need to “find a strand of hair in a stack of needles in a warehouse of haystacks” just to catch him, because, if he’s not so insanely stupid, you might have already spent too much effort in catching mentioned culprit… where in you could have just closed your wide-open entry gates, trained the untrained security personnel, and educated your inhabitants in proper security common-sense noggin’ tips.

    Oh, and I just remembered. You won’t leave your keys behind, and place them in the care of a person you never TRUST. And TRUSTed people are hard to acquire, for the TRUST is easily RUSTed by but a simple trivial matter.

  2. int main(return(255);); Says:

    YES to PUBLIC-KEY CRYPTOGRAPHY!

    PGP for the win.

Leave a Reply

Join Kabataan Partylist

Kabataan Campaign Materials

Kabataan Voters Education

Re-elect Kabataan Partylist Re-elect Kabataan Partylist Re-elect Kabataan Partylist Re-elect Kabataan Partylist Re-elect Kabataan Partylist Re-elect Kabataan Partylist





kabataan-tarp-long