Topic: PSN = Privacy? Security? Never!

[Chozo Ghost]

I wouldn't recommend talking to people through the PS3 itself about said hacking because apparently Sony monitors (or can monitor) conversations on there and even if you aren't promoting hacking, just talking about it with someone might get Sony's attention and they could ban you or something. Not saying that would necessarily happen, but its a possibility so why risk it?

[KDR_11k]

Hell, why not? Write a news story about it if it does happen and get tons of publicity, you're running a news website!

[BlackNMild2k1]

And the drama continues......
Story and summary: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=26100951&postcount=1
Site of hacker in question: http://grafchokolo.com/

long story short, Sony threatens HV hacker Graf_Chokolo to to stop hacking and sends out DCMA violation letters. Graf_Chokolo tells Sony to Back off or he will release everything he knows about the Hyper Visor and the Hyper Visor process so that all other devs can continue to reverse engineer everything. Sony sends German Police to heis house to cease all his computers. Graf_Chokolo then releases all he knows to the internet with instructions to spread it as far and wide as possible.

My Question is, Who is more fucked up here?
Is HV stuff gonna screw Sony's anti-hacking regiment up or is Graf_Chokolo screwed for the way he publicly admits to handling this situation (threat and then follow through)? Is that considered blackmail?

[TJ Spyke]

I don't know German law, but I am pretty sure he could be arrested if had done that here in the US for trying to basically blackmail Sony.

[broodwars]

Is HV stuff gonna screw Sony's anti-hacking regiment up or is Graf_Chokolo screwed for the way he publicly admits to handling this situation (threat and then follow through)? Is that considered blackmail?

Yes, it will probably hinder Sony's efforts to curtail the thieves from picking apart any new security measures.  And yes, I would definitely consider that blackmail under U.S. interpretation.  He was threatening to release sensitive information if Sony didn't stand down from trying to stop his illegal ways.  I don't know how German law would deal with that, but the fact that he did release that sensitive information doesn't help his case.  I hope he rots in jail.
 
Once again, praise the increasingly lovable hackers and the way they are peacefully pursuing their "homebrew" with blackmail.

[Chozo Ghost]

He wasn't demanding financial gain or anything like that from Sony. He just told them to "back off". It may be more self defense than black mail.

[UncleBob]

Once again, praise the increasingly lovable hackers and the way they are peacefully pursuing their "homebrew" with blackmail.

Let's see... Sony threatens guy with fines and jailtime, that's good.  Guy threatens Sony back with releasing information... and that's bad?

[broodwars]

Once again, praise the increasingly lovable hackers and the way they are peacefully pursuing their "homebrew" with blackmail.

Let's see... Sony threatens guy with fines and jailtime, that's good.  Guy threatens Sony back with releasing information... and that's bad?

Yes, they are.  Sony was completely within their legal right to pursue legal action against him (a known hacker, not innocent by any stretch of the imagination), and if he had stopped his illegal activity DMCA letters might have been as far as this went.  He responds with threatening to increase malicious hacking across the internet by releasing his information if Sony continues pursuing their legal right, with the intention of harming the company.  Sony sends in the German police to protect their intellectual property.  That seems pretty clear-cut to me.

[UncleBob]

He did not respond with a threat to increase malicious hacking.  He responded with the threat (promise?) to tell everyone what he knows.  What other people do with his information isn't his fault.  He has absolutely no responsibility or obligation to Sony to keep his knowledge secret.

[broodwars]

He did not respond with a threat to increase malicious hacking.  He responded with the threat (promise?) to tell everyone what he knows.  What other people do with his information isn't his fault.

And we're back at this old argument.  We've been down this road before, so I'll just say that I find that notion extremely irresponsible.  This is a war between malicious hackers and Sony.  You all keep insisting upon that distinction.  I find it laughable that someone should not be held responsible if they put information out that aides the malicious hackers, just because it was posted on the internet.  It's like saying that someone who posts the exact blueprints of the White House on the internet isn't responsible for terrorist groups using that information to penetrate and assault the building (an extreme example to be sure, but that's the power of information on the internet.  You can't guarantee that only the people who will use that information for "good" will see it).  Gotta love the internet, where apparently no one is accountable and everything is apparently permitted.

[UncleBob]

Can't speak for Germany, but here in America, we have good ol' Freedom of Speech.

I guess, by your way of thinking, the creator of, say, the Anarchist Cookbook should be jailed because he's releasing information that someone may potentially use one day to cause harm?

I disagree.  It's a horrible and scary thought process.

[broodwars]

Can't speak for Germany, but here in America, we have good ol' Freedom of Speech.

I guess, by your way of thinking, the creator of, say, the Anarchist Cookbook should be jailed because he's releasing information that someone may potentially use one day to cause harm?

I disagree.  It's a horrible and scary thought process.

I believe in Freedom of Speech, but I also believe that with that freedom comes the duty of using it responsibly.  There's good reason that we have clauses in the U.S. Freedom of Speech that implement limits such as preventing someone from...say...(to cite an old cliche) shouting "FIRE!" in a crowded theater. 
 
The Anarchist Cookbook was long before my time, but I can guarantee you that if someone were to write a new book these days that detailed more modern versions of such contents, it would never see publication due to public outcry and legal ramifications.  But if it did and a terrorist group released a video with them holding the book after committing some mass attrocity, that company (and to a lesser extent the writer) would probably be held legally accountable and potentially charged with treason.
 
We'll just have to agree to disagree on this, and leave this argument peacefully at rest. 

[Ian Sane]

I don't think freedom of speech has ever covered blackmail.  An employee of Mastercard could quite easily gain access to my credit card number.  He could then phone me up and threaten to release it publicly unless I paid him not to.  Does he have the right to tell everyone this information about me that is supposed to be private and can cause me all sorts of problems?  He is also are specifically threatening me with this information.  "Give in to my demands or I create problems for you."

Slander is also not covered by freedom of speech.  There are certain restrictions that apply when one's speech can specifically harm an individual.

This isn't like someone releasing a book giving tips for breaking security systems.  That's potentially damaging information but it is generic and does not target a specific individual.  But it wouldn't be right to release a book specifically on how to break into Bob Johnson of Omaha's house.  There is a difference between general potentially damaging information and specific information risking damage on a specific individual.

[BranDonk Kong]

This is not blackmail, not even close.

Also, who is to say that graf_chokolo has actually done anything illegal? He hasn't been arrested, no files have been charged. He told Sony to get off of his back, or he would release what he knows, they seized his computers, so he did what he said he would do. Also, none of this information does ANYTHING, but help people hack THEIR OWN PS3s - the same thing that George Hotz did. Turns out Sony might be going after good ol' geohot, graf, and others because they've uncovered something Sony didn't want anyone to know (besides the lack of security and spying on every single thing you do on your PS3, which is illegal) - Sony is breaking the law simply by releasing their firmware updates without including the source code used in creating their .sprx files - which is something no one would have known about without geohot's jailbreak.

[TJ Spyke]

He illegally hacked the PS3, and when Sony did their legal right to tell him to stop he threatened to release it. When they did the right thing and get the authorities involved, he decided to be a punk (I almost typed something else, but keep this clean) and released it anyways. Sony hasn't done anything wrong (despite your claim Brandogg), while this guy can rightly be arrested or sued soon.

[broodwars]

Also, who is to say that graf_chokolo has actually done anything illegal?

We'll see what happens.  graf_chokolo's actions are at best legally gray, and he didn't help his case by issuing threats against Sony (and he hurt it even more by actually releasing the information).  I don't think the German Police Department would have complied with Sony if they didn't have charges they could file (and perhaps are filing) against this hacker.

[Morari]

It's like saying that someone who posts the exact blueprints of the White House on the internet isn't responsible for terrorist groups using that information to penetrate and assault the building.

Um... They wouldn't be responsible. The terrorist group would. Your idea that blame must always be assigned elsewhere is horrifying. Not only horrifying because it is wrong and dangerous, but because it seems to becoming a more popular line of thought everyday. You should take a step back from thing and really evaluate just what you're saying. Don't fall prey to the boogieman concepts that corporations and governments throw out. Doing so will only ensure that they remain unchallenged while stepping on top of you your peers.

Your continual use of terrorism in your examples shows that you've already drank WAY too much of the propaganda Kool-Aid. I can only hope that you don't drown in it and pull everyone else down with you.

[broodwars]

Um... They wouldn't be responsible. The terrorist group would. Your idea that blame must always be assigned elsewhere is horrifying. Not only horrifying because it is wrong and dangerous, but because it seems to becoming a more popular line of thought everyday. You should take a step back from thing and really evaluate just what you're saying. Don't fall prey to the boogieman concepts that corporations and governments throw out. Doing so will only ensure that they remain unchallenged while stepping on top of you your peers.

Your continual use of terrorism in your examples shows that you've already drank WAY too much of the propaganda Kool-Aid. I can only hope that you don't drown in it and pull everyone else down with you.

Oh good, Morari's here.      Mods, you might as well close this thread now and get it over with, because it's all downhill from here and you're just going to have to do it eventually anyway.

[Chozo Ghost]

Sony sends in the German police to protect their intellectual property.  That seems pretty clear-cut to me.

A clear-cut waste of public resources. Where are the police when children are being molested? Those are the homes that should be raided. Not someone who just wants to be able to use Linux on hardware which he owns and paid for. At this point does it even matter anyway? I'm sure whatever info he released is small potatoes and could have been easily duplicated by someone else anyway. Geohotz already did the real damage.

Sony hasn't done anything wrong

Actually, they did. They took away a feature (Other OS) which was advertised, promised, and paid for by consumers. By taking it away they committed theft. The E.U. seems to care a good deal about consumer rights, so...

[broodwars]

A clear-cut waste of public resources. Where are the police when children are being molested?

Perhaps, but it's not up to us to decide how the German Police Department allocates its resources.  Furthermore, police departments routinely have different divisions for dealing with specific types of crime.  Software crime such as this would not be covered by people investigating social disturbances, and vice-versa.  Can you perhaps show evidence that such an act was being commited while this raid was being conducted, and that the police knew about it and ignored it?  Hell, can you show evidence that other larger crimes were being committed during this raid and ignored, beyond statistics?  Contrary to popular belief, the role of the police is not to prevent crimes (that would be pretty much impossible), but to arrest perpetrators and punish them when they are aware of them.

[Morari]

Contrary to popular belief, the role of the police is not to prevent crimes (that would be pretty much impossible), only arrest perpetrators and punish them when they are aware of them.

Isn't that exactly what you're arguing for though? You not only want to prevent crimes, you seem to want to outright punish people for thought crimes. You want to ban material that may be used to commit crimes by independent groups. You want to sacrifice anything resembling freedom for the illusion of safety.

And FYI... It isn't exactly the police department's job to punish criminals either. That's for the courts.

[Chozo Ghost]

Consumer rights, open source, Linux, etc. are all popular things in the E.U. I wouldn't be surprised if the courts ruled against Sony in this matter. Remember how the E.U. courts ruled against Microsoft for being a monopoly whereas the U.S. didn't really give a **** about it? The DMCA doesn't apply in Europe.

[broodwars]

Isn't that exactly what you're arguing for though? You not only want to prevent crimes, you seem to want to outright punish people for thought crimes. You want to ban material that may be used to commit crimes by independent groups.

I don't believe I've argued for any bans (I've said that the public would not allow certain things such as the publication of a handbook in how to blow up buildings), just that when an act is committed using such material that those who leaked it cannot say they do not share responsibility.  What the hackers are currently doing is already illegal, though it would be an illegality I could live with if they weren't also passing that information on tacitly to pirates and those that would use the information to do Sony (and its consumers) harm.  Then they have the gall to claim that they bear no responsbility for what they have unleashed.
 
And please, Morari, I know how much you love your 1984/Brave New World Conspiracy Theorizing, but I've only ever argued against actual crimes perpetrated by actual hackers (not "thought crimes").

[TJ Spyke]

Sony hasn't done anything wrong

Actually, they did. They took away a feature (Other OS) which was advertised, promised, and paid for by consumers. By taking it away they committed theft. The E.U. seems to care a good deal about consumer rights, so...

Under that logic, publishers of MMO's could get in trouble when they shut down the games because consumers are left with nothing more than coasters. Should EA get in trouble when they shut down servers for their games? The online play was advertised, promised, and the main reason some people buy the game. All features for systems and games are subject to be removed at any time.

Morari, people can be punished for possessing and giving out info that is not theirs. Chozo, they go after people when they have knowledge of them breaking the law (like this guy did). Sony will not get in trouble for anything in this.

[broodwars]

Consumer rights, open source, Linux, etc. are all popular things in the E.U. I wouldn't be surprised if the courts ruled against Sony in this matter. Remember how the E.U. courts ruled against Microsoft for being a monopoly whereas the U.S. didn't really give a **** about it? The DMCA doesn't apply in Europe.

We'll see.  I was under the impression that the only major governing body that didn't sign into the DMCA was China, and that was because of the massive piracy that happens there.