VX Heavens

§§ 1, 4, 5, ch. 79 SLA 1984 [§ 11.46.200(a)(3); § 11.46.990(1)(3)-(7); § 11.81.900(b)(51)]; § 3 ch 79 SLA 1984 [§11.46.740]; 881 4 ch 166 SLA 1978 [§ 11.46.985]; § 10 ch. 166 SLA 1978 [§ 11.81.900(b)(45)]

In the late 1980's the computer world has awakened to a new threat to its health - an infestation of various maladies which collectively, and sometimes erroneously, have been called "computer viruses". ADAPSO, the software trade organization, reported a 10-fold increase in viral infections from 3000 m the first two months of 1988 to 30,000 reported during the last two months of the same year.Lawyers, legislators, computer manufacturers, software programmers, and security experts are equally concerned whether or not the people responsible for these various electronic malfunctions can be or should be prosecuted under existing statutes. Several of the most recent incidents include the INTERNET worm, Aldus peace virus, the Pakistani Brain, and the Burleson Revenge. The motives of the perpetrators include pranks, improvement of protection, probative or punitive, prowess, peeping, philosophy, potential sabotage, poverty, and power.A range of existing state and federal statutes might cover these sets of facts, and additional bills are pending in Congress and in several state legislatures in the spring of 1989.It is difficult to determine strategies since it cannot be ascertained whether the rogue programs are a transient problem which will go away as "hackers" develop a different ethical standard, whether they are a drop in the bucket of problems which may arise as the criminally motivated become more computer literate, or whether they are like the common cold, afflictions which come with the use of computers with which we must learn to live.

... However, a new villain - the virus author - has surfaced, bringing a new crime into the international forum: the spread of the computer virus. ... Free from the fear of prosecution, the virus author feels no need to stop wreaking global havoc. ... Part II focuses on the crime of the spread of a computer virus and the type of damage that a virus author is capable of inflicting across the world from a single isolated terminal. ... Finally, the section concludes with an overview of the role a virus author plays in instigating that crime. ... Computer crime legislation as a whole covers a wide variety of offenses. ... For the United States, the Melissa virus concluded with "the first successful prosecution of a virus author in over a decade and only the second successful prosecution in [American] history" under the nation's specialized computer crime statutes. ... Countries with Lesser Computer Crime Laws ... " Certain aspects of computer crime legislation are particularly incompatible with extradition. ... This roadblock kept the United States from extraditing the ILOVEYOU virus author from the Philippines. ... Some government efforts do not require help from the private sector to combat computer crime. ...

A victim of computer virus infection may bring legal action under a negligence theory against entities such as web site operators and other providers and distributors of infected software. Proof of specific negligence is simple in cases involving a familiar virus strain that could have been prevented cost-effectively. However, in cases involving complex and novel strains, and where lapses in compliance with the non-durable component of anti-viral precautions leave no evidentiary trace, such direct proof may be impossible. This article develops a theory of circumstantial evidence, based on the doctrine res ipsa loquitur, aimed at alleviating a virus victim’s burden of proof. Res ipsa loquitur allows an inference of negligence based on the mere occurrence of an accident and the circumstances surrounding it, and does not require proof of specific negligence.The analytical core of the article consists of two components. First, a probabilistic analysis of the res ipsa doctrine identifies the factors that make a strong res ipsa case. Second, an analysis based on (a) the computer science of the structure, operation and detection of computer viruses, and (b) the economics and law surrounding virus detection and elimination, establishes that a malfunction resulting from computer virus infection typically constitutes a strong res ipsa case. Indeed, the res ipsa inference of negligence is particularly strong in cases of infected mission-critical software, such as components of the national critical information infrastructure. In contrast, under this analysis, a general computer malfunction would present a weak res ipsa case. A final section addresses aspects of damages, including a model of damages and analysis of the economic loss rule in the computer virus context.

The idea of Cybercrime is not new, yet there is significant confusion amongst academics, computer security experts and users as to the extent of real Cybercrime. In this paper, we explore the breadth of computer-based crime, providing a definition of the emerging terms “Cybercrime” and “crimeware”. We thendivideCybercrimeintotwodistinct categories: Type I Cybercrime, which is mostly technological in nature, and Type II Cybercrime, which has a more pronounced human element. We then use two case studies to illustrate the role of crimeware in different types of Cybercrime, and offer some observations on the role of cognition in the process of Cybercrime. Finally we provide several suggestions for future work in the area of Cybercrime.

Author's note: "Highly controversial position on rejecting First Amendment protection for virus code. Constitutional lawyers who have written to me universally condemn this proposal as untenable - but I still pig-headedly maintain my position."

As a staunch defender of Free Speech and the rights of young people to experiment with their lives in recent months I have had to face up to some unpalatable facts - virus writing is evil and cannot be justified in any circumstances. It follows that prosecution of virus writers is something which should be universally accepted as appropriate action. Virus writing needs to be recognised as a criminal act by international conventions and virus writers should always be subject to extradition. Just like murderers and terrorists, virus writers should find no escape across national boundaries. And the investigation of computer viruses needs to be a regulated activity with failure to apply for regulation being a criminal offence.

There is a witch-hunt taking place today. Without a deep understanding of the phenomena of computer viruses legislators are attempting, both nationally and internationally, to prohibit what they do not understand. The computer virus is both misunderstood as a concept and abused as a term. Despite this the rallying cry is that all viruses are evil and must be destroyed in the same way as witches were seen as evil in the middle ages. The uncritical criminalisation of computer viruses does not lead to a better society nor does it cure all the ills for which viruses are blamed. This paper is not a defence for viruses but it does explore the alternative uses of computer viruses of which a legislator should be aware and take into consideration when in the processes of defining the legal status of computer code.

This Note examines why current computer crime laws are ineffective, and will continue to be ineffective, in preventing the damage caused by virus and worm computer programs unless significant changes are made. This Note then presents an alternative approach to fighting cybercrime that would prohibit the writing of virus and worm programs.6 Part I outlines the issues involving computer systems, the Internet and malicious software and introduces the concept of cybercrime.

... On June 28th (Vol.7, Issue 16, P.26) of this year, Federal Computer Week published an article by John Stein Monroe entitled "McAfee Champions Virus Protection". I must take exception to many of the statements ascribed to Mr. McAfee. In the interview, Mr. McAfee asserts that ...

Increasingly, the Internet and electronic document interchange are required business tools. Where even a few years ago, Web sites and e-mail were novelties, and e-commerce virtually non-existent, these are now commonplace. Businesses of any size have Web sites, e-mail is ubiquitous, and e-commerce is booming.Unfortunately, the increase in Internet usage and dependence has been accompanied by a commensurate increase in illegal and improper activities. Some of these phenomena are merely electronic versions of older activities - stock kiting, pyramid schemes, and the like, while others are uniquely Internet-based - viruses, worms, and other devices designed to disrupt Internet service or damage computers.These objects' creators are somewhat unique in that there is apparently no economic motive for their actions. They are vandals, pure and simple, and their vandalism is enormously costly to the world economy. It has been estimated that viruses cost the U.S. economy several billion dollars a year (Violino 1996).

Computer viruses damage computer systems in many ways, including destroying programs and data, causing lost computing time and necessitating expensive cleanup procedures and increased security measures. If the damage caused by such a virus is extensive, it would seem appealing to sue the author for restitution. Careful consideration must be paid to the facts in the case, however, to determine whether or not a beneficial resolution is possible through legal action. Two problems stand in the way of a favorable resolution. First, there are few laws on the books which set clearly applicable precedents for the right to legal relief in virus-related cases. Second, since hackers tend to work by themselves, the cost of a lawsuit may be more than can reasonably be recovered from the defendant. The legal ramifications of the virus problem are discussed in detail.

This essay contains a description of several famous malicious computer programs (e.g., computer viruses and worms) that caused extensive harm, and it reviews the legal consequences of each incident, including the nonexistent or lenient punishment of the program's author.

Computer viruses are still a hot topic for network and computer security professionals. Nearly every computer conference has a session on computer viruses, their detection, and prevention, but never, the recourses one has when they are the victim of a computer virus.

Computer viruses have become the “hot” topic in the computer security industry. Nearly every computer conference has a session on how to protect your computer from computer viruses and other security threats. There are several computer virus “vaccines” on the market.