News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:XZ backdoor: "It's RCE, not auth bypass, and gated/unrepl... by ronsor on Saturday March 30, 2024 @04:37PM (#39878406)
It's not simply vulnerable code: it's an actual backdoor. That is malware distribution (without permission) and is therefore illegal.
Re:XZ backdoor: "It's RCE, not auth bypass, and gated/unrepl... by greyface- on Saturday March 30, 2024 @04:50PM (#39878517)
Is it illegal to distribute malware? I see security researchers doing it all the time for analysis purposes.
Re:XZ backdoor: "It's RCE, not auth bypass, and gated/unrepl... by ronsor on Saturday March 30, 2024 @04:53PM (#39878547)
No, it is not illegal to distribute malware by itself, but it is illegal to trick people into installing malware. The latter was the goal of the XZ contributor.
Re:XZ backdoor: "It's RCE, not auth bypass, and gated/unrepl... by pbhjpbhj on Saturday March 30, 2024 @06:47PM (#39879437)
I assume you're talking from a USC perspective? Can you say which specific law, chapter, and clause applies?
Re:XZ backdoor: "It's RCE, not auth bypass, and gated/unrepl... by dvhh on Sunday March 31, 2024 @01:19PM (#39886071)
I would somewhat agree, but then come to mind "what is the "legal" definition of malware ?".

Some people would say that most drm software would act like malware/ransomware.

And tricking people to install such software is only matter of an ambiguously worded checkbox.

Re:XZ backdoor: "It's RCE, not auth bypass, and gated/unrepl... by fragmede on Saturday March 30, 2024 @04:56PM (#39878576)
specifically, thevCFAA covers distribution of malicious software without the owners consent. Security researchs downloading malware implicitly give consent to be downloading malware marked as such.