In a new court filing, online voting startup Voatz argues that most security research and ethical hacking should be limited to those who have clear permission from organizations to probe systems and software for vulnerabilities and flaws.
See Also: Restructuring Your Third-Party Risk Management Program
The amicus or "friend of the court" brief was filed Thursday by Voatz's legal team as part of a case headed to the U.S. Supreme Court that could redefine the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act - a 1986 law that makes it a federal crime to access a computer system without permission. The law has been amended several times since it was first passed.
In the case before the Supreme Court - Van Buren v. United States - the justices are being asked to examine the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and possibly limit its scope, which could have wide implications for ethical hackers who probe IT systems and software looking for vulnerabilities and sometimes run legal risks by conducting this type of research.
In its view, Voatz argues that CFAA should remain the same and that ethical hackers and security analysts should seek permission from an organization before conducting any ..
Support the originator by clicking the read the rest link below.
