Author Topic: Cybercrime Law in PH - Causing Uproar  (Read 1190 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline HeRo

  • Peasant
  • *
  • Posts: 76
  • Cookies: 1
  • -HeRo
    • View Profile
Cybercrime Law in PH - Causing Uproar
« on: September 23, 2012, 11:34:47 am »
So we have this newly approved cybercrime law, which some of us kinda feels happy (at last, the authority would not be as dumb as they were before regarding cybercrimes)



The problem now is this, it wasn't thought carefully and was approved forcefully. Another thing is the "Libel" that was added last minute.


Let me tell you a bit of a story.


Some moths or days ago, one of our senators was "cyber bullied" because of a speech he literally copy and pasted from Sarah Pope's blog post. The thing is when the media cornered him and asked his side on why he never gave credit, his statement was “Bakit ko naman iku-quote ang blogger? Blogger lang ‘yon.” that means "Why would I quote a blogger? It's just a blogger". This is where the "cyberbullying" occurred. I simply call it becoming an internet meme HAHA.

Article Regarding the Copy Paste
[size=78%]http://professionalheckler.wordpress.com/tag/sen-tito-sotto-plagiarism/[/size]


So the next thing is.. The ex-comedian now senator (he was really an ex comedian) have took the "cyberbullying" too much and rushed on passing the cybercrime bill, he then added the Libel on the very last minute that even his secretary didn't know much anything about it.



17 Cybercimes Covered and Explained (with penalty)
http://digitalfilipino.com/introduction-cybercrime-prevention-act-republic-act-10175/

One of our senators who's against this bullshit posted this.


https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/c0.0.403.403/p403x403/267432_413317762057128_715826985_n.jpg

Offline HeRo

  • Peasant
  • *
  • Posts: 76
  • Cookies: 1
  • -HeRo
    • View Profile
Re: Cybercrime Law in PH - Causing Uproar
« Reply #1 on: October 03, 2012, 03:58:26 am »
Update: Yesterday and Today has been a very 'scary' day for Philippines' Cyberspace. Apparently, Hackers are going up against hackers.


Hackers will upload a web version of LOIC/HOIC to attack the government websites, hacker's from the government will then deface the online tool.


Oh well.. Let's see what will happen. For the last few weeks, about 20 or so government websites were defaced, and a huge number were DDoSed. apparently no one was caught yet.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2012, 03:59:11 am by HeRo »

Offline HeRo

  • Peasant
  • *
  • Posts: 76
  • Cookies: 1
  • -HeRo
    • View Profile
Re: Cybercrime Law in PH - Causing Uproar
« Reply #2 on: October 08, 2012, 03:45:48 pm »
The Department of Justice have started collecting internet traffic data.


Just what on fuck is wrong with my country O.O I'm guessing that soon enough, a massive cyberwar will occur.


Quote
Although much emphasis is placed on the inclusion of libel in RA 10175, I am more concerned with Chapter 4, in particular Sec 12 which says:
"
SEC. 12. Real-Time Collection of Traffic Data. — Law enforcement authorities, with due cause, shall be authorized to collect or record by technical or electronic means traffic data in real-time associated with specified communications transmitted by means
of a computer system.

Traffic data refer only to the communication’s origin, destination, route, time, date, size, duration, or type of underlying service, but not content, nor identities.

All other data to be collected or seized or disclosed will require a court warrant.

Service providers are required to cooperate and assist law enforcement authorities in the collection or recording of the above-stated information.
"

To the layperson this may seem benign and, even, justifiable. However, to someone from within the industry such as myself, this is very scary. First, because Sec 12 cannot be implemented. I say this because you cannot gather communication data without getting the content as well.

This very broad and loose clause is very open to abuse by the government. A simple "suspicion of malice" has the potential to intrude upon your rights to privacy. They can do fishing expeditions listening in to your data, and when they find something, they ask the courts for a warrant.

Let me explain. Upon order by the DOJ, law enforcement authorities can and will listen in to your data communications without need for a warrant. The law says they cannot look at the content. But this is not entirely accurate. They will be using a packet sniffer to do this. A packet sniffer will reveal all, including the content. The photo I attached is a screen capture of a packet sniffing tool.

(I will be trying to explain this to laypeople, and so will be leaving out many technical things. I acknowledge the danger of oversimplification.)

Data transmission is done in packets. A packet will contain: origin, destination, message type, message length, and content, among others. Although to us humans, a packet may seem like a discrete unit of communications, to the computer it isn't. It is one continuous stream of data, one packet after another. The only way of separating one packet from another is looking at the packet information which will tell you how long the packet is. You then measure the length of the packet to get to the start of the next packet. And to be able to measure something, you need to have it with you. In other words, you will need the entire packet, including the contents, to do this.





« Last Edit: October 08, 2012, 03:49:27 pm by HeRo »

Offline HeRo

  • Peasant
  • *
  • Posts: 76
  • Cookies: 1
  • -HeRo
    • View Profile
Re: Cybercrime Law in PH - Causing Uproar
« Reply #3 on: October 09, 2012, 08:27:22 am »
We fucking won! A temporary victory!

Quote
MANILA, Philippines—The Supreme Court on Tuesday stopped the implementation of Republic Act 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.
During Tuesday’s full court deliberation, the high court justices unanimously issued a temporary restraining order after it was flooded by petitions assailing the constitutionality of several provisions of the said law.
A total of 15 petitions from various organizations told the high court that several provisions of violates the 1987 Constitution specifically the provisions on freedom of speech, equal protection of the law, right to privacy, illegal searches and seizures, double jeopardy.