Hackers thrive in wireless world
2004-12-04 · Les Twarog & Sonja Pedersen
Iain MacIntyre
Sun
Hackers Thrive in Wireless World
"If they launch an attack from your open access point, it's going to be traced back to you and your network. They'll be long gone." Hackers hide behind our privacy laws Iain MacIntyre Vancouver SunDecember 4, 2004 The biggest problem in prosecuting hackers is that there are so few cases to prosecute. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms and The Privacy Act, laws that protect Canadian citizens, also shield hackers and make investigating cybercrimes extremely difficult. "It's not a prosecution issue; it's an investigation issue," Crown counsel Henry Waldock says. "I haven't yet had a case involving forensic computer evidence. "The Internet was designed by academics. It was a time before black-hat hackers were part of this world. It wasn't designed for forensic accounting or forensic analysis. The forensic trail left by computers is relatively slim." Since cybercrime usually leaves no physical evidence in the traditional sense, investigators have little more than computer forensics to pursue. Often, there is nothing to chase. Every computer hardware card has a serial number or MAC (Media Access Control) address to identify it. Addresses, however, can be changed by adept hackers, who make themselves transient. Time-stamping on data also can be doctored. "The trouble with electronic data is its fragility," Waldock says. "A fingerprint on a car door, it would be ludicrous for someone to suggest someone fabricated it. "But any kind of incriminating data can be planted by someone else by placing it in the hard drive. And there's no way to date it. All date stamps can be changed." Waldock, an experienced Crown prosecutor in Chilliwack who has a degree in computer science and lectures on cybercrime, says the easiest way to catch hackers would be to intercept and trace their transmissions. This, however, is illegal. Section 184 of the Criminal Code makes it an offence to intercept private communications. Investigators require judicial authorization to wiretap a phone or monitor the communications of a cybercrime suspect. They must convince a judge there are "reasonable and probable grounds" to order a wiretap against an individual. Sometimes police do not have a single, identifiable hacker suspect. When they do, it remains difficult to establish the legal grounds necessary for wiretap authorization. A honeypot is a cyberspace sting operation that Waldock says could be an effective tool for police. Authorities establish a vulnerable computer to lure hackers, much like police use bait cars to entice auto thieves. But again, without reasonable and probable grounds for a wiretap against a specific person, the police cannot intercept transmissions. Also, officers could be assisting a hacker as he commits cybercrime. "You're stopped before you get started," Waldock says. "You have a chicken and egg problem." By definition, laws follow crime. In the case of hacking and cybercrime, the lag seems more pronounced. Early in the electronic age, the Supreme Court ruled that stealing a copy of information was not a crime because data did not constitute property. Information taken was merely borrowed as long as it still existed at its origin. Existing law progresses through changing interpretations and new laws have given authorities more latitude to combat cybercrimes involving child pornography and identity theft. "The technology is moving along at a frightening pace," Waldock says. "There are telephones you get in Japan that have infrared cameras, so you can take pictures of someone and see through their clothes. "I have a degree in computer science and am very much into technology, and I have no idea what's coming next. "A decade is a long time in the information age. In law, it's relatively brief. From 1993 to 2003, the Web went from 2,700 sites to 45 million. In about the same time frame, the Long Term Offender designation went from an idea to legislation interpreted by the Supreme Court of Canada." While the law tries to catch up, the private sector charges ahead. There are global efforts to regulate the Internet and technology giants such as Microsoft and Intel are developing so-called "trusted computing," which would make users easier to track. Even as a prosecutor, however, Waldock has concerns about civil liberties being compromised by this possible future wave of technology. "Hackers enjoy their privacy, but so do the rest of us," he says. "That's the balance here. How much of an Orwellian state do you want to live in?"© The Vancouver Sun 2004 |
