“.. In the UK, the introduction of malware is covered by section 3 of the Computer Misuse Act . The Act states that a crime is committed if a person “does any act which causes an unauthorized modification of the contents of any computer” and the perpetrator intends to “cause a modification of the contents of any computer” which may “impair the operation of any computer”, “prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer” or “impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data” ..
Malware is generally distributed unintentionally subsequent to its initial creation. Thus an ICP or an ISP would not be found criminally liable under either the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act or the Computer Misuse Act for most cases of dissemination ..”
What the Law Says about Distributing a Virus or Malware
Craig S Wright, InfoSec Island, 20 September 2011
https://www.infosecisland.com/blogview/16567-What-the-Law-Says-about-Distributing-a-Virus-or-Malware.html – last access 22 September 2011 – (Full article)
“.. The Japanese parliament has quietly passed legislation to make the creation or distribution of a virus or similar malware a criminal offense ..
the distribution of a virus created, for example, in the US, in Japan by a Japanese citizen, would come within the scope of the criminal law ..
what happens if the malware distribution takes place without the knowledge of the user of the computer, such as when a botnet is involved..
Legislators in Japan are less concerned about the semantics, however, as they say this is the country’s response to support the International Convention on Cybercrime, a treaty ratified by more than 30 countries and which mandates international co-operation in investigating crimes in cyberspace ..”
Creating or distributing malware in Japan is now a crime
InfoSecurity Magazine, 20 June 2011
http://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/view/18782/creating-or-distributing-malware-in-japan-is-now-a-crime/ – last access 22 September 2011 – (Full article)
” This is a review (“the review”) conducted at the request of and for the Lord Chief Justice, prompted by concerns as to the operation of the disclosure regime contained in the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996, as amended (“the CPIA”). ”
Review of Disclosure in Criminal Proceedings (Judiciary of England and Wales)
The Rt Hon. Lord Justice Gross
Interesting publication of a paper at the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy 2011 (California). The research (involving 15 authors) investigated purchasing spam products and amongst other things, focused on tracing the payments.
” .. The paper performs holistic analysis that quantifies the full set of resources employed to monetize spam email—including naming, hosting, payment and fulfillment—using extensive measurements of three months of diverse spam data, broad crawling of naming and hosting infrastructures, and over 100 purchases from spam-advertised sites. We relate these resources to the organizations who administer them and then use this data to characterize the relative prospects for defensive interventions at each link in the spam value chain. In particular, we provide the first strong evidence of payment bottlenecks in the spam value chain; 95% of spam-advertised pharmaceutical, replica and software products are monetized using merchant services from just a handful of banks ..
the so-called “spam value chain” involves; botnets, domain registration, name server provisioning, hosting services, and proxy services ..
spammers must also process orders, which requires “payment processing, merchant bank accounts, customer service, and fulfillment.” ..
95% of spam-advertised pharmaceutical, replica, and software products are monetized using merchant services from just a handful of banks ..
13 banks handling 95% of the 76 orders for which they received transaction information .. just three banks handled the majority of transactions: Azerigazbank in Azerbaijan, DnB NOR in Latvia (although the bank is headquartered in Norway), and St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla National Bank in the Caribbean ..
all software orders and 85% of pharmaceutical orders used the correct Visa “Merchant Category Code,” which identifies what’s been sold. “A key reason for this may be the substantial fines imposed by Visa on acquirers when miscoded merchant accounts are discovered ‘laundering’ high-risk goods,” ..
orders were fulfilled from 13 suppliers in four countries: the United States–Massachusetts, Utah, and Washington, all for herbal purchases, as well as West Virginia for pharmaceuticals–plus India, China, and New Zealand. Most pharmaceuticals came from India, while most herbal products came from the United States, likely due to weak regulations ..”
“3 Banks Service Majority Of Spam-Driven Sales”
Mathew J. Schwartz, InformationWeek 25 May 2011
http://www.informationweek.com/news/security/client/229625599 – last access 8 June 2011 – ( Full Article )
“Click Trajectories: End-to-End Analysis of the Spam Value Chain”
Kirill Levchenko et al., IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy 2011, Oakland, California, 24 May 2011
http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~savage/papers/Oakland11.pdf – last access 8 June 2011 – ( Full Journal )
Interesting article in Time regarding IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn who is currently on Bail in New York. Is this to be a new development in Digital Forensic services ?
“..IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn on bail was moved from temporary lodgings on lower Broadway to a large townhouse in Tribeca. Keeping watch over him will be multiple “armed monitors” courtesy of security firm Stroz Friedberg.
– snip –
terms of Strauss-Kahn’s bail order, filed with the New York State Supreme Court on May 20, DSK is “confined to home detention 24 hours per day at an address in Manhattan.” He is permitted to leave the home only for court appearances, medical and legal appointments and religious observances, and the court must have six hours notice.
The people responsible for ensuring Strauss-Kahn’s compliance work for Stroz Friedberg LLC, a cyber security and computer forensics firm. According to “in-home detention protocols” prepared by the company, Stroz Friedberg employees will monitor Strauss-Kahn 24 hours a day, maintain a log of all visitors, search all visitors for weapon and have sole discretion to limit the type and number of visitors to DSK’s residence, along with any other measures that “may be required to prevent flight.”
– snip –
Stroz Friedberg previously kept watch over Bernard Madoff (2009). Ed Stroz made sure to emphasize this is not the firm’s “core expertise,” but rather a sideline business that coincidentally presented itself.
– snip –
Although the Strauss-Kahn case has kept them in the news, Stroz sees digital and cyber security as the most important growth area for the firm in the coming years.
– snip –
Stroz says, “but we’re kind of evolving into the firm you have to have if you’re a serious industry out there. Who isn’t at risk for litigation, regulatory scrutiny, trade secret theft, insider problems? And when that happens, that is not a normal business issue. And you don’t get good at this unless you’re kind of a jungle cat out there seeing things.”
“Who’s Keeping an Eye on Strauss-Kahn?”
Nate Rawlings, TIME, 26 May 2011
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2074075,00.html – last access 27 May 2011 – ( Full Article )
“.. A man wrongly accused in Britain’s largest ever child pornography investigation has won damages in the High Court after an eight-year legal battle.
Jeremy Clifford, 51, from Watford, was arrested and falsely charged in 2003 as part of Operation Ore. His credit card details had been found among those of thousands of British people on a list maintained by Landslide, a commercial provider of illegal pornography based in the US.
Hertfordshire Constabulary seized a computer that had belonged to Mr Clifford and discovered 10 illegal thumbnail images in its temporary internet files folder.
However, a senior High Court judge found on Friday that the arresting officer had been told by a computer forensics expert that the images were not sufficient evidence to charge.
“The images could have been received unsolicited by and even without the knowledge of the operator of the computer, for example as ‘pop-ups’,” said Mr Justice Mackay.
Despite this, the officer, Detective Constable Brian Hopkins, pressed three charges of possession of indecent images of children. Mr Justice Mackay said he cut a “rather pathetic figure” in the witness box, having initially claimed he could not give evidence because of a psychiatric condition.
– snip –
The finding was based on evidence the court heard from an internal investigation launched after Mr Clifford was formally cleared of all the allegations before trial. It found that Hertfordshire Constabulary’s forensics expert, George Fouhey, had advised against pressing charges ..”
“Judge hits police with massive bill over false Operation Ore charges”
Court correspondent, Policing, The Register UK, 4 April 2011
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/04/operation_ore_suspect_wins_damages/ – last access 5 April 2011 – ( Full Article )