Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!UIAMVS.BITNET!AWCTTYPA From: AWCTTYPA@UIAMVS.BITNET ("David A. Lyons") Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Subject: legality of writing viruses Message-ID: <8809030056.aa08124@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> Date: 3 Sep 88 07:09:45 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 94 X-Unparsable-Date: Friday 02 Sep 88 11:55 PM CT [Sent to mcgurrin, Whitney, Fox, info-apple] >Organization: The MITRE Corp., Washington, D.C. >Date: Fri, 02 Sep 88 10:57:15 EDT >From: mcgurrin@mitre.arpa >Dave [Whitney], if the bill you mention would make virus *WRITING* >illegal I'm afraid I can't agree with you that I hope it passes. >[...] it should not be illegal in a free society to write any type of >code. Distributing it to unknowing recipients is a whole other story >[...] Brian Fox writes: >I also disagree with making the writing of any type of code illegal. >This is akin to censorship, which I know the majority of us do not >agree with. I would be in favor of a bill making it illegal to write (1) malicious software and (2) viruses, whether they intentionally cause damage or not. Why? Because (1) any virus written is almost certain to slip out accidentally even if it isn't distirbuted on purpose, and (2) any virus will, sooner or later, cause damage even if it was intended to be harmless. I challenge anyone to present a scenario where a virus could spread with no possibility of causing damage. I am *not* in favor of any restrictions on what PEOPLE can write for EACH OTHER to read, but I believe a distinction needs to be made between writing stuff for people to read and writing stuff for machines to execute! If all PEOPLE automatically and flawlessly DID everything that message on a piece of paper TOLD them to do, then I'd be in favor or restrictions on human-to-human communication, too! Where would YOU (all of you) draw the line between what should be legal and what should be illegal, and why? 1. Writing a self-propogating computer program (a "virus") which is almost certain to escape and do damage to unsuspecting computer users; 2. Breeding a biological virus known to have incredible spreading power, one that is likely to escape and present a health hazard; 3. Intentionally releasing a computer virus; 4. Intentionally releasing a biological virus presenting a health hazard; 5. Intentionally doing direct damage to an innocent person's machine-readable data; 6. Intentionally doing direct damage to an innocent person; I tried to put these roughly in order or increasing ought-to-be- illegal-ness. If you believe some of these things should be legal, put them in order yourself and let me know why you draw the line where you do. [Brian, still:] >And besides, there is nothing wrong with "virus" code, it is the >heinous actions performed by a few of the (improperly named) >"viruses" that we despise so much. I think there IS something fundamentally wrong with viruses [see below]. What improperly-named viruses are you referring to? Any self-propogating code is a virus, right? CyberAIDS and Festering Hate are genuine viruses, and they are also malicious. >Note that there are also good purposes for self-propagating code, >such as amusement value (max headroom virus), and system-maintenence >(new-software-release-updater). I disagree. I don't want ANYTHING fiddling with any of my files unless I *know* that it's going to fiddle with my files. It's a waste of my time and disk space, and there is always a chance that something will go wrong (ex: during a DISK WRITE that is happening only because of the virus and on a disk I would not normally write to, there's a power fluctuation leaving my root block damaged). As a software developer, it's very important to me that I *keep* old versions of system software around for testing my products with older versions. If I want to use the latest system software, I'll BOOT it! >I dislike calling someone[']s file-deleter a "virus" program because >it gives that non-person undeserved respect. Any moron can delete >files; we certainly don't need some idiot to write a program to do it >for us. EXCUSE ME? >NO< virus or other software that fiddles with files or volumes without the user's permission earns its author any of MY respect. Exactly the opposite, in fact. >Brian Fox --David A. Lyons bitnet: awcttypa@uiamvs DAL Systems CompuServe: 72177,3233 P.O. Box 287 GEnie mail: D.LYONS2 North Liberty, IA 52317 AppleLinkPE: Dave Lyons