>The FBI has been in the hacking business for a long time, famously using malware to log suspects' keystrokes as early as the 1990s. But in the high-profile case surrounding a dark web child abuse site called Playpen, the Bureau is arguing that because it was authorized by a warrant, its computer intrusion code shouldn't be called “malware” at all.
>In a testimony earlier this week in the case of US vs. Jay Michaud, FBI special agent Daniel Alfin argued that the hacking tool used to identify Michaud and thousands of other Playpen users—which the FBI euphemistically calls a “Network Investigative Technique” or “NIT”—isn't malware because it was authorized by a court and didn't damage the security of Michaud's computer.
>“The NIT utilized in this investigation was court-authorized and made no changes to the security settings of the target computers to which it was deployed. As such, I do not believe it is appropriate to describe its operation as 'malicious,'” Alfin said. He added that he personally loaded the NIT onto one of his own machines and that “it did not make any changes to the security settings on my computer or otherwise render it more vulnerable to intrusion than it already was.”
>Malware is short for “malicious software,” and has always been somewhat hard to define. But the government's interpretation defies its commonly understood meaning in computer security, which describes code that surreptitiously installs and runs on a device without the owner's consent. The FBI's NIT would certainly fit that description: it was quietly installed on the machine of anyone accessing the Playpen website, which was only available while using the anonymous Tor browser. Once implanted, the NIT returned the true IP addresses of the site's visitors. To send the NIT, the FBI seized control of the Playpen site, effectively facilitating the distribution of child abuse images for two weeks.
https://archive.is/odz9x
>advanced interrogation
>aka waterboarding
>>54697004
>Malware is short for “malicious software,” and has always been somewhat hard to define.
no, not really FBI, malware is extremely easy to define
As long as they have a warrant, and as long as they are only using their spyware to spy on the individuals the warrant permits them to spy on, I see nothing wrong with this.
>hostile software made to fuck with users
If they have the warrant it's fine, but they shouldn't redefine terms
>>54697004
>To send the NIT, the FBI seized control of the Playpen site, effectively facilitating the distribution of child abuse images for two weeks.
So when do they get their day in court?
>it did not make any changes to the security settings on my computer or otherwise render it more vulnerable to intrusion than it already was
has someone audited this malware to make sure? usually new code presents a larger attack surface and there are tons of anecdotal stories of hackers hijacking government backdoors.
>>54697198
this is the definition of malware. just because a group of people has agreed that it does what they want and a court has ruled it legal doesn't mean it's not malware.
>>54697004
Is it that hard to not go looking for fucked up illegal shit online? Why is this even a thing?
actually it is, because it's malware.
so when does the FBI go to jail for hacking?
>send NIT
How can you send smth not hypertext via hypertext protocol? It was js executed by browser?
>>54699284
It is a thing if nothing else erouses you
>>54699558
Yup I'm curious how they are deploying that shit, someone respond please.
So now the FBI is allowed to distribute CP in order to entrap people?
Why limit it to the deep web? Why not start spreading it all over the www and collecting IPs from anybody who stumbles across it by accident?
Oh wait, that's what they do on 4chan.
/g/ can't refute this. Because if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about.
>>54699624
because you don't need that on the www
they can just make a honeypot but nobody falls for those im guessing
Bureaucrats are really good at NIT picking.
>>54700030
>Because if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about.
Thanks, you just cured my lifelong problem with anxiety.
>It's not malware if the person making it thinks it's not malware and swears it can and will only be used by him
Doesn't that make most malware not malware?
4chan = fbi honeypot
Fbi viruses dont infect linux computers lel
>>54699558
>>54699619
I think it was by a Flash vulnerability, so it only affected anyone stupid enough to allow Flash to run while using Tor.
>>54700771
Adobe is botnet everybody boycott
