EU plans tougher punishment for hackers – and their bosses

Biz could be criminally liable if it 'profits' from employees' cyber attacks


The European Parliament's Civil Liberties Committee overwhelmingly voted to approve proposals to criminalise certain activity relating to cyber attacks last week. The proposals contain plans to make specified "legal persons" within companies liable for certain offences.

"Legal persons would be liable for offences committed for their benefit (e.g. a company would be liable for hiring a hacker to get access to a competitor's database), whether deliberately or through a lack of supervision," the European Parliament said in a statement. "They would also face penalties such as exclusion for entitlement to public benefits or judicial winding-up."

EU member countries will be required to "ensure that their networks of national contact points are available round the clock" and that they can "respond to urgent requests within a maximum of eight hours" in order to prevent cyber-attacks spreading across borders.

The Committee's proposals would make it a criminal offence to conduct cyber attacks on computer systems. Individuals would face at least two years in jail if served with the maximum penalty for the offence.

A maximum penalty of at least five years in jail could apply if "aggravating circumstances" or "considerable damage ... financial costs or loss of financial data" occurred, the Parliament said in a statement.

One aggravating circumstance in which the heavier penalty could be levied is if an individual uses 'botnet' tools "specifically designed for large-scale attacks". Considerable damage may be said to have occurred through the disruption of system services, according to plans disclosed by the Parliament.

Individuals found in possession of or distributing hacking software and tools also face criminal charges under the Committee's proposals.

"Illegal access, interference or interception of data should be treated as a criminal offence," the MEPs said, according to the Parliament.

Using another person's "electronic identity" in order to commit an attack that causes "prejudice to the rightful identity owner" could result in offenders serving a minimum of three years in jail if they are under the maximum penalties that could be imposed.

"Tougher penalties" would be imposed on criminal organisations. Those harsher penalties will also be imposed for attacks on "critical infrastructure such as the IT systems of power plants or transport networks," the Parliament said. If damage caused by attacks is "insignificant" then no criminal sanctions "should" apply.

Criminal offences will also apply for the sale or production of tools that are used to commit cyber-attack crimes, it said.

"We are dealing here with serious criminal attacks, some of which are even conducted by criminal organisations," Monika Hohlmeier MEP said. "The financial damage caused for companies, private users and the public side amounts to several billions each year. No car manufacturer may send a car without a seatbelt into the streets. And if this happens, the company will be held liable for any damage. These rules must also apply in the virtual world," she said.

The Committee's rapporteur hopes to form agreement on a new EU Directive by the summer. Both the European Parliament and Council of Ministers would have to back the proposals for this to happen.

In the UK individuals can face up to 10 years in jail for serious offences under the Computer Misuse Act.

Under the Act it is an offence for a person to knowingly cause "a computer to perform any function with intent to secure access to any program or data held in any computer, or to enable any such access to be secured" without authorisation.

Under the Act a person is also guilty of an offence if the unlawful computer access is used to commit, or facilitate, some other offences regardless of whether that subsequent offence is to take place in the future or is indeed possible to commit. A person is also guilty of an offence if they commit any unauthorised act with intent to impair the operation of any computer, prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer, impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data, or enabling those acts to be done.

Making, adapting, supplying or offering to supply any electronic program or data intending it, or knowingly it is likely, to be used or to assist in the commission of unlawful computer access or impairment is also an offence. Supplying electronic programs or data "with a view to its being supplied for use to commit, or to assist in the commission" of unlawful computer access or impairment is also an offence under the Act.

Copyright © 2012, Out-Law.com

Out-Law.com is part of international law firm Pinsent Masons.

Similar topics

Broader topics


Other stories you might like

  • SEC probes Musk for not properly disclosing Twitter stake
    Meanwhile, social network's board rejects resignation of one its directors

    America's financial watchdog is investigating whether Elon Musk adequately disclosed his purchase of Twitter shares last month, just as his bid to take over the social media company hangs in the balance. 

    A letter [PDF] from the SEC addressed to the tech billionaire said he "[did] not appear" to have filed the proper form detailing his 9.2 percent stake in Twitter "required 10 days from the date of acquisition," and asked him to provide more information. Musk's shares made him one of Twitter's largest shareholders. The letter is dated April 4, and was shared this week by the regulator.

    Musk quickly moved to try and buy the whole company outright in a deal initially worth over $44 billion. Musk sold a chunk of his shares in Tesla worth $8.4 billion and bagged another $7.14 billion from investors to help finance the $21 billion he promised to put forward for the deal. The remaining $25.5 billion bill was secured via debt financing by Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Barclays, and others. But the takeover is not going smoothly.

    Continue reading
  • Cloud security unicorn cuts 20% of staff after raising $1.3b
    Time to play blame bingo: Markets? Profits? Too much growth? Russia? Space aliens?

    Cloud security company Lacework has laid off 20 percent of its employees, just months after two record-breaking funding rounds pushed its valuation to $8.3 billion.

    A spokesperson wouldn't confirm the total number of employees affected, though told The Register that the "widely speculated number on Twitter is a significant overestimate."

    The company, as of March, counted more than 1,000 employees, which would push the jobs lost above 200. And the widely reported number on Twitter is about 300 employees. The biz, based in Silicon Valley, was founded in 2015.

    Continue reading
  • Talos names eight deadly sins in widely used industrial software
    Entire swaths of gear relies on vulnerability-laden Open Automation Software (OAS)

    A researcher at Cisco's Talos threat intelligence team found eight vulnerabilities in the Open Automation Software (OAS) platform that, if exploited, could enable a bad actor to access a device and run code on a targeted system.

    The OAS platform is widely used by a range of industrial enterprises, essentially facilitating the transfer of data within an IT environment between hardware and software and playing a central role in organizations' industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) efforts. It touches a range of devices, including PLCs and OPCs and IoT devices, as well as custom applications and APIs, databases and edge systems.

    Companies like Volvo, General Dynamics, JBT Aerotech and wind-turbine maker AES are among the users of the OAS platform.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022