Showing posts with label Cybercrime. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cybercrime. Show all posts

Oct 2, 2012

Pinoy netizens ‘go black’ on Facebook to protest Cybercrime Law

Filipino netizens are turning their Facebook profile photos into black as a sign of protest against the controversial Cybercrime bill.


A group called Philippine Internet Freedom Association is currently encouraging more people to switch to the "black" profile photo to support mounting protests against the Cybercrime law.

For weeks, the debate has moved away from the political and "industry expert" circles to the citizens who are now taking action against what is perceived to be a draconian law covering the Internet.

As part of a personal protest, some people also carry Facebook status messages that shows a "black bar" that is followed by "[STATUS BLOCKED] (RA NO 10175)."

Senator Francis Escudero is set to file amendments to the bill on Tuesday, as he earlier admitted he made a mistake of signing this law.

Earlier, Senator Teofisto Guingona who is among the more vocal opponents of the Cybercrime bill, says that the law, signed by President Benigno Aquino III on September 12, violates the Constitution.

Senator Guingona hit on the law's vague provisions, including one on online libel, which can supress the citizen's right to freedom of speech and expression.

Hacktivists, dubbed Anonymous Philippines, had been defacing government websites to protest the Cybercrime law, that is to take effect on October 3.

Among the government websites that were hit include the National Telecommunications Commission, the Philippine Information Agency, the Food Development Center, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, and the Metropolitcan Waterworks and Sewerage System.

One of the controversial provisions of the law will throw anyone in jail for 12 years if they're found posting defamatory comments on social networks, which is a tougher penalty versus an existing libel law that applies to "traditional media."

According to this Interaskyon story, there will be more government websites that will be attacked due to mounting opposition to the Cybercrime law. - source

Sep 21, 2012

Philippines Cybercrime law: Yay or nay?

The newly approved law aimed at combating cybercrimes has been met with mixed reactions from the public and private sectors.

The Cybercrime Prevention Act is a boon for local firms, particularly in the information technology sector, business groups said.

Other groups meanwhile warned that the new law threatens Filipinos' freedom of expression as well as freedom of information.

But what does the anti-cybercrime law mean for the ordinary Filipino netizen?

Most if not all of the offenses in the law are already crimes punishable under the Revised Penal Code.

Commenting on the new law, Information and Communications Techonology Association of the Philippines (ITAP) President Dondi Mapa said: "It's not a matter of identifying new crimes but only recognizing that existing crimes now happen in a new environment."

The anti-cybercrime act itself notes under its declaration of policy that it is the state's mechanism to adopt "sufficient powers to effectively prevent and combat such offenses by facilitating their detection, investigation, and prosecution."

The law categorizes cybercrimes into three: (1) offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems; (2) computer-related; or (3) content-related offenses.

Illegal access to computer systems, illegal interception of data, data or system interference, as well as misuse or computer systems or data belong in the first category.

Also in the same group is "cyber-squatting," which involves the acquisition of a domain name "in bad faith to profit, mislead, destroy reputation, and deprive others from registering the same."

In case of businesses, these may include the use of a domain name "similar, identical, or confusingly similar" to registered trademarks.

But businesses are not the only targets of "cyber-squatters," as the law also covers the use of personal names "identical or in any way similar with the name of a person other than the registrant."

Computer-related offenses, meanwhile, include the input, alteration or deletion of any computer data with the intent of forgery, fraud or identity theft.

On the other hand, cybersex, defined under the law as the willful engagement in online sexual activities, is included in content-related offenses.

Child pornography is another content-related offense in the law.

The anti-cybercrime act notes that punishment to child pornography committed through a computer system will be one degree higher than the sanctions in the Anti-Child Pornography Act.

Also named a content-related offense is the sending of unsolicited communication which advertise or sell products or services.

Under the new law, firms may only send electronic messages if recipients who grant prior consent or to existing subscribers or customers for service announcements.

Otherwise, the messages should allow recipients to "opt out." The source and intention of the message should also not be disguised.

Meanwhile, the law broadens the coverage of libel to include those "committed through a computer system or any other similar means which may be devised in the future."

This means that online statements against the reputation of an individual or an entity may give rise to libel suits, as if they were published or broadcast.

Among the crimes enumerated in the law, the provision on libel is most hit.

Media watchdog Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility said the inclusion of libel as an act punishable by imprisonment goes against a long-standing UN principle of decriminalizing libel.

"Libel as a criminal offense has been used by past administrations as well as local officials today to harass and intimidate journalists," it noted.

For his part, Senator Teofisto Guingona III called the law "a prior restraint on the principle of the freedom of expression and freedom of speech."

Although broadly welcoming the anti-cybercrime act, ITAP's Mapa meanwhile urged the government to be circumspect in drafting the new law's implementing rules.

"The implementation should be done with due process and without curtailing citizens' rights," Mapa said in a press briefing.

Mar 1, 2012

'Bloody Monday': Hackers strike gov't websites anew


Hackers hit at least three more government websites early Monday as protests mount against the Cybercrime Prevention Act which is set to take effect Oct. 3.

The online portals of the National Telecommunications Commission, the Philippine Information Agency and the Food Development Center were defaced by hackers claiming to be members of the group "Anonymous Philippines."

The same group claimed responsibility in a spate of attacks Thursday that hit at least six websites, including those of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas and the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System.

The hackers, which used the name "PrivateX", replaced the front pages of the website with pink background that claim the websites to be "seized."

A white-on-black message meanwhile read: "This domain name associated with GOV.PH has been seized pursuant to an order issued by Anonymous Philippines."

"A federal grand jury has indicated several individuals and entities allegedly involved in the operation of this website/department/ office charging them with the following federal crimes: conspiracy, violations of human rights, corruption, copyright infringement, money laundering, piracy, misuse of devices, libel, plagiarism, and destruction of freedom of speech," the message read further.

Twitter users also floated the possibility that the attacks will continue throughout the day in an online "hacktivist" movement dubbed "Bloody Monday."

"Nagsimula na ang Anonymous Philippines! (Anonymous Philippines has started!) Turning government sites down. The battle is on! #BloodyMonday," Twitter user Savipra Gorospe said.

Others, however, worried that the online protests would only push the government to tighten regulations for the Internet.

"IMHO (in my humble opinion), these #BloodyMonday hacks just give the government more justification on #CybercrimeLaw The sentiment doesn't justify the means," Twitter user EJ Mangahas said.

In a press briefing last week, Palace urged hackers to channel protests through other means instead of crippling government websites.

"I think the better venue for them is to really show their protests in a proper forum rather than hacking government websites," reports quoted Palace Spokesperson Edwin Lacierda as saying.

"It won’t win them brownie points if that's what they are doing," he added.

Five petitions against the Cybercrime Prevention Act have so far been lodged with the Supreme Court. - source