Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Using a VPN could become a criminal offence under new CFAA interpretation

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 98 posts

Re: Using a VPN could become a criminal offence under new CFAA interpretation

#11

Post by FateOfNations »

sharemywin wrote: post #3

couldn't the logic for anonymous browsing be similar? what about ad blockers?

The underlying issue is "accessing a computer system you know (or should know) you shouldn't be accessing".

Ad blockers operate on your own equipment and network and don't involve accessing any other systems.

"Anonymous browsing" isn't clearly defined enough to analyze. If it was something like "We don't allow connections via Tor", and you used Tor to connect anyways, this concept would apply (especially if you attempted to bypass technical controls, or intentionally disguised the traffic).

Re: Using a VPN could become a criminal offence under new CFAA interpretation

#12

Post by syshum »

sandworm101 wrote: post #6

>> VPN to get access to content that is otherwise blocked in your country through an IP Block for example could become a criminal offence as well. Yes. Accessing material that has been deemed illegal enough to be the subject of a country-wide block is generally going to be a criminal offense. We might all hate censorship, but the people who write the censorship laws are the same as the ones writing the criminal laws.…

Well in the case in question is a US case, based on US Law, and using CFAA to get around the 1st amendment is indeed scary and should be given more weight than a causal dimssial of "well we hate censorship but...." which calls in the question if you really even hate censorship... I have my doubts

Beyond that this is CLEARLY a bad reading of CFAA, recent US Supreme Court rulings have shown they would prefer a narrow reading of the law instead of a broad one so I hope the lower court recognizes this and shots LinkedIn Down.

Re: Using a VPN could become a criminal offence under new CFAA interpretation

#13

Post by tyingq »

FateOfNations wrote: post #11
sharemywin wrote: post #3

couldn't the logic for anonymous browsing be similar? what about ad blockers?

The underlying issue is "accessing a computer system you know (or should know) you shouldn't be accessing". Ad blockers operate on your own equipment and network and don't involve accessing any other systems. "Anonymous browsing" isn't clearly defined enough to analyze. If it was something like "We don't allow connections via Tor", and you used Tor to connect anyways, this concept would apply (especially if you attem…

Ad blockers often include paywall/regwall bypasses, which does somewhat fit the description.

Re: Using a VPN could become a criminal offence under new CFAA interpretation

#14

Post by FateOfNations »

sandworm101 wrote: post #6

>> VPN to get access to content that is otherwise blocked in your country through an IP Block for example could become a criminal offence as well. Yes. Accessing material that has been deemed illegal enough to be the subject of a country-wide block is generally going to be a criminal offense. We might all hate censorship, but the people who write the censorship laws are the same as the ones writing the criminal laws.…

From the context, (CFAA, a US law) "VPN to get access to content that is otherwise blocked in your country through an IP Block" wouldn't be referring to using a VPN to bypass blocks imposed by "your local government" or censorship-related issues, but rather circumventing blocks imposed by US-based content providers.

Hypothetical scenario: User outside the United States uses a VPN to access US Netflix content. In doing so, have circumvented Netflix access control mechanism and are accessing the Netflix's computer systems in an unauthorized manner. Unauthorized access to computer systems is a violation of the CFAA. Accordingly, the foreign user is potentially liable for felony criminal charges in the US, just the same as they had "hacked" any other computer system in the US.

Re: Using a VPN could become a criminal offence under new CFAA interpretation

#15

Post by DarkWiiPlayer »

FateOfNations wrote: post #11
sharemywin wrote: post #3

couldn't the logic for anonymous browsing be similar? what about ad blockers?

The underlying issue is "accessing a computer system you know (or should know) you shouldn't be accessing". Ad blockers operate on your own equipment and network and don't involve accessing any other systems. "Anonymous browsing" isn't clearly defined enough to analyze. If it was something like "We don't allow connections via Tor", and you used Tor to connect anyways, this concept would apply (especially if you attem…

No, that's not the point: If a website states "you are not allowed to use this website with an ad blocker", then by accessing it anyway, you're suddenly a "hacker" before the law and could face severe legal consequences.

Re: Using a VPN could become a criminal offence under new CFAA interpretation

#16

Post by lugged »

FateOfNations wrote: post #14
sandworm101 wrote: post #6

>> VPN to get access to content that is otherwise blocked in your country through an IP Block for example could become a criminal offence as well. Yes. Accessing material that has been deemed illegal enough to be the subject of a country-wide block is generally going to be a criminal offense. We might all hate censorship, but the people who write the censorship laws are the same as the ones writing the criminal laws.…

From the context, (CFAA, a US law) "VPN to get access to content that is otherwise blocked in your country through an IP Block" wouldn't be referring to using a VPN to bypass blocks imposed by "your local government" or censorship-related issues, but rather circumventing blocks imposed by US-based content providers. Hypothetical scenario: User outside the United States uses a VPN to access US Netflix content. In doin…

Read OP quote again, parent missed the part that shows this is what they are talking about.

>> If the court follows this argument the ...

Op is referring to precedent potentially being set, but I'm not sure it would actually apply in practice. (Different laws)

Re: Using a VPN could become a criminal offence under new CFAA interpretation

#17

Post by matheusmoreira »

FateOfNations wrote: post #14
sandworm101 wrote: post #6

>> VPN to get access to content that is otherwise blocked in your country through an IP Block for example could become a criminal offence as well. Yes. Accessing material that has been deemed illegal enough to be the subject of a country-wide block is generally going to be a criminal offense. We might all hate censorship, but the people who write the censorship laws are the same as the ones writing the criminal laws.…

From the context, (CFAA, a US law) "VPN to get access to content that is otherwise blocked in your country through an IP Block" wouldn't be referring to using a VPN to bypass blocks imposed by "your local government" or censorship-related issues, but rather circumventing blocks imposed by US-based content providers. Hypothetical scenario: User outside the United States uses a VPN to access US Netflix content. In doin…

> the foreign user is potentially liable for felony criminal charges in the US

US law does not apply to non-US citizens. How could a foreigner possibly be liable for anything?

Re: Using a VPN could become a criminal offence under new CFAA interpretation

#18

Post by FateOfNations »

tyingq wrote: post #13
FateOfNations wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The underlying issue is "accessing a computer system you know (or should know) you shouldn't be accessing". Ad blockers operate on your own equipment and network and don't involve accessing any other systems. "Anonymous browsing" isn't clearly defined enough to analyze. If it was something like "We don't allow connections via Tor", and you used Tor to connect anyways, this concept would apply (especially if you attem…

Ad blockers often include paywall/regwall bypasses, which does somewhat fit the description.

I would argue that it depends on how it is implemented.

Some pay/reg walls are implemented such that the site is sending the full content to you but directing your web browser not to display it (like using a `display: none` CSS property). I would say using a browser extension to direct the browser to display it anyways wouldn't be a violation. You were authorized to make the initial request for the otherwise public page and they choose to send the full content to you. You aren't making any other connections to their system that you aren't authorized to make.

On the other hand, if it is doing something to trick the server into sending you content that it wouldn't otherwise send you and you aren't authorized to access, I would tend towards seeing that as something closer to a violation.

Re: Using a VPN could become a criminal offence under new CFAA interpretation

#19

Post by pieno »

sandworm101 wrote: post #6

>> VPN to get access to content that is otherwise blocked in your country through an IP Block for example could become a criminal offence as well. Yes. Accessing material that has been deemed illegal enough to be the subject of a country-wide block is generally going to be a criminal offense. We might all hate censorship, but the people who write the censorship laws are the same as the ones writing the criminal laws.…

> Accessing material that has been deemed illegal enough to be the subject of a country-wide block is generally going to be a criminal offense.

That’s not the issue discussed here, I think. We’re not talking about someone circumventing censorship in their own country (which is obviously illegal in your own country).

What we’re talking about here are IP-based country filters imposed by websites such as Netflix or BBC iPlayer, restricting visitors from certain countries to access all or certain content. Circumventing that filter by using a VPN (thereby masquerading as someone in a “permitted visitor country”) is obviously going to be a breach of the terms & conditions of that website and/or license conditions of content made available. But the argument apparently raised by LinkedIn in this case is that this is also a criminal offence of gaining unauthorised access to systems (I.e. legalspeak for what’s colloquially referred to as “hacking”), which would likely lead to (more severe) prosecution and punishment.

Post reply on HN