Leaders from both the private and public sectors united to oppose an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court that they say advocates a broad interpretation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and could peg independent security researchers as threats.
The coalition contended that a recent filing by blockchain voting company Voatz in Van Buren v. United States fundamentally misrepresented “widely accepted practices in security research and vulnerability disclosure, and that the broad interpretation of the CFAA threatens security research activities at a national level.”
At issue in Van Buren, set to be heard by the court in October, is whether it is a federal crime for someone with permission to access information on a computer to do so for an improper purpose. The case could modernize and alter the scope of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA).
Please register to continue.
Already registered? Log in.
Once you register, you'll receive:
The context and insight you need to stay abreast of the most important developments in cybersecurity. CISO and practitioner perspectives; strategy and tactics; solutions and innovation; policy and regulation.
Unlimited access to nearly 20 years of SC Media industry analysis and news-you-can-use.
SC Media’s essential morning briefing for cybersecurity professionals.
One-click access to our extensive program of virtual events, with convenient calendar reminders and ability to earn CISSP credits.