Follow

🇩🇪 Spionagesoftware : Im Zeitalter der digitalen Revolution tragen kommerzielle Hersteller eine zentrale Verantwortung & müssen für die Folgen ihrer Sicherheitslücken haftbar gemacht werden.

Mehr über meine schriftliche Anfrage an die Kommission: patrick-breyer.de/spionagesoft

🇬🇧 Spy software : In the age of the digital revolution, commercial manufacturers bear a responsibility and should be liable for damages if security bugs are their fault.

Read more about my written question to the Commission: patrick-breyer.de/en/pegasus-s

@echo_pbreyer
I'm not sure about this. Bugs are a fact of life, and intrusion exploits do not necessarily count as bugs.

We don't sue the glass manufacturer when a burglar smashes their way into a house through a window. Rather, we prosecute those who break in.

@0 I say they should be liable if it' their fault (e.g. not reacting to reported bugs)

@echo_pbreyer

Ok, failing to adequately address reported vulns is another matter (mamot.fr/@0/106611708816095668) and it might be reasonable to hold them liable *if* a) vulnerability has been reported via proper channels, b) failed to be addressed properly and c) it has been exploited.

I'm not sure if that's not the case already.

@echo_pbreyer

> Hungarian authorities are suspected to have monitored the smartphones of journalists and politicians using spyware. How will the Commission address this allegation?“

Wouldn't it have been better to point out that Hungarian journalists and politicians critical of the government have been targeted (strictly, there's no evidence of Hungarian government involvement)?

And what about the #Catalan politicians and activists known to have been targeted? Do they not matter?

@0 Yes, question could have been worded more broadly. Thanks for the suggestions.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
chaos.social

chaos.social – a Fediverse instance for & by the Chaos community