CLEMENS HOFFMANN

Hacker Paragraph Reform

For years, IT security researchers and ethical hackers have faced significant legal challenges under Germany's computer crime laws, particularly the so-called "Hacker Paragraph" (§ 202c StGB). Initially introduced to combat cybercrime, these laws unintentionally criminalized tools and practices essential for IT security research. This legal gray area has discouraged efforts to identify and fix vulnerabilities, despite their importance for cybersecurity.

The Problem: Criminalizing Security Research

The 2007 introduction of the "Hacker Paragraph" marked a turning point. It made tools used in penetration testing and vulnerability analysis potentionally illegal, even when utilized responsibly.

Over the years, several cases highlighted the unintended consequences of this law:

  • Security researcher Lilith Wittmann discovered a vulnerability in the system of the CDU (a German political party) and faced legal actions instead of recognition.

  • Another developer, who has found flaws and vulnerabilities in e-commerce systems, has undergone a house search and legal investigations.

These incidents illustrate how the current laws not only fail to protect security researchers but actively penalize them, hindering the pursuit of improvements in IT security.

Proposed Reforms: A Step Forward?

The current gouvernment has recognized these issues, proposing reforms to differentiate between malicious hackers and those acting in the public interest. The draft law introduces specific criteria under which vulnerability research would no longer be criminal:

  1. Purpose: The research must aim to identify a security vulnerability.

  2. Reporting: Discovered vulnerabilities must be disclosed to the system's operator, manufacturer, or the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI).

  3. Neceessity: The actions taken must be essential for identifying the vulnerability.

While these changes represent progress, they fail short of adressing all concerns. For instance, § 202c StGB, which criminalizes hacking tools, remains unchanged. Critics argue that this ommision maintains uncertainty for researchers using tools that could be misinterpreted as intended for malicious use.

Reactions from the Community

The IT security community has expressed mixed reactions to the proposed reforms. The Chaos Computer Club (CCC) acknowledges the attempt to protect ethical hackeing but warns that researchers still operate in a "dangerous legal gray area." As CCC spokesperson Dirk Engling states, this reform may only shield "obviously harmless inspections," leaving professionals exposed to legal risks.

Lilith Wittmann, whose case exemplifies the need for reform, also criticized the draft for not going far enough. She cautioned that the ambiguity in determing "good intent" might still result in punitive actions, such as house searches, before innocence is proven.

A Balancing Act

While the proposed reforms are a step toward modernizing Germany's computer crime laws, they must go further to fully support IT security research. Ethical hackers play a crucial role in safeguarding digital infrastructure. Striking a balance between protecting against genuine cybercrime and empowering responsible researchers is essential for fostering a resilient and secure digital society.


Sources: