Thread Content
Currently, many online shopping platforms offer flash sales to attract attention. However, some people may find that even though they sit in front of their computers early on with fast internet speeds, they still can’t outbid others. In fact, what’s competing with you might be a flash sale app. Recently, the Yingze District People’s Court in Taiyuan rendered a judgment in a case related to the unauthorized use of software. The three individuals who created and sold such software were sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment and fined for the crime of \"providing programs and tools for invading and illegally controlling computer information systems.\" This is also the first case in China in which those who developed and sold such rush-buying software were sentenced. The scalping software involved in this case is named “Heimi,” and it was once a highly sought-after tool among online scalpers. This software is able to bypass or circumvent the security measures in the computer information systems of shopping websites, enabling automatic login, bulk ordering, and automatic payment. It takes precedence over the ordering requests of other normal users, thus allowing them to purchase the items available during flash sales. Illegally profited over 110,000 yuan by selling such flash sale software. It is understood that Zhang, who graduated with a degree in software engineering, met Ren, who had prior experience in flash sales, online; within a week, Zhang developed a software for taking advantage of flash sales, and the two then found Chen online to create an official website for this software, which they then sold. In 2015, Ren and Zhang developed a special shopping software called Heimi Tmall (Taobao) designed for the Tmall website, and sold it in large quantities on their official website. In January 2017, after receiving a report from the Tmall platform, the Yingze District Branch of the Taiyuan Public Security Bureau identified three suspects and promptly arrested them all. According to the tests conducted by the Physical Evidence Identification Center of the China Criminal Police Academy, the Tmall software involved in this case is malware; it is capable of constructing network requests in unconventional ways and sending them to Taobao’s server, thereby simulating manual logins by users to their Taobao accounts and enabling bulk ordering. At the same time, this program can send unconventional graphic verification codes by invoking third-party encoding platforms, thereby bypassing Taobao’s security system’s human-machine recognition verification mechanism. It can also change the IP address by redialing to circumvent Taobao’s security firewall restrictions on sending frequent network requests from the same IP address. It is reported that Ren and Zhang illegally earned over 110,000 yuan by selling Tmall (Taobao) flash purchase software, taking a portion of the price difference from the items that buyers successfully purchased through this software. Chen obtained an illegal profit of over 6,000 yuan by creating websites for selling the black rice-themed flash sale software, maintaining those websites, and acting as an agent to sell such software. China’s first case in which those who developed and sold software for unauthorized access was sentenced: In August of this year, the People’s Procuratorate of Yingze District in Taiyuan filed charges against three defendants on suspicion of providing programs and tools for invading and illegally controlling computer information systems. Following a public trial, the People’s Court of Yingze District in Taiyuan sentenced the software developers, Ren and Zhang, to three years in prison with a four-year suspension, along with a fine of 30,000 yuan each; the seller, Chen, was sentenced to two years in prison with a three-year suspension, and a fine of 10,000 yuan. Zhou Yuwang, head of the Research Office at the Yingze District People’s Court, said that as the first case in China in which those who developed and sold software used for scalping were sentenced, the judgment in the \"Hei Mi\" case not only cracked down on criminal activities that disrupted computer management order but also served as a warning. Zhou Yuwang explained: “The conviction and sentencing of Ren and the other two individuals were based on Articles 285, Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Criminal Law.” This type of criminal activity is more concealed and sophisticated, making it difficult to investigate and gather evidence; it severely undermines **network information security**. This case imposes penalties on the manufacturers of software tools used in the black and gray market industries, serving as a warning to others not to disrupt the order of computer management; otherwise, they will face criminal liability. ” Industry experts say that current laws and regulations in China lack comprehensive provisions regarding regulatory measures such as industry access controls for malware, mandatory real-name registration for its creators, functional audits prior to its release, and bans on those who engage in illegal activities. Greater efforts are also needed to monitor websites and groups that sell malware or teach criminal methods. Only through a coordinated effort by multiple parties can effective oversight of such malware be achieved.
These people with such smart minds don’t use them for the right purposes.
What about those who make game cheats? Should it also be targeted?
Countries around the world face similar problems: some people who consider themselves highly skilled are unwilling to work on research in established companies; instead, they prefer to be hackers and take pride in breaking through the security measures of software. “Events like the “Hacker Conference” are gatherings of such people; senior technical professionals from many application software and security software companies attend them to gather information. However, in society, if one arbitrarily breaks through others’ defenses for profit-making purposes, what’s the difference between that and breaking into someone’s home to steal things? Therefore, the judgment in this case will serve as a precedent for similar cases in the future, helping to protect citizens’ legitimate rights.
What is the reason for the conviction? Unfair competition?