Newsletter
03 April 2020 Hackers and the virus at a time when a pandemic of feelings is unfolding

In this time of reflection to which we have all been involuntarily consigned by an invisible virus, it occurs to me to think about another kind of virus: the HACKER.

Social distancing and isolation call for the communication of the deepest feelings of the human being. We are living in a time when the hardest core of intimacy has been taken to the instrument that allows us to be together: the mobile phone and the computer. The meetings, the disagreements, the sighs, what we left undone, the love stuck in a corner of the computer.

It's worth questioning the audacity of those who legitimise hacking into computer systems on the pretext of using relevant evidential material without taking into account the irreparable damage caused to personal property that is in every way inalienable.

The intrusive way in which hackers access the data contained in computer systems goes beyond all open and hidden methods of investigation, and its exponential damage is reflected in the universe of rights and subjects affected in a permanent and uncontrollable way. It is a harmfulness that bears no resemblance or comparison to that of legal means of investigation, which as a rule limit the content and time of intrusion. The authorities restrict access to the matter under investigation by reference to a certain period of time. The hacker, on the other hand, spreads his curiosity over time by accessing a mobile phone or computer, which are known to complement the citizen's personality and in which the deepest feelings are often deposited, such as sounds, images and words belonging to the intangible and absolute core of the owner's privacy.

It should be borne in mind that the judgement of the legality of the intrusion refers to the moment when the hacker accesses the data, and cannot take into account the results obtained through that intrusion, regardless of their probative potential. There can be no doubt that the legality of a search cannot depend on the seizure of the murder weapon from the murder suspect's home, even if it is covered in traces of the victim's and suspect's blood, even if this means of proof proves decisive for a conviction.

The prohibition on evaluating this data is a proclamation of the effectiveness of the preordained rules, just as it is when it comes to behaviour that represents totally uncontrollable intrusions into people's privacy. The rules that protect behaviour of this kind would be completely frustrated if the evidence obtained through the evidence declared invalid were valued.

On the other hand, the rules are strengthened by the legal penalty for not utilising the results of their violation

Article by: Carlos Melo Alves