zlacker

> Pretty much every such product uses libz, libssl, and these days websocket and javascript libraries. Are they malware?

The answer to this question is obvious and the question doesn’t have to be asked. In what kind of thinking a product considered malware would imply that its generic components are also malware? It is clear logic fallacy. Same with C&C software - I don’t get how do you generalize it to IRC. I do not also see how this generalization can happen in law enforcement or courts.

>>ivan_g+(OP)
I'm trying to say that:

1) this is on a spectrum. For libssl it's pretty obvious. For DHT? Significantly less obvious, I would say.

IRC gets a mention because it has been used as C&C for a VERY long time, and hasn't changed anything to prevent this from happening.

2) it's not experienced techies that will make this choice. It's uninformed judges or even police officers directly.

>>spwa4+If1
1) when software is developed with legitimate purpose in mind, it is not malware. If a developer of such software is persecuted, it would be easy for their legal defense to demonstrate it _unless_ there’s some other regulation that prohibits such use cases (eg something similar to EU Chat Control proposals).

2) it is very unlikely that police will go after such software. They need to connect it to their case first and that requires technical expertise, so it will likely be a cybercrime unit.