Reporting a Breach or Vuln? Be Sure Your Lawyer's on Call

While disclosure of software vulnerabilities and data breaches has become more accepted over the past three decades, researchers and whistleblowers continue to risk lawsuits and criminal charges depending on the country in which they live.

In April 2022, for example, police in Istanbul arrested independent Turkish journalist İbrahim Haskoloğlu after he revealed details of a breach of government data in Turkey. The country's ruling party has since proposed a law to make the false reporting of a data breach a crime punishable by two to five years in prison — a law that critics say will prevent disclosure of real data breaches.

And in the island nation of Malta, three computer-science students and their lecturer at the University of Malta will be charged in March, two years after they found vulnerabilities in scheduling service FreeHour and notified the company. FreeHour claimed the disclosure appeared to be a ransom demand and reported the students to the police — although, since then the firm has criticized the nation's lack of clear exemptions for researchers.

The students continue to face charges, however.

"I hope that at the end of this case, it results in a better climate for cybersecurity, but I'm genuinely exhausted from this whole situation," Michael Debono, one of the students, stated in a post on Facebook. "It's crazy that I've had to spend almost two years now dealing with the fallout of an incident that should have been resolved over a table in a day with FreeHour and the police."

Turkey and Malta are not the only countries to crack down people who report data breaches and software vulnerabilities. In Poland, a train manufacturer threatened to sue three ethical hackers who circumvented a kill code that the cybersecurity professionals claim disabled trains that had been parked in a third-party repair facility. In China, vulnerability researchers who do not first report software issues to the government risk prison time.

Even in the US, where vulnerability-disclosure issues have been debated for decades, companies and government agencies still occasionally resort to legal attacks rather than civil engagement. In September 2024, the city government of Columbus, Ohio, filed a lawsuit against whistleblower David L. Ross after he disputed the significance of a data breach, claiming that Ross colluded with the ransomware gang behind the breach. Two months later, the city settled the lawsuit.

Defensive Driving and Disclosure

Worldwide, vulnerability researchers need to take care when disclosing software security issues. Erring on the side of safety, like defensive driving, should be the default for cybersecurity researchers and whistleblowers, says Trey Ford, chief information security officer at San Francisco-based Bugcrowd, who connects its stable of independent penetration testers with clients.

The October 2022 email that resulted in three students and their lecturer facing charges. Source: Lecturer Luke Collins' site

In the best case, researchers should obtain permission from the targeted organization to conduct research and disclose findings, he says.

"The reality now is: If you see something, and you're not absolutely sure — and don't have receipts and proof — maybe don't say anything, or you risk going to jail," Ford says, pointing out that defensive or vindictive organizations can cause trouble. Any risk can be "further amplified by the misaligned incentives of companies that would prefer not to address an issue. These companies have the power to almost completely silence the reporter."

In addition, working with the organization rather than immediately adopting an adversarial approach can help minimize potential misinformation about what constitutes a breach or vulnerability, says Ilona Cohen, chief legal and policy officer at HackerOne, a hacking-services platform.

Researchers should also always be cognizant of local law, she says.

"Whether a data breach has occurred or a vulnerability is present are not always clear-cut," Cohen says. "It’s not uncommon for countries to have laws against fraudulent misrepresentation, but lawmakers must take care not to target individuals that do not intend to deceive or to cause harm."

Benign Intent or Hostile Actions

So far, the researchers and whistleblowers are paying the price of the lack of clarity. Turkish journalist Haskoloğlu, for example, claimed he notified the Turkish government two months before his disclosure, after being contacted by the hackers that the data had been stolen. Last month, he announced he would leave Turkey following escalating death threats.

In December, Newag — the train manufacturer in Poland that allegedly bricked trains not repaired in its workshops — filed a lawsuit against the three hackers who discovered and publicized their workaround for the kill code. While the European Union adopted a right-to-repair law for consumer goods in 2024, it's unclear whether industrial equipment, such as trains and machinery, are covered.

The incidents highlight that organizations are aiming to silence researchers, rather than engage publicly with them, says Dustin Childs, the head of threat awareness and the Zero Day Initiative at Trend Micro, which maintains a third-party bug bounty program.

"It’s a disturbing trend I hope reverses soon," he says. "We need to offer safe harbor to researchers who are willing to report vulnerabilities in a coordinated manner. Unfortunately, this trend is unlikely to change without either litigation or legislation."

Globally, however, legislation appears to be moving in a different direction. In August 2024, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention Against Cybercrime, which makes it a crime to "access ... an information or communications technology (ICT) system without right" or to intercept data or communications. Digital-rights groups worry that the treaty will lead to more laws that penalize legitimate security research.

While Turkey appears to be the first country since August to pass a more strict cybercrime statue, tougher regulations seem increasingly likely, Childs says.

"Overall, we are currently in a climate where governments favor businesses over individual researchers," he says. "It would not surprise me to see similar measures in other countries."