BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 9 |
By: Capriglione |
Government Transparency & Operation |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Interested parties contend that current law pertaining to cybercrime is outdated because it focuses on the technology used rather than the activity perpetrated. C.S.H.B. 9 seeks to implement a more lasting approach to addressing cybercrime by making certain acts of electronic access interference, electronic data tampering, and unlawful decryption criminal offenses.
|
||||||||||||||||
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill expressly does one or more of the following: creates a criminal offense, increases the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or changes the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
|
||||||||||||||||
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
|
||||||||||||||||
ANALYSIS
C.S.H.B. 9 amends the Penal Code to create the third degree felony offense of electronic access interference for a person, other than a network provider acting for a legitimate network operation or protection purpose, who intentionally interrupts or suspends access to a computer system or computer network without the effective consent of the owner. The bill establishes as a defense to prosecution for the offense that the person acted with the intent to facilitate a lawful seizure or search of, or lawful access to, a computer, computer network, or computer system for a legitimate law enforcement purpose.
C.S.H.B. 9 creates the Class A misdemeanor offense of electronic data tampering for a person who knowingly alters data as it transmits between two computers in a computer network or computer system without the effective consent of the owner and for a person who knowingly introduces malware or ransomware onto a computer, computer network, or computer system without the effective consent of the owner and without a legitimate business purpose. The bill enhances the penalty for the offense if the person acted with the intent to defraud or harm another or alter, appropriate, damage, or delete property and establishes penalty enhancements ranging from a state jail felony to a first degree felony, depending on the aggregate amount involved and if the computer, computer network, or computer system is owned by the government or a critical infrastructure facility. The bill specifies that when benefits are obtained, a victim is defrauded or harmed, or property is altered, appropriated, damaged, or deleted in violation of the bill's provisions, whether or not in a single incident, the conduct may be considered as one offense and the value of the benefits obtained and of the losses incurred because of the fraud, harm, or alteration, appropriation, damage, or deletion of property may be aggregated in determining the grade of the offense. A person who is subject to prosecution for the offense of electronic data tampering and any other Penal Code offense may be prosecuted for either or both offenses.
C.S.H.B. 9 establishes that software is not ransomware for purposes of an electronic data tampering offense if the software restricts access to data because authentication is required to upgrade or access purchased content or because access to subscription content has been blocked for nonpayment. The bill excepts from such offense officers, employees, and agents of certain service providers who commit the proscribed act in the course of employment while engaged in an activity that is a necessary incident to the rendition of service or to the protection of the rights or property of the person's employer and whose alteration of data was consistent with accepted industry technical specifications.
C.S.H.B. 9 establishes as an affirmative defense to prosecution for the offense of electronic access interference and the offense of electronic data tampering involving altering data as it transmits between two computers in a computer network or computer system without the owner's effective consent that the actor was an officer, employee, or agent of a communications common carrier or electric utility and committed the proscribed act or acts in the course of employment while engaged in an activity that is a necessary incident to the rendition of service or to the protection of the rights or property of the communications common carrier or electric utility.
C.S.H.B. 9 creates the Class A misdemeanor offense of unlawful decryption for a person who decrypts encrypted private information without the effective consent of the owner. The bill enhances the penalty for the offense if the person acted with the intent to defraud or harm another or alter, appropriate, damage, or delete property and establishes penalty enhancements ranging from a state jail felony to a first degree felony, depending on the aggregate amount involved and if the computer, computer network, or computer system is owned by the government or a critical infrastructure facility. The bill establishes as a defense to prosecution for such offense that the actor's conduct was pursuant to a contract entered into with the owner for the purpose of assessing or maintaining the security of the information or of a computer, computer network, or computer system or providing other services related to security. A person who is subject to prosecution for the offense of unlawful decryption and any other Penal Code offense may be prosecuted for either or both offenses.
C.S.H.B. 9 includes the amount of any expenditure required by a victim of a computer crime to attempt to restore, recover, or replace any data altered, acquired, appropriated, damaged, deleted, or disrupted in the definition of "aggregate amount" for purposes of statutory provisions relating to computer crimes.
|
||||||||||||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
September 1, 2017.
|
||||||||||||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 9 may differ from the original in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following comparison is organized and formatted in a manner that indicates the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|