Hacker News Reader

I was surprised by the ACLU response given that sharing source code is very clearly free speech.

Is the ACLU of all groups really interested in stopping/censoring people from sharing ideas?

Chris, the ACLU staffer quoted in the article, is not an attorney. Chris has likened selling 0-days to being an arms merchant -- not a bad comparison -- but I'm not aware of an ACLU policy calling for a ban on selling 0-day exploits.

To respond to your point more broadly, the ACLU has done excellent work on many Internet issues, and has represented me in court on multiple occasions. But it is not a monolithic entity, its board members do not always make the decisions you and I might prefer, and it does not always come down on the free speech side of an issue: http://www.volokh.com/2011/04/27/harvey-silverglate-on-the-a...

In this case, there's no "sharing" of code. They're selling 0-day exploits, which is considered bad form by many in the security industry. If Kevin were sharing the exploit code publicly, so that the associated vulnerabilities could be properly fixed and defended against, there wouldn't be such backlash.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com