Table of ContentsBackgroundMain IssueRecommendationsIn March, the Georgia State Legislature passed SB 315 only when Governor Deal vetoed the bill of law. Supporters of SB 315 saw the legislation as necessary to protect private data, deter malicious hackers and allow companies to "hack", while opponents feared it would cripple cybersecurity research, harm the Georgia's growing cybersecurity industry is witnessing abuse from malicious hackers and overzealous prosecutors. Say no to plagiarism. Get a custom essay on "Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned"?Get the original essayBackgroundIn August 2017, cybersecurity researcher Logan Lamb discovered that the Kennesaw State University Center for Election Systems' voter database had been created using a misconfigured server and unpatched Drupal. PHP content management framework. If a malicious actor took advantage of these vulnerabilities, not only would they have gained access to the registration records of Georgia's 6.7 million voters, but they could also modify voter rolls and compromise the tabulation of election results. Shortly after this revelation, Georgia State Senator Bruce Thompson introduced SB 315 and encouraged the General Assembly to pass a law criminalizing illegitimate computer access. Additionally, beginning on March 22, 2018, a week before the Georgia state legislature voted on SB 315, the city of Atlanta suffered a debilitating ransomware attack, putting pressure on lawmakers for them to expand the crackdown on incidents linked to piracy. , the Georgia state legislature passed SB 315. SB 315 would have amended the Official Code of Georgia Annotated to establish the new crime of “unauthorized access to a computer.” » The bill defined "unauthorized access to a computer" as "any person who accesses a computer or computer network knowing that such access is without authorization." “Violators of this new law would be charged with a misdemeanor of a serious and aggravated nature and, if found relevant to the violation, would have their personal computers and property declared contraband subject to civil asset forfeiture. SB 315 also included four exceptions to the crime of "unauthorized access to a computer" because the bill would not apply to a) any person who is a member of the same household, b) access to a computer or a computer network for legitimate commercial activity, c) active cybersecurity defense measures. and d) persons based on violations of the terms of service or user agreements. Almost immediately, news of the bill's legislative success gave rise to a heated public debate among the bill's sponsors, civil liberties groups, hacktivists, and invested industries. Supporters of SB 315, including Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr, argued that, as one of only three states that has not criminalized "unauthorized access to computers," Georgia should have complied. have been adopted for a long time. Carr argued that even if no information was stolen or altered, the unauthorized access to the computer still violated the confidentiality of personal information (PI). Additionally, refraining from criminalizing unauthorized access to a computer, unless personal information is used maliciously, would prevent prosecutors from intervening before malicious actors exploit the information..