Legal protection for ethical hacking under Computer Misuse Act is only the first step

Steven

Legal protection for ethical hacking under Computer Misuse Act is only the first step

Summary

The UK is updating the Computer Misuse Act to provide legal protection for ethical hackers. Rupert Goodwins argues this is necessary but not sufficient: legal cover must be paired with scaled education, clear legitimacy pathways, monitored environments and incentives so the defenders pipeline actually grows. The piece calls for learner licences, verified accounts, bounty-style payments and a cultural push to normalise ethical hacking.

Key Points

  1. The government has moved to amend the Computer Misuse Act to protect legitimate cybersecurity research.
  2. Legal change is essential but won’t fix the acute shortage of cybersecurity researchers and practitioners.
  3. Goodwins urges rapid creation of accessible on-ramps: training environments, verified ‘licences’, monitored tests and clear ethical codes.
  4. He proposes applying a ‘many-eyes’ model to live infrastructure, akin to open-source scrutiny, plus bounty payments for validated finds.
  5. Organisations should view vetted white-hat activity as force-multiplying rather than an extra risk; broader participation improves overall security and reduces ransomware exposure.

Content Summary

The article traces the Computer Misuse Act’s origins and says recent amendments recognising ethical hacking are overdue. However, change in law only sets the stage: without scaled education and credible, quick-to-achieve pathways to legitimacy, the UK won’t produce the thousands of ethical hackers it needs. Goodwins suggests practical steps — verified accounts, logging, conditional bounties and a ‘learner’s licence’ model — to safely open live infrastructure to supervised testing.

He acknowledges CISO concerns but argues that many vetted testers are defenders-in-waiting, not extra attackers. The piece closes with a cultural plea: promote ethical hacking in schools, workplaces and online as a legal, fun and career-making activity.

Context and Relevance

This matters to security leaders, policymakers and anyone involved in cyber resilience. The legal fix reduces fear for researchers, but the article highlights the larger systemic problem: workforce shortages and lack of scalable entry-points into legitimate security testing. Its recommendations intersect with ongoing trends — bug bounties, red-team/blue-team training, national security priorities and attempts to crowdsource vulnerability discovery without increasing risk.

Why should I read this?

Short version: the law finally caught up, but the job’s only half done. If you care about less ransomware, smarter hiring, or real-world ways to scale defenders, this is a quick, punchy read that maps how a legal change could (and should) become practical action. It’s basically the playbook for turning a policy tweak into a talent pipeline — worth a read if you want to stop firefighting and start building.

Source

Source: https://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.com/2025/12/15/cma_update_opinion/