Compu-Fix/Compu-Fix.iso/pubnews/cud317.txt

Text File | 1993-03-01 | 37KB | 738 lines

  ****************************************************************************
                  >C O M P U T E R   U N D E R G R O U N D<
                                >D I G E S T<
              ***  Volume 3, Issue #3.17 (May 17, 1991)   **
   ** SPECIAL ISSUE: EXHIBITS FROM RIGGS'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM **
  ****************************************************************************

MODERATORS:   Jim Thomas / Gordon Meyer  ([e-mail])
ARCHIVISTS:   Bob Krause / / Bob Kusumoto
GAELIC GURU: Brendan Kehoe

            +++++     +++++     +++++     +++++     +++++

CONTENTS THIS ISSUE:
File 1: Moderator's Corner
File 2: A Media Commentary on the RIGGS Sentencing
File 3: Exhibits from the Atlanta 3 Sentencing Memorandum
File 4: EXHIBIT A from Riggs' Sentencing Memorandum
File 5: EXHIBIT E from Riggs' Sentencing Memorandum
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

USENET readers can currently receive CuD as alt.society.cu-digest.
Back issues are also available on Compuserve (in: DL0 of the IBMBBS sig),
PC-EXEC BBS (414-789-4210), and at 1:100/345 for those on FIDOnet.
Anonymous ftp sites: (1) ftp.cs.widener.edu (192.55.239.132);
                     (2) [e-mail];
                     (3) dagon.acc.stolaf.edu (130.71.192.18).
E-mail server: [e-mail].

COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing
information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of
diverse views.  CuD material may be reprinted as long as the source is
cited.  Some authors, however, do copyright their material, and those
authors should be contacted for reprint permission.  It is assumed
that non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless
otherwise specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned
articles relating to the Computer Underground.  Articles are preferred
to short responses.  Please avoid quoting previous posts unless
absolutely necessary.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent
            the views of the moderators. Contributors assume all
            responsibility for assuring that articles submitted do not
            violate copyright protections.

********************************************************************
                           >> END OF THIS FILE <<
***************************************************************************

------------------------------

From: Moderators
Subject: Moderator's Corner
Date: May 17, 1991

********************************************************************
***  CuD #3.17: File 1 of 5: Moderators Corner                   ***
********************************************************************

++++++++++++++++
Information on subversive software wanted
++++++++++++++++

(Gordon received a number of helpul replies from his earlier request,
but for those who missed CuD 3.14, we reprint it again.  Thanks to all
those who responded).

Gordon is in the beginning stages of research for a technical paper on
'subversive' software.   The article will discuss software that has
been written for unusual purposes and circumstances, not all of which
may be legal.  Examples in this "genre" would be 'Fuckin' Hacker',
'Code Thief', and 'Receipt Writer'.

It would be helpful to gather as many examples as possible, from many
different computer platforms. He is *not* seeking executable copies,
but just the name and description of the program.  Any additional
historical information, such as author name, date, innovative
features, etc would be a bonus.  If you can recall having seen, used,
or heard of any unusual software that you feel fits in this category
He would appreciate it if you'd drop me a line.  The article has not,
as of yet, been slated for publication, but he will supply a finished
copy to anyone who responds or requests one.  The finished work may
also appear in a future issue of CuD.

Thanks for your time and assistance!  Gordon Meyer
[e-mail] GRMEYER (GEnie and Delphi) or via CuD at
[e-mail]

+++++++
New BBS
+++++++

A new BBS, similar in goals and philosophy to FACE-TO-FACE (which
crashed) began May 18. It's called FREE SPEECH (618-943-2399), and
will be open to all callers.  Computer security and law enforcement
agents are welcome.  The sysop (Crimson Death) aims to encourage
discussion and debate of Constitutional, computer security, and other
issues.  It's running Emulex, HST compatible, and users are encouraged
to upload news articles and related files.

********************************************************************
                           >> END OF THIS FILE <<
***************************************************************************

------------------------------

From:  [e-mail]
Subject:  A Media Commentary on the RIGGS Sentencing
Date:     Tue, 14 May 91 20:39 EDT

********************************************************************
***  CuD #3.17: File 2 of 5: Media Comment on Riggs Sentencing   ***
********************************************************************

Here is an article I recently saw in the May/June 1991 issue of
Contingency Journal. The author seemed very glad of the judges
decision of restitution for Bell South by the computer hackers (I bet
the author would have approved of dismemberment of their hands also).
According to the story's bio sketch, the author is an attorney with 20
years of experience, including 10 years in computer security at a
major financial institution.

It is interesting to note that the author states that one of the
schemers published the information in a hacker's newsletter. But the
author never mentions that the case against the publisher was dropped
by the government, nor does the author correct the slur that the
publisher was in on the scheme (actually it was proved in court by the
government's own witness that the publisher was not part or any way
connected with the scheme).  I only wish that the government would
order restitution to the American taxpayer for what the S & L scheme
will cost us in the next few years.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

       Restitution Ordered For Bell South Hackers
            By Michael H. Agranoff, Attorney

The law is beginning to respond effectively to the problem of computer
hacking. In September 1988, three young men began implementing a
scheme to steal proprietary data from Bell South Telephone Co.
computers. They illegally gained access to Bell South from a home
computer, downloaded the data and tried to disguise the fraud by using
the IDs of legitimate users.

The stolen data was transferred on an interstate computer network and
stored on a bulletin board system. It was made known to others in a
hacker's newsletter published by one of the schemers.

If the fraud had continued, it could have disrupted telecommunication
channels throughout the country, according to government prosecutors.
The hackers were in a position to retrieve and modify credit
information, eavesdrop on telephone conversations and worse.

Various charges of fraud, theft and conspiracy were lodged against the
trio. They attempted to get the charges dismissed on technical
grounds, were unsuccessful and pleaded guilty to a smaller number of
charges.

A federal judge in Georgia imposed sentences last November.  One
hacker was given 21 months in prison and two years supervised
probation.

The other two hackers were each given 14 months in prison.  Seven of
those months were to be served in a half-way house, where they must
assist colleges and businesses in computer work. Following release,
the hackers must each complete three years community service, to
include 120 hours each year of computer-related work, during which
time they may not own or access a computer, except for employment,
without supervision approved by the court.

Each of the three hackers was also ordered to pay restitution to Bell
South amounting to $233,880 per hacker.  Readers may reflect upon this
sentence. In trying to

protect the public interest and yet not be vindictive, the judge
rendered (in this writer's opinion) a wise and thoughtful decision.
Will it send the appropriate message to potential hackers throughout
the country? Let us see.

********************************************************************
                           >> END OF THIS FILE <<
***************************************************************************

------------------------------

From: Moderators
Subject: Exhibits from the Atlanta 3 Sentencing Memorandum
Date: 15 May, 1991

********************************************************************
***  CuD #3.17: File 3 of 5: Exhibits from Riggs' Sentencing     ***
********************************************************************

The author of the article above errs in the nature of the crime, the
nature of the evidence, and omits that the sentence included restriction
on computer use upon release.  He seems to rely upon prosecutors' statements,
and shows no awareness of the discussions surrounding the sentence of the
case when he refers to the judge's "wise and thoughtful decision.
There is not even a glimmering in the story that the sentence may be
too harsh (quite the contrary, in fact), or that the sentencing
memorandum may have been misleading.

When Riggs was sentenced late last fall to 21 months in a federal
penitentiary for "hacking," the prosecution submitted a lengthy
sentencing memorandum (reprinted in CuD 2.16) that was strongly
criticized for its inaccuracies and what some saw as an inappropriate
prejudicial attitude in both the tone and content (see CuD 2.17 for
EFF and other responses).  We, and presumably others, were informed
that there was considerable information in attached documents that
would justify the sentence and that we should be more patient.  The
Exhibits attached to the memorandum are now available, and they are
less than compelling, filled with non-sequitor logic, and fail to add
any new information that might reduce criticism of the sentence.

CONTENTS

The Government submitted five attachments to its sentencing memorandum
that, in a separate motion, it requested to be sealed.  These exhibits
raise a few questions both about the justification for the sentence
and the sentencing procedure itself.  Two of the Exhibits follow the
conclusion of this file. The original sentencing memorandum was
reprinted in CuD 2.16.

EXHIBIT A (File #4, below) is a history of the Legion of Doom, taken
from Phrack 31.

EXHIBIT B (not included here) is a collection of posts from Black Ice
BBS. In 23 pages, the Exhibit provides a few score posts selectively
abstracted from December 2, 1988 through March 12, 1989. The Exhibit
includes the BBS's help screen, a user list, and information ranging
from general one line comments to technical information, dialups and
network addresses.  Although some of the information boarders on what
some might justifiably consider stretching beyond the limits of
licitness, none of it provides evidence of a dangerous conspiratorial
group bent on destroying the nation's telecom system. However, such
information was blacked out of the Motion to Seal, so it is difficult
to assess. But, from what can be inferred from the context, it seems
that much of the "questionable" information is generally public and
the rhetoric, rather than content, provides the logs' drama.
According to the sentencing memorandum (p. 8), these logs appear to
show that the callers knew that hacking was illegal, that they took
precautions to avoid apprehension, and some posts make "frequent
references to law enforcement and national security computer systems."
Although the posts may reflect unacceptable behavior, the overall
interpretation gleaned by the government stretches credibility.

EXHIBIT C consists of an electronic post in November, 1988, requesting
the Riggs meet with the acting director of OCS, and 4 letters
exchanged between Riggs and Georgia Tech's Office of Computing
Services (OCS) and the Dean of Student Affairs From June 6, 1989 to
June 19, 1989. In the first letter, the OCS indicated to Riggs that
they possessed evidence that his account had been misused and asked
Riggs to contact them.  The second letter of two pages outlined
specific allegations of Riggs' abuse.  The third, from Riggs to the
Director of the OCS, was a written apology.  The final letter, from
the office of the Dean of Student Affairs to Riggs was a letter
saying, in essence, cool it in the future or else.  According to the
original sentencing memorandum (p.  9), the only reason for submitting
these letters was to "indicate that Georgia Tech was very concerned
about Grant's abuses of their system."

EXHIBIT D, a report of an earlier legal problem in North Carolina
involving Riggs, was not included, presumably because he was a
juvenile when it occured.

EXHIBIT E consists of five posts from various people taken from The
Phoenix Project discussing Robert Morris. They are reproduced in File
#5, below.

Even in the aggregate, the Government's exhibits are rather innocuous.
The logic by which conclusions are drawn from the Exhibits presented
is spurious as best, and--as is much of the rhetoric guiding arguments
for questionable procedures (see Steve Jackson Games' suit against
William Cook, Timothy Foley, Barbara Golden, et. al.)--represents
claims for which empirical evidence to the the contrary was clearly
present and known, or should have been known, to the prosecutors.

We in no way condone the activities to which the Atlanta 3 pled
guilty. Nor do we condone many of the behavior of the type alleged in
their original indictment.  We do not believe that offenses in the
cyberworld should go without response or, when appopriate, without
sanctions.  However, we also believe that questionable actions by law
enforcement personnel should be equally subject to examination and
response.  The exhibits stage manage the allegations in a way that is
discomforting.  The sentencing memorandum and the Exhibits claiming to
support it should be carefully examined for the subtle ways in which
the "language of justice" serves unjust ends.  Innuendo, fabrication,
dubious logic, and unsubstantiated assertions in the guise of "facts"
do not reflect well on those entrusted with protecting federal law and
the Constitution.

********************************************************************
                           >> END OF THIS FILE <<
***************************************************************************

------------------------------

From: Moderators
Subject: EXHIBIT A from Riggs' Sentencing Memorandum
Date: 15 May, 1991

********************************************************************
***  CuD #3.17: File 4 of 5: Exhibit A from Memorandum           ***
********************************************************************

Exhibit A is a reprint from "Phrack 31" summarizing the history of the
Legion of Doom. It reflects a "guilt by association" device, a
rhetorical ploy without factual foundation that makes a series of
leaps from a dangerous act to the possibility that the defendants
*could* have committed such an act:

      Aside from the hacker logic bomb threat, a June 1989
      intrusion into the BellSouth network also prompted the
      federal investigation.  A computer hacker broke into the
      BellSouth network and rerouted calls from a probation office
      in Delray Beach, Florida to a New York Dial-A-Porn number.
      Although creative and comical at first blush, the rerouting
      posed a serious threat to the security of the telephone
      system. If a hacker could reroute all calls to the probation
      office, he or she could do the same to calls placed to this
      Court, a fire station, a police station or any other
      telephone customer in the country. Again, none of the three
      defendants are implicated in this dangerous prank, though an
      investigation of the intrusion ultimately led investigators
      to the illegal activities of the three defendants and other
      members of a self-proclaimed elite group of hackers called
      the Legion of Doom. The Legion of Doom is described in a
      hacker "magazine" article filed separately as _Government
      Exhibit A_. (Sentencing Memorandum, p. 3).

After an earlier allusion to logic bombs, which were unrelated to the
Riggs case, the spectre of serious crimes are linked to the
defendants. Next, an example in which none of the defendants were
implicated is raised--the rerouting of a dial-a-porn number to a
probation officer. Here, prosecutors move beyond the slippery slope
thesis of behavior that suggests, by analogy, if you have a marijuana
cigarette today you'll likely be a junkie by morning.  Despite the
DENOTED disclaimer of non-involvement, they phrase the language in
such a way that it CONNOTES guilt by arguing that the possession of
"forbidden knowledge" COULD allow one to commit potentially dangerous
acts such as "jeopardizing the entire telephone industry" or "shutting
down telephone service throughout the country" (p. 7 of Sentencing
Memorandum).

The Exhibit provides nothing more than a brief history of the
LoD and its members. For conspiracy theorists who see organized
malevolence in any voluntary association of 2 or more people who
defy conventional social norms, the document may seem significant.
But, for some, the Fortune 500 would seem equally dangerous and
conspiratorial. We do not claim that the LoD can stake claim to
the moral high ground, but neither does our reading of the Exhibit
A suggest a subversive group capable of threatening our social
fabric. It hardly provides evidence that would justify a
few years of incarceration.
Judge for yourself:

++++ Begin Exhibit A

                               ==Phrack Inc.==
                Volume Three, Issue Thirty-one, Phile #5 of 10

The History of The Legion Of Doom
--- ------- -- --- ------ -- ----
During the summer of 1984 an idea was formulated that would ultimately
change the face of the computer underground forever.  This particular
summer, a huge surge of interest in computer telecommunications placed
an incredibly large number of new enthusiasts on the national computer scene.
This crowd of people all seeking to learn as much as possible
began to put a strain on the nation's bulletin board scene, as the novices
stormed the phonelines in search of knowledge.  From out of this chaos
came a need for learned instructors to help pass on their store of
information to the new throngs.
One of the most popular bulletin boards of the day was a system in New York
state called Plovernet, which was run by a person who called himself
Quasi-Moto.  This BBS was so heavily trafficked, that a major long
distance company began blocking all calls to its number (516-935-2481).
The co-sysop of Plovernet was a person known as Lex Luthor.  At the time
there were a few hacking groups in existence, such as Fargo-4A and Knights of
Shadow.  Lex was admitted into KOS in early 1984, but after making a few
suggestions about new members, and having them rejected, Lex decided to
put up an invitation only BBS and to start forming a new group.
Starting around May of 1984, Lex began to contact those people who he had
seen on BBSes such as Plovernet and the people that he knew personally
who possessed the kind of superior knowledge that the group he envisioned
should have.  Many phone calls and Alliance Teleconferences later, the
group of individuals who made up the original Legion of Doom were compiled.
They were:
               Lex Luthor
               Karl Marx
               Mark Tabas
               Agrajag the Prolonged
               King Blotto
               Blue Archer
               EBA
               The Dragyn
               Unknown Soldier
The group originally consisted of two parts:  Legion of Doom, and Legion
of Hackers.  The latter was a sub-group of the first, comprised
of people who were more advanced in computer related subjects.  Later on,
as members began to all become more computer-based, the Legion of Hackers
was absolved.  (The name "Legion of Doom" came from the cartoon series
"Superfriends," in which Lex Luthor, Superman's arch rival, led a group
by the same name)
The actual Legion of Doom bulletin board was quite ahead of its time.
It was one of the first "Invitation-only" hacking based BBSes; it was the
first BBS with security that caused the system to remain idle until
a primary password was entered; and it was the first hacking BBS to deal
with many subjects in close detail, such as trashing and social
engineering.  The BBS underwent three number changes and three different
login procedures during its life.  At its height, the BBS had over
150 users and averaged about 15 posts per day.  This may seem
high when compared to contemporary BBSes, but this was a private system,
with only very-competent users, so the quality of messages content was always
high.
There was always some confusion that falsely assumed since someone
was on the LOD BBS, that they were a member of the group.  In fact,
only a handful of the total LOD membership were ever on the actual
LOD BBS.
The Legion of Doom also had special subboards created for its members on
other BBSes after the home base BBS went offline.  The first was on
Blottoland, the next on Catch-22, followed by one on the Phoenix Project,
and the last on Black Ice Private.  The group's members have usually tried to
keep a low profile publicly, and usually limited their trade of information
to select private BBSes and personal telephone conversations.  This adherence
to privacy has always added to the LOD mistique.  Since most people didn't
know exactly what the group was involved in, or experimenting with, people
always assumed that it was something far too detailed or sensitive to be
discussed.  For the most part, this was not true, but it did not help to
diminish the paranoia of security personnel that LOD was after their
company's systems.
The group has undergone three distinct phases, each a result of membership
changes.  The first phase ended with the busts of Marx, Tabas, Steve Dahl,
Randy Smith, X-man, and the abandonment by Agrajag and King Blotto.
The group lay semi-dormant for several months, until a resurgence
in the summer of 1986, in which several new members were admitted, and a new
surge of would-be hackers appeared, ready to be tutored.  This phase again
ended in a series of busts and paranoia.  The third phase basically revolved
around Summercon of 1988, where several new members were admitted by those
LOD members attending the festivites.  The third phase is now at an end
brought on by busts and related paranoia, again, two years after its onset.
There is no indication that points to any resurgence in the future, but
nothing is certain until summer.
Since its creation, LOD has tried to put out informative files on a wide
variety of topics of interest to its contemporaries.  These files ranged from
the first actual scanned directory of Telenet, to files on various operating
systems.  The LOD Technical Journal was to be a semi-regular electronic
magazine comprised of such files, and other items of interest to the hacking
community.  Only three issues of the Technical Journal were produced.  As
the fourth issue was being pieced together, several members were raided, and
work on it was abandoned.
From the time it was formed continuing up to the present, the Legion of
Doom has been quite a topic of controversy in the computer underground and
with computer security professionals.  The Legion of Doom has been
called everything from "Organized Crime" to "a Communist threat to national
security" to "an international conspiracy of computer terrorists bent
on destroying the nation's 911 service."  Nothing comes closer to the
actual truth than "bored adolescents with too much spare time."
LOD members may have entered into systems numbering in the tens of
thousands, they may have peeped into credit histories, they may
have monitored telephone calls, they may have snooped into files and
buffered interesting text, they may still have total control over
entire computer networks; but, what damage have they done?  None, with
the exception of unpaid use of CPU time and network access charges.  What
personal gains have any members made?  None, with the exception of three
instances of credit fraud that were instigated by three separate greedy
individuals, without group knowledge.
The Legion of Doom will long be remembered in the computer underground as
an innovative and pioneering force, that consistently raised the collective
level of knowledge, and provided many answers to questions ranging from the
workings of the telephone system to the structure of computer operating
systems.  No other group dedicated to the persuit of computer and
telecommunications knowledge has survived longer, and none probably will.
The Legion of Doom  1984--1990
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alumni of the Fraternal Order of the Legion of Doom  (Lambda Omega Delta)
Handle                Entered   Exited    Location       Reasons for leaving
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lex Luthor            Early 84--          Florida
Karl Marx             Early 84--Late  85  Colorado       Bust w/Tabas..College
Mark Tabas            Early 84--Late  85  Colorado       Too numerous to list
Agrajag the Prolonged Early-84--Late  85  California     Loss of Interest
King Blotto           Early 84--Late  85  Ohio           College
Blue Archer           Early 84--Late  87  Texas          College
EBA         Early 84--          Texas
The Dragyn            Early 84--Late  86  Minnesota      Loss of Interest
Unknown Soldier       Early 84--Early 85  Florida        Bust-Toll Fraud
Sharp Razor           Late  84--Early 86  New Jersey     Bust-Compuserve Abuse
Sir Francis Drake     Late  84--Early 86  California     Loss of Interest
Paul Muad'dib         Late  84--Early 86  New York       Modem Broke
Phucked Agent 04      Late  84--Late  87  California     College
X-Man                 Late  84--Mid   85  New York       Bust-Blue Boxing
Randy Smith           Late  84--Mid   85  Missouri       Bust-Credit Fraud
Steve Dahl            Early 85--Early 86  Illinois       Bust-Credit Fraud
The Warlock           Early 85--Early 86  Florida        Loss of Interest
Terminal Man          Early 85--Late  85  Massachusetts  Expelled from Group
Dr. Who               Early 85--Late  89  Massachusetts  Several Reasons
The Videosmith        Early 86--Late  87  Pennsylvania   Paranoia
Kerrang Kahn          Early 86--Mid   89  London, UK     Loss of Interest
Gary Seven            Early 86--Mid   88  Florida        Loss of Interest
The Marauder          Early 86--Mid   89  Connecticut    Loss of Interest
Silver Spy            Late  86--Late  87  Massachusettts College
Bill from RNOC        Early 87--Late  87  New York       Bust-Hacking
The Leftist           Mid   87--Late  89  Georgia        Bust-Hacking
Phantom Phreaker      Mid   87--          Illinois
Doom Prophet          Mid   87--          Illinois
Jester Sluggo         Mid   87--          North Dakota
Carrier Culprit       Mid   87--Mid   88  Pennsylvania   Loss of Interest
Master of Impact      Mid   87--Mid   88  California     Loss of Interest
Thomas Covenant       Early 88--Early 90  New York       Bust-Hacking
The Mentor            Mid   88--Early 90  Texas          Retired
Necron 99             Mid   88--Late  89  Georgia        Bust-Hacking
Control C             Mid   88--Early 90  Michigan
Prime Suspect         Mid   88--          New York
The Prophet           Mid   88--Late  89  Georgia        Bust-Hacking
Phiber Optik          Early 89--Early 90  New York       Bust-Hacking
** AKA **
Randy Smith           Poof!
Dr. Who               Skinny Puppy
Kerrang Kahn          Red Eye
Phantom Phreaker      ANI Failure / Psychedelic Ranger
Doom Prophet          Trouble Verify
Thomas Covenant       Sigmund Fraud / Pumpkin Pete
Necron 99             The Urvile
Control C             Phase Jitter

********************************************************************
                           >> END OF THIS FILE <<
***************************************************************************

------------------------------

From: Moderators
Subject: EXHIBIT E from Riggs' Sentencing Memorandum
Date: 15 May, 1991

********************************************************************
***  CuD #3.17: File 5 of 5: EXHIBIT E from Memorandum           ***
********************************************************************

EXHIBIT E:

Exhibit E comes from The Phoenix Project, a BBS in Texas.  The
proseuctions' logic seems to claim that the six posts, five from 1990
and one from 1988, show how carefully the CU followed the
Morris case and and that the comments demonstrate that fear of
harsh sentences would be a deterrent. In fact, the logs show
no such thing.
(The following were reproduced from the original Phoenix Project logs
made available to us with the exception of the post of the December 8,
1988, post, which was typed in from the sentencing memorandum).

++++++++++++ BEGIN EXHIBIT E

58/64: morris
Name: The Mentor #1
Date: Tue Jan 23 21:57:27 1990

Robert Morris was found guilty. If he's sentenced to do time, it'll be a
*very* bad precedent.

<sigh>

Mentor



Read:(1-64,^58),? :

59/64: BLackmail?
Name: Erik Bloodaxe #2
Date: Tue Jan 23 22:51:58 1990

Geez...I'd like to think myself above things like that...

In anycase, not everyone has GOOD sensitive information...(not all of us who
ARE in this country have the balls to dig where that type of crap is...god I
want to move to Australia!)

Maybe they'll kick me out of the country!  Right...I'm not that important,
although I would like to think that I am...hehe

hell, maybe it IS time to start doing all the terrible things I always had the
capabilities to do on the internet...need to get some "Insurance"

maybe...who knows...

->ME



60/64: well
Name: Phoenix #17
Date: Wed Jan 24 01:29:23 1990

like i said... im open to better ideas.. coz i we do have sensitive ino...
then no matter what we do with it... it will be termed blackmail..

Phoenix4

<and once you have publicised it.. youve played your cards.. andthen theyll
mess you up real bad..>


Read:(1-64,^61),? :

62/64: i understand...
Name: Ravage #19
Date: Wed Jan 24 14:34:03 1990

that the prosecution had a hard time showing malitous (sp!) intent. does
anyone know if that is true? if it is true then i doubt he will get any
time. probably a fine, community service, a probated time. what is the
latest on the ccc guys? have they taken them out and shot them yet?

in my previous post i was refering to the publication, through tv,
radio,and paper, of sensitive information held by organizations. it
would not have to be identified as to sender. therer are plenty of
underground, small town, press services (hey how about the gossip
rags?) that would be ideal to send that kind of stuff to. not only
that but what about the up wire? you could put it in que and it
would go all over.

grey owl
The Urvile #9
11:46 am  Thu Dec 08, 1988
christ, i don't know c that well, now c++? fucking a.
wheter you realize it or not, the virus will hurt us a tremendous amount
in
the future. somebody go kill morrison.
even if the courts are lax on him, (which is the only silver lining ican
think
of), then security on all systems is going to increase. we don't need
that.
not one bit.  think about the hacker of tomorrow.  how the fuck are they
gong
to learn? fuck, how are we going to get in a system that we've
just dug
up
(no tricks, no, the brute force method).
fuck life.

+++++++++++++ END EXHIBIT E

The government reproduced sequential messages #58-62 from January
23-24, 1990, but excluded message #61. We obtained it from the
original logs. It reads:

++++ Start Post #61

61/64: Morris Convicted
Name: Phiber Cut #34
Date: Wed Jan 24 04:43:24 1990

If RTM get's jail time we should all be suprised.  What he did was morrally
and ethically wrong, and he fucked upt and will now have to pay the piper.
However, hej is a very bright person and should not be put in a jail cell
with a bunch of hardended ass f**king criminals!

Hopefully he'll get some sort of community service and a fine, and this will
be enough to kkeep him from fucking up the network in the future.

+++++ End Post #61

Exhibit E is used as evidence that "hackers" would be deterred by a
substantial sentence, and the Morris case is used as evidence that
hackers followed it closely. But, several fallacies underlie this
assumption:

1) It is not unusual for computer hobbyists to follow news about their
interests. Morris's worm affected many on the nets, and most were
aware of his action.  Contrary to the claim that "Computer bulletin
board services (BBS's) around the country were buzzing about the
Morris case" (Sentencing Memorandum, p. 20), there was surprisingly
little discussion on most boards other than a simple mention and some
brief discussion. On The Phoenix Project, from which the logs for the
exhibits were taken, the discussion was intermittent over a several
day period, and the exhibit lists only 5 following the conviction.
One post was actually taken from December, 1988, over a year before
the Morris conviction. Such a dubious selection of posts to try to
magnify a the prosecutors' interpretation of them is disingenuous at
best.

2) The exhibits totally distort the context of the discussions.  We
are curious about the omission of post #61 of January 24, 1990.
Perhaps it was omitted because the poster explicitly condemns Morris's
action as unethical, and this post contradicts the point the
prosecution is trying to make. In fact, the general tenor of posts
about the Morris incident reflected strong condemnation. But,
prosecutors, to the contrary, ignore this and their distortion
borders on blatant fabrication. While this may be "good lawyering," it
does little to instill respect for the integrity of or confidence in
those who fabricate.  The CU did not consider Morris a "hacker," and
he was never held up as hero or role model. "Hackers," like most
others, are as hostile (if not more so) to those who create or spread
viruses as law enforcement. Viruses, as Cliff Stoll once suggested (in
a quote taken out of context by the media) are like razor blades in
the sand. Because "hackers" spend considerable time on the beaches of
the cyberworld, they have little sympathy for those cyber-vandals who
trash systems.  If the prosecutors had been intellectually honest,
they would have explained that the meaning of the posts was couched in
a hostility for Morris's actions tempered by their understanding that
prison was not an appropriate sentence. In fact, even the selective
quotes from Exhibit E indicate that the fear that viruses might
tighten up security is based on the value that one must *never* trash
a system.

3) The prosecution claims that "Clearly, the (Morris) sentence had
little effect on defendants Grant, Riggs, and Darden" (Sentencing
Memorandum, p. 20). This is outrageously irresponsible. The memorandum
states that their activities occured from September, 1987, through
July 21, 1989.  The Morris incident first made the news in November,
1988, when the virus was released.  The verdict occured in January,
1990. MORRIS'S SENTENCE was handed down in MAY of 1990. The
prosecution seems to have discovered a revolutionary new approach to
causality and chronological sequencing: Riggs, et. al, are expected to
have learned in 1987-1989 from events that wouldn't occur until 1990!

Mike Godwin (CuD 2.17) and others have raised serious criticisms about
the sentence of Riggs especially. The Exhibits were not available at
the time of those criticisms. However, now that they are public, the
sentences appear even more unjust. Worse, the logic by which they were
justified by the prosecution's exhibits strike us as gross hyperbole.
More simply, drawing from the definition of police lying by Hunt and
Manning (Symbolic Interaction, "The Social Context of Police Lying,"
14(1): 51), a strong case might be made that the prosecution LIED!

********************************************************************

------------------------------

                         **END OF CuD #3.17**
********************************************************************