Hacker Chronicles 1/HACKER1.ISO/cud1/cud117d.txt

Text File | 1992-09-26 | 4KB | 83 lines

***************************************************************
***  CuD, Issue #1.17 / File 4 of 6 / LoD and SS            ***
***************************************************************

To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: Legion of Doom/Secret Service
Date: 22 Jun 90 04:39:54 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Kenneth Trant) writes:

> In reading all the postings regarding the Secret Service, LoD, & the
>C/Hackers I find (maybe in my own mind :-) ) that everyone is jumping to
>the defense of the defendants, who it appears have admitted to entering
>systems without the permission of the Sysadm's. People seem to always side
>against the gov't in favor of the individuals in these types of cases,
>unless of course it was they who were the victims. I for one believe that
>if they illegally entered another computer, whether to just poke around or
>to gather information or material, they deserve to lose all their equipment
>and serve some jail time. If they have some much time on their hands to
>crack systems let them do community service. Someone mentioned that they
>had a hard time believing the estimated amount of the "stolen property",
>who cares?. They broke in, they stole, they should lose their equipment and
>go to jail.

Kenneth, it seems to me that the points you raise here are based on the
assumption that we're all REFLEXIVELY anti-government. I for one am not.
But if you study how the law is being used in cases like these, you cannot
help but worry about the implications such use has for the expansion of
government power.

First, consider the issue of whether the property was really "stolen." The
law defines property interests and stolen property in several ways. These
definitions include: 1) whether the rightful owner was deprived of its use
(not true in this case), 2) whether (in the case of information), the thief
*used* the information himself rather than merely *possessing* it (not true
in this case), and 3) whether the thief had some kind of fiduciary duty to
the rightful owner (not true in this case). The broad definition of
property used by the federal prosecutors here could just as easily be
applied to a whistleblower who photocopies government documents and takes
them to the press.

Second, consider the degree of punishment. Neidorf and Riggs currently must
defend themselves against an 11-count indictment. Eight of the counts are
for wire fraud, which carries a maximum penalty of $1000 and five years'
prison time *per count*. The other three are for interstate transportation
of stolen property, with a maximum of $10,000 in fines and 10 years in
prison *per count*.

Third, consider the breadth of definition in the feds' use of the term
"fraud" in the wire-fraud counts: Apparently, the "fraud" in the Legion of
Doom prosecutions was nothing more than 1) the defendants' use of handles
(common-place in the BBS world, as you should know), and 2) their alleged
erasure of evidence that they had ever entered the computers in question.
This is a *very broad* application of the crime of wire fraud.

Fourth, consider that the original indictment tacked on an 18 USC 1030
charge, which gave the Secret Service jurisdiction along with the FBI. Even
though the charge was dropped in the amended indictment (that particular
statute requires a federally owned computer or a "Federal interest
computer" for jurisdictional purposes), its initial presence justified
expanded involvement of the Secret Service in domestic law enforcement.

Me, I have no objection to criminalizing unauthorized access to other
people's computers. But I object to prosecution of this scale against
defendants of this sort, for much the same reason I oppose prosecuting
joyriders for grand theft auto.

--Mike



Mike Godwin, UT Law School  |"No interest is good unless it must vest,

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
+                               END THIS FILE                                +
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+===+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=


Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253 12yrs+