Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: karajorma on May 12, 2009, 05:56:10 pm
-
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/court-upholds-hacking-conviction-of-man-for-uploading-porn-pics-from-work-computer/
An Ohio appellate court has upheld the felony hacking conviction of a man who was found guilty of unauthorized access for misusing his computer at work.
Richard Wolf acknowledged that his behavior was inappropriate when he used his work computer to upload nude photos of himself to an adult web site and view other photos on porn sites, but he didn’t think he should be convicted of hacking for doing so.
While I'll agree that using a work computer to upload naked pictures of yourself should probably get you fired, it certainly shouldn't get you 15 months in jail and a criminal record for hacking.
More worrying though is that the conviction wasn't actually based on what he did on the internet but simply the fact that he was in violation of his employers acceptable computer usage policy. Which does mean that doing anything on the internet which your employer doesn't want you to do could be classified as hacking and get you sent to jail.
-
Maybe he used a proxy. The eldery may consider that haxing.. ^^
-
It's just like anything else. If they really want to throw the book at you they can get you for something.
Just looking at the map. Figured it would be in some backwoods southern county but it's not. Still the town is only about 2 miles wide so it could be in the sticks. Possible jury of people that don't know what internet access even is.
-
These people are everywhere. My mum manages networks and has a master's degree and I still have to teach her how to use powerpoint.
-
These people are everywhere. My mum manages networks and has a master's degree and I still have to teach her how to use powerpoint.
That's because powerpoint is a tool designed for bull****, i.e. the art of lying through obfustication.
-
Powerpoint is how kids who are too young to write essays make reports for class.
-
Powerpoint is how kids who are too young to write essays make reports for class.
Or how just about every professor in college delivers lectures. :p
-
I can think of only two professors in my entire college career who used that horrid program, and I go to a large university.
-
my high school teachers cram massive amounts of crap onto each slide
i think they copy/paste from wikipedia
-
What is the legal definition for "hacking"?
-
Assuming they did indeed charge him at the state level.
The Ohio hacking statute reads in part that “No person, in any manner and by any means, including, but not limited to, computer hacking, shall knowingly gain access to, attempt to gain access to, or cause access to be gained to any computer, . . . without the consent of, or beyond the scope of the express or implied consent of, the owner of the computer, . . . or other person authorized to give consent.”
Under that definition, what he was doing WAS hacking. However that definition of hacking is VERY broad and can encompass many things that, while they might be illegal, aren't hacking. On the other hand; while uploading naked pictures of yourself to the internet is grounds for firing, if anybody wanted to prosecute it would be hard to come up with an actual charge (if this "hacking" definition weren't in place). Who knows? Maybe for some reason they couldn't fire him unless they could prove some sort of legal wrongdoing (forgot to put a terms of use on the computers...).
EDIT: Upon further inspection of the article:
He added that the city had never actually disseminated a policy regarding internet usage to tell workers what was inappropriate.
Looks like they DID need to find SOMETHING illegal to be able to fire him. Still bull**** for criminally charging him though. . .
-
He added that the city had never actually disseminated a policy regarding internet usage to tell workers what was inappropriate.
Looks like they DID need to find SOMETHING illegal to be able to fire him. Still bull**** for criminally charging him though. . .
Doesn't that also tie the legality of his actions to the policy that was never disseminated?
-
You would have thought so.
Without an acceptable use policy it's hard to understand how they could claim that visiting any particular website constitutes illegal use of the companies hardware.
-
These people are everywhere. My mum manages networks and has a master's degree and I still have to teach her how to use powerpoint.
That's because powerpoint is a tool designed for bull****, i.e. the art of lying through obfustication.
Im the master! PP rocks. Through useless school i can do PP presentations. I think i had the best looking presentation in my Botany class...
-
He added that the city had never actually disseminated a policy regarding internet usage to tell workers what was inappropriate.
Looks like they DID need to find SOMETHING illegal to be able to fire him. Still bull**** for criminally charging him though. . .
Doesn't that also tie the legality of his actions to the policy that was never disseminated?
According to his employer's terms, nothing that he did was illegal. However, it appears as if they went "oh ****...we can't get him because we forgot to post our policies" and they dug up this VERY broad definition of hacking. Essentially, it appears as if it went like this:
Employer: He didn't actually break our policies, so what do we do?
Advisor in Employer's company: Well, there IS this very broad definition of hacking we can apply here. We can just charge him criminally; if it's in the law it doesn't have to be in our rules.
Employer: Charge the bastard!
-
Yeah but the thing is that even that broad definition of hacking only applies if he made unauthorised use of the network. Which without an acceptable use policy, he didn't.
-
Ahh, I see your point. They may still have been able to get him under implied use though.
. . .beyond the scope of the express or implied consent of, the owner of the computer . . .
A properly displayed usage policy would be express. It just depends on what they can claim as "implied" use of the computer is. I guess if he's using it for work, it's implied he's supposed to be using that computer for his job. However if you charge him that way, then playing Solitaire is hacking.
...effed up if you ask me...I think they should have just fired him and let it be. There's no reason to charge him criminally for something like this. Loss of job is plenty of "punishment". They aren't felony charges (don't think they are anyway) so nobody HAS to prosecute him.
-
I'm more interested in the whole story. While I know some things are just stupid, as this case would be if this is all he did. But, I'm also very leery on the fact that I really doubt a mostly computer based site would give the whole story, like if he hacked one of his co-workers computer to do it so he wouldn't get caught.
-
Did you read the docket from the case? It's all laid out in there.