McKinnons back in the news

To extradite or not?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7456216.stm

I think he should be tried under UK law myself as 45 years for 'curiosity' sounds a bit rough.


This made me laugh too (in profile):
"I found out that the US military use Windows," said Mr McKinnon in that BBC interview.
lol.

personally I don't think he should be punished at all. He didn't actually damage anything or send any secrets to other countries did he? All he did was highlight holes in the networks security.

If the miltary has a bad security, it's their own fault if someone breaks in.
And if the person is honoust about telling that they have bad security, they should give the man a medal and a job to do the security for them.

Instead of improving their security they just get rid of people who can bypass their security.

Digital: sounds about right, what a sad world we live in. Due to this, expect to see thousands more viruses written to try to attack the US military, if they'd acted maturely and thanked him, it would have done wonders for their public image.

If I can break in to your house and steal with ease, are you to blame?

I don't get why everybody is sticking up for this guy. He knowingly broke the law not only once, but again and again and again, until he got caught. Whose fault is that?

Just because he was doing it for 'curiosity' doesn't mean its OK. I'm curious what its like to drive an Enzo - I wouldn't damage it, but that still doesn't make it OK for me to go and break into one.

So, if I don't take anything, then it is OK for me to try to break into a bank vault? I am just trying to point out their security flaws, right?

Why is it OK over the Internet, but not in person?

Why don't they just use the alien technology he claims they have and make him "disappear"?

I pretty sure companies hire folks to break into their systems. Whether or not they do their job isn't any reason for someone to come along and break in.

This is similar thread to the one a year ago or so. Where is was argued that if you left your door open, did you deserve to be stolen from. I presonally say no. But people were arguing that if people don't have a firewall and security on their PC, that they deserved to be hacked. That's called "Lack of morals" or society going down the tubes.

It's not really the same, though, is it. I think he should get off scot free, assuming he did no damage.

I say no, too. But if someone looks through your door and makes a mental image of the contents, hey ho.

> It's not really the same, though, is it.

Yes, it is.

Fact is, this guy illegally gained access to computer systems. It doesn't matter how easy it was, it's illegal activity that he repeated time and time again. This guy needs to be punished for breaking the law, it's that simple.



No! - If you gain illegal access to my home through any means, be it easy or hard you've still committed the exact same offense. Passing the buck because it was easy to do is the same mentality pirates have by saying "I'd never buy the product anyway as I can't afford it".

Put the whole thing into perspective... He broke the law repeatedly, not one, not twice, but repeatedly.

Basically this is the stupid way the law works, back in 1989/90 people hacked with ease without fear of reprisal. When a hole was found someone left a message on the hole and a possible fix, then governments and corporations got pissed off that people accessed thier computers and told them that thier security was rubbish so they passed a law making it illegal to hack someone elses computer.

Surely the better option is what has been stated here, hire the hackers to make airtight security. TBH if Microsoft hired some of these people Windows wouldnt be as security bug ridden as it is now.

I don't really care if he did it or not. What I can't understand is why UK is ready to extradite a British citizen to another country. For example, our (Croatia) constitution says a Croatian citizen cannot be extradited to another country and the only exception to the rule is the war crimes tribunal in Hague. While I agree that he may be tried in the UK I most certainly don't agree with him being sent to a foreign country to be tried there. Threats or not.

I wonder if the law lords would be so quick to send him to Afghanistan or somewhere similar...

Barney

Yes, it is the same thing.


Right. The information that is made intentionally publicly available is fair game. Just like a website. You look at the stuff that is offered up, you are welcome to view it. You try to get past whatever security there is to see what else there is, you are breaking the law.

That is exactly what is going on here in this case. Look in my open door, feel free. Open my door and look in, you are breaking the law.