Hot answers tagged

14

tl;dr- I don't see how you can "leak" a large organization's IP addresses given that they seem to be very public information. However, misusing an organization's network services or/and somehow being complicit in an attack could probably get someone into touble. Organization IP address allocations seem to be public information. I Google'd "Colorado ...


13

Can you be liable for damages? Under Tort Law, yes. Let's assume someone developed a virus based on your code. The virus caused millions of dollars of damage. The plaintiff (software vendor) can argue that: You have a Duty of Care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee are likely to injure your neighbor Donoghue v. Stevenson (...


9

Generally speaking, if a person sends you an email you can publish it. Like if they call you a bunch of nasty names, or threaten you in some way, that information is yours and you can publish it. However, I'll give you three scenarios where you should not publish an email sent to you (and I'll edit to add more if they come up). Private facts. There is a ...


8

No, it is not. Just as it is illegal to steal from a thief, it is illegal to hack a hacker. Criminals are often considered a good target for crimes from a practical standpoint, but crimes against criminals are still prosecuted. As criminals are unlikely to report crimes against them to the authorities (particularly when doing so runs the risk of them ...


6

Forget about copyright or EULAs. In the UK this would be illegal under the Computer Misuse Act (1998) and you could be jailed for up to a year - specifically Unauthorised access to computer material. (1)A person is guilty of an offence if— (a)he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure access to any program or data held ...


6

Given that both parties have committed criminal offenses (the 'bad actor' is attempting fraud and the 'victim' has committed unauthorized access to a computer system), no court would hear a civil case between these parties. As a matter of public policy, criminals do not owe a duty of care to each other so no one can win this case.


5

Yes. In the United Kingdom it is illegal under the Computer Misuse Act 1990. In other jurisdictions there may not be a law directly aimed at computer crime but if you sell it knowing that a crime is going to be committed with it that makes you an accomplice. Most computer crime is prosecuted under laws not directly aimed at computer misuse.


5

In regards to U.S. Law to be employed by the government. You would need to be certified to DoDD8570 specs. Here is a baseline to understand what certifications are required depending on the role you are looking to be gainfully employed. These mostly require being GIAC certified among some of the other certifications. In regards to becoming a "Certified ...


5

Your question has two distinct aspects which have to be considered separately: criminal law and civil law. I will give an opinion on both aspects, but first I have to give you a word of warning: This case is not clear in the sense that the law can be immediately apply. For a full answer you need the services of a practicing lawyer who does the necessary ...


5

This is relatively uncharted legal territory, so until multiple cases establish some sort of precedent, we can only guess. I know of no legal requirement that a Browser or User has to submit cookies or referrer data or other meta-information accurately. In that regard, a user is unlikely to be prosecuted just for submitting HTTP headers. It is likely ...


4

On the face of the CFAA: How does Aaron Swartz's mass download from JSTOR constitute hacking? He exceeded his authorised access on a protected computer. If this is hacking (the masking of one's IP address) then doesn't that make using VPN hacking? Hacking is not a term used in CFAA. In Aaron's case changing the IP address was a necessity for him to ...


4

A creative prosecutor could probably come up with a raft of charges. But you could start with the federal wiretapping statute, 18 USC 2511, and the anti-hacking statute, 18 USC 1030. Here is an indictment brought in 2012 under the anti-hacking statute against someone who distributed and used this kind of software. Depending on the facts and the jurisdiction,...


4

It is unlikely that the US, or any government, would condone any kind of crime. The reason for this is that the law must be seen to be impartial and applied fairly to all those subject to it. What happens if tomorrow, the government decides they don't like you? It is possible that this type of activity, or activity amounting to it, would be sanctioned in ...


4

No, it may not be legal. Most original material is subject to the copyright laws. If one authors a poem, and sends it to a recipient by email, the poem is still copyrighted, and the author could still sue the recipient if the recipient uses the poem in ways which were not implicitly or explicitly authorised. There are various fair use exceptions to the ...


4

Eugene Volokh categorizes this as "crime-facilitating speech" in his articles, "The Freedom of Speech and Bad Purposes", and "Crime-Facilitating Speech". He characterizes the situation like this: Some chemistry textbooks discuss how explosives are made, some posts to computer security discussion groups discuss security bugs in a leading operating ...


3

In law there are two different concepts: admissibility of evidence and the weight of that evidence. Your question concerns both. I will begin by discussing a little bit about what both these two terms mean. Admissibility means that this evidence may go before the trier of fact. Typically the trier of fact is the jury, however, if both parties have waived ...


3

Of course it is illegal. You are attempting to access somebody's data without their knowledge and certainly without their consent. In the U.K. it is a crime under the Computer Misuse Act 1990, the Police and Justice Act 2006 and the Serious Crimes Act 2015. The clue here should be in the term Serious Crimes. The Human Rights Act, and indeed the ECHR, ...


3

This would probably constitute illegal wiretapping and would certainly constitute a 4th Amendment search if conducted by law enforcement. Normally, the definition of whether something is "public" for purposes of an expectation of privacy is whether it could be detected by a human being unaided by technological enhancements from a place where someone could ...


3

It could be. Accessing any web page is subject to whatever the terms of use are for the page, and if those terms state that the page may only be accessed from within the US, then accessing the page from outside the US is a violation of the TOS (hence use is infringing): see 2.4(h) of the Netflix EULA. There are EU rules that override such terms, within the ...


3

The situation is basically a mess. It depends on jurisdiction, and it may not be at all clear which jurisdictions apply if, for instance, a UK person accesses a US website via the Canadian point of presence of a VPN provider based in Switzerland. Anti-hacking laws usually ban "unauthorised" use. These laws were generally written in the 80s or 90s before ...


2

If the application end-user licence agreement prohibits reverse engineering, then reverse engineering is prohibited, no matter if there is some security measures or not and no matter your purposes. When you walk on the street, the fact that you pass near an open door or window doesn't make this home a public place, and does not make you free to enter in the ...


2

Consider that the provider doesn't know it's you that is attacking your own VPS, so they could start an investigation, which is expensive, and might also incur fines if they alert the police forces Some attacks (DDOS for instance) will necessarily affect also other users, not only you. Bottom line, I'm definitely not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure that if ...


2

Disregarding the example of logging IP addresses (as Andrew said, this is not the same as "hacking a server"): The conduct in question ("hacking" a server and exfiltrating information without the permission of the owner) would definitely constitute a "search" for purposes of the fourth amendment and other constitutional law; therefore, a warrant is required....


2

Ok, there is an essential flaw in your question. What you stated the FBI did was not attempting an unauthorized access on the network. What they did was collect IP addresses. This would be the same thing as a pen register, which law enforcement does not need a warrant for. Smith v. Maryland The ninth circuit stated the same in the 2007 case US v. Forrester....


2

In most states in the United States, you can be sued. Whether or not the suit is successful will depend on facts related to the newsworthiness of what you publish. The Digital Media Law Project has a page where they discuss suing over the Publication of Private Facts. A plaintiff must establish four elements to hold someone liable for publication of ...


2

What you describe is nothing malicious. I'm not a lawyer, so I can't say whether it technically runs afoul of laws proscribing "unauthorized access/use of computer systems." Also, it may technically run afoul of the host's terms and conditions. Again, IANAL, so I can't rule out the sad possibility that you could be in legal trouble for what you did ... ...


2

You have the copyright on all your pictures. He had no permission to copy any of them, so he has committed copyright infringement on a massive scale. You can just get a solicitor who will happily take him to court for you. You shouldn't be overdoing it, $750 per infringed work (per picture) as statutory damages should be fine. If you want it cheaper, the ...


2

Depends on where you are. It's called piggybacking and its legality varies state to state (and possibly even county to county). You might not get caught, but if you do the penalties may include a fine or a custodial sentence. For example, you might find yourself doing this in, say, New York - you would probably not run into legal issues there, provided you ...


2

There are no international laws that govern all hacking around the world. Generally however, criminal statutes require that the accused, if convicted, be ordered to pay restitution to their victim(s). This is generally for the actual financial amount required to restore the victim to their position, had the crime not occurred. For your examples, it would ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible