-
October 17th, 2003, 04:38 PM
#1
Member
Teenager cleared of hacking
-
October 17th, 2003, 04:44 PM
#2
This surprises me that he was found not guilty. Normally the courts slam "hackers" because of the image media produces. I guess they couldn't convict him if he was innocent, but I'm sure they tried every trick in the book to do it.
just my 2 cents
-
October 17th, 2003, 04:46 PM
#3
The teenager told the court that hackers operated legally, but that people who entered computer systems illegally were known as "crackers".
At least he has his facts straight, a good point that should be brought to light more often yet I doubt it will matter. Thats my two pennies.
[shadow]Prepare ship for ludicrous speed![/shadow]
-
October 17th, 2003, 04:47 PM
#4
-
October 17th, 2003, 04:52 PM
#5
Senior Member
I am happy for him... this is all I can say
-
October 17th, 2003, 04:56 PM
#6
Member
hey cross...i checked the link and its still working.....
I found out another hacking news rather interesting..........check this out
"Feds admit error in hacking conviction"
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105_2-5092697.html
I feel like if your time is bad.......u could end up in prison for no wrong doing, or if ur time is good u could walk free even if you did some crime..........
How could you prove your innocence if your comp has been used by someone to hack into other systems..................
-
October 17th, 2003, 05:23 PM
#7
There will always be a problem in getting a conviction in a jury trial, mainly because the jurors do not understand the subject. The same can be said of complex fraud trials.
The basic tenet is that "reasonable doubt" = "not guilty"
The major problem is that you have to prove that the person had exclusive access to the computer at the time, and the presence of a RAT or backdoor would mean that this was not the case. However, suppose he loaded the malware himself, just to provide a defence in case he got caught?
The trouble is that the police and prosecuters over here are pretty computer illiterate themselves
My question is: if the guy was that damned 7337 or whatever they call themselves, how come he let his machine get infected? the hacker hacked, I don't think so
Just my thoughts on it all
Cheers
-
October 17th, 2003, 05:27 PM
#8
Member
-
October 17th, 2003, 08:59 PM
#9
The trouble is that the police and prosecuters over here are pretty computer illiterate themselves
wouldn't totally agree with you there nihil .... NCIS aren't bad - your local bobby might be clueless but thats not to say all areas of law enforcement in the UK are
I think he may have been trying to play down his 7337n355 in anattempt to get off the accusations..... double bluff kinda thing... either that or he is a smeghead
Z
Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes
-
October 17th, 2003, 10:24 PM
#10
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|