McKinnon's last appeal has failed
news.bbc.co.uk
news.bbc.co.uk
"Mr McKinnon admits that he hacked into 97 US computers from his bedroom in north London between 2001 and 2002 and left a message on one machine saying: "I will continue to disrupt at the highest levels.""
Two years, almost 100 computer systems, taunting and threats.. that doesn't sound so harmless to me.
[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/5...
“US foreign policy is akin to government-sponsored terrorism these days . . . It was not a mistake that there was a huge security stand down on September 11 last year . . . I am SOLO. I will continue to disrupt at the highest levels . . .”
In context, it seems less sinister, more stupid / self-important.
By the way, I would like to know how could he have made $800.000 in damages. Is this the money spent to make the system more secure?
If one bozo in his moms basement can cause hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage or worse they have real problems, and suing the guy that did the damage is the least of their issues.
A military installation that can be hacked by somebody in a foreign country ought to be plugging holes instead of asking for extradition.
Even so he should have never been able to do what he did. All he should have found were very securely locked doors, alarmbells going off all over the place and a very stern talking to.
We're not talking about the website of the local football club here, it's the military.
If a foreign nation with a large budget and a concerted effort would be able to crack it that would be embarrassing but at least you could have some understanding. Now the assumption is that if this clown could do it then probably every two bit intelligence agency in the world has been doing it as well. In other words there is lots of egg to go around for various faces.
Instead of turning this guy into an asset they are trying to make him in to a scapegoat. What he did wasn't good but he could only do it because somebody else left cracks that shouldn't even have been there in the first place.
As it is they ought to be very much ashamed.
Of course there will be people that will say 'but he had no business doing that' or 'he should have known better'.
Maybe.
The 'rattling a locked door of my house' analogy has been made plenty of times, I think the military should be held to a much higher standard and that they basically ought to put out a bounty for every hole that somebody proves exists.
That way the script kiddies/blackhats get to make a decent living and we all end up more secure.
Do you really mean "if"? It won't even be "when", it will be "for some time, now".
It's all just a little bit of history repeating. Heh.
I'm disgusted and outraged but can't think of anything I could do that wouldn't be pointless other then making me feel like I did something.
Writing letters to my representatives/senators is not going to make them do diddly squat in defense of a "military hacker", that's the stuff political attack adds would love as fodder.
Bollocks indeed.
Which consequences are you ranting that he should deal with, exactly?
What it does do, though, is post the subtext "I wasn't shocked because I'm awesome, and he's a big girl's blouse who needs to grow up into a real man like me", like any generic internet tough guy post. i.e. a rant about how weak and pathetic you think other people are (compared to you). Basically.
The US already have a seriously bad reputation when it comes to handling things like this so I'm sure he'll end up bagged and tagged within a year.