Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Teenager facing prison for downloading unsecured files from government website

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 502 posts

Re: Teenager facing prison for downloading unsecured files from government website

#161

Post by Anon1096 »

astrodust wrote: post #69
daodedickinson wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Why did this kid admit that? How astronomcally low are the odds there's nothing illegal to possess in there?

As the amount of 4chan material you've archived increases the probability of not archiving something illegal quickly diminishes to zero.

Depending on the boards archived there's a pretty good chance he doesn't have CP. Only /b/ (and I hear /sp/ as well but I never go there) really ever have child porn, and then very very rarely and quickly deleted to the point that an archiver might not pick it up. Due to the sheer size and uselessness of a possible /b/ archive I kind of doubt there's anything bad.

Re: Teenager facing prison for downloading unsecured files from government website

#162

Post by jessaustin »

jstarfish wrote: post #114
ryandrake wrote: post #49

Good thing he’s in Canada and only got raided. If he were in the USA, they would have tossed flashbangs and tear gas into his house, vaulted in through the windows, shot the family dog, and held the whole family at gun point, boots on their necks. It’s a shame that police departments think these “shock and awe” tactics are even remotely appropriate for dealing with non-violent suspects.

I don't like or agree with it either, but it is unfortunately necessary for the preservation of digital evidence. Many nonviolent actors involved in cybercrimes have prepared killswitches or some other manner of instantly burning everything to the ground if you give them enough time to react when you show up with a warrant.

If we can't enforce the law without making society terrible, let's get rid of the law.

Re: Teenager facing prison for downloading unsecured files from government website

#163

Post by Kelbit »

WestCoastJustin wrote: post #89

I've contacted the reporter to see if we can setup a legal fund for this guy. It sounds like he's being bullied. This could also get a very bad precedent in Canada as this is totally absurd.

Keep us informed. I'll chip in.

Re: Teenager facing prison for downloading unsecured files from government website

#164

Post by jopsen »

astrodust wrote: post #69
daodedickinson wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Why did this kid admit that? How astronomcally low are the odds there's nothing illegal to possess in there?

As the amount of 4chan material you've archived increases the probability of not archiving something illegal quickly diminishes to zero.

The more systematic your collection the better your defense will be.

Intent and knowledge of the illegal material of which you are in possession could easily be a requirement.

I'm no laywer, but archiving the internet is hardly illegal.

Re: Teenager facing prison for downloading unsecured files from government website

#165

Post by WestCoastJustin »

gburt wrote: post #105
WestCoastJustin wrote: post #89

I've contacted the reporter to see if we can setup a legal fund for this guy. It sounds like he's being bullied. This could also get a very bad precedent in Canada as this is totally absurd.

Please keep us informed on the outcome. I have written a letter to my MP and MLA as well as the MP for Halifax.

He got back to me and said there is no legal fund at this time. These people need to hire a lawyer ASAP. Their sons life is over because he wrote a for loop with wget.

  for i in `seq 1 7000`; do
    wget http://foi.example-gov-domain.gc.ca/foi-download.cgi?id=$i;
  done
Boom, you are not going to federal prison for 10 years! What a complete joke!

Re: Teenager facing prison for downloading unsecured files from government website

#166

Post by doomtop »

rayiner wrote: post #140
samatman wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It... it is accessible from a link That's what a url with an id in it is a link

A "link" is a DOM element in a web page which references a URL, but a URL is not itself a link. To point a finer point on it: the fact that a URL is referenced in a link means that a user is supposed to see and access it.

Sounds like you might be thinking of an anchor element. People ask for the "link" when they mean the URI all the time.

Re: Teenager facing prison for downloading unsecured files from government website

#168

Post by inetknght »

adanto6840 wrote: post #65

I agree with many of the comments here, along the lines of "intent?" and "bad law", etc... How can I provide material assistance to either this kid and/or to the problem at large? I'm looking for something other than "donate to the EFF [or equiv.]" ideally though; I'd prefer to donate directly to his legal fund, or even do some legwork myself that will help, etc. And ideally in a way that not only helps him, but that…

Propose changes (additions, subtractions, et al) to current law. Talk to your (I don't know Canadian politics) political figureheads about your proposals. Shop them around.

Talk to your law enforcement agencies about computer crimes.

Write and talk publicly about the issues.

Re: Teenager facing prison for downloading unsecured files from government website

#169

Post by rayiner »

jopsen wrote: post #155
Declanomous wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not necessarily a problem that the older generation can only think about technology in a metaphorical sense, the problem is that the metaphors they are using are idiotic. I think, by and large, people are constrained to thinking about things they can describe. To that extent, being able to accurately describe something is meaningful, and is therefore a linguistic issue. Semantics are very important when you are…

No OP has a point, we shouldn't talk in metaphors so much... It's not necessary. The web is in many ways a huge collection of resources that reference each other. Some of these references are explicit in links, others in text, and some are available for programmatic access. In fact many resources can be discovered by programmatic access, and there is no inherent reason to think this is wrong. Just because an API isn'…

> In fact many resources can be discovered by programmatic access, and there is no inherent reason to think this is wrong. Just because an API isn't documented doesn't make using it illegal.

The license to access private property is based on the intent of the property owner. Where the intent is made express (through a sign), that governs. Where the intent is not made express, we try to figure out what a reasonable person would infer about the property owner's intent.

The method of access, therefore, is relevant insofar as it tells you about what the owner of the web server intended people to have access to. The fact that content on a website meant for the public to access is only accessible by "programmatic" means that ordinary users would not know, is strong evidence that the owners of the web server did not intend for people to access those documents.

Re: Teenager facing prison for downloading unsecured files from government website

#170

Post by systematical »

BadThink6655321 wrote: post #141
rayiner wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I already play with urls that have possible id's in them out of habit Do you jiggle door handles out of habit to see if they're unlocked? It's antisocial behavior. If you were supposed to have access to that document, it would be accessible from a link or search box on the main site.

If they're my door handles, then yes. If they're public doors, then yes. Why, just yesterday, I tried the door of my favorite coffee establishment where the Open light was on but, unbeknownst to me, they had closed early. The kid got documents on a public facing server. He did nothing wrong.

A bit more complicated than that but I am sympathetic to this persons plight. What complicates this is if the website had a Terms of Use policy, if not then outside of existing statutes I can't see how he is guilty. Even if their are terms of use, I think these are useless if I have not agreed before entering the site. All very confusing.

The blame truly lies on the government for allowing such porous security. They should be glad a seemingly benign teenager discovered their flaw and not some more nefarious actor.

Post reply on HN