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

Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

documentcloud.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 324 posts

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#261

Post by awj »

phereford wrote: post #130
feydr wrote: post #88

can someone please explain what the deal is here for us uninitiated? sounds like they are throwing the book at him for stealing books? seriously? why is the prosecution being so aggressive? did he profit from it or something? this sounds so petty

He violated Terms of Service for a large database of journals at an egregious rate. If he had stolen say...10,000 articles this may be a non-issue. The fact that they can tie 4,000,000 articles to him is what makes this so bad. The other part that is extremely bad is his measure to continually evade MIT MAC banning through spoofing. That measure of evasion proves, to some extent, his intent to steal and is a form of…

I wouldn't be too surprised if him causing a month (months?) long interruption of JSTOR for an entire campus deeply involved in government contracts was also part of the ire.

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#262

Post by gwern »

mukyu wrote: post #180
gwern wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The indictment mentions only one laptop, BTW. No indication he signed up with "different laptops".

22. On October 8, 2010, Swartz connected a second computer to MIT’s network and registered as a guest, using similar naming conventions: the computer was registered under the name "Grace Host," the computer client name "ghost macbook," and the throw-away e-mail address “ghost42@mailinator.com." 23. The next day, October 9, 2010, Swartz used both the “ghost laptop” and the “ghost macbook” to systematically and rapidly…

Huh; my bad.

Also mentioned is that Swartz used the network closet to take 2 IP addresses. Are we to infer he hooked up both laptops with an IP each? Or is the real scenario that he was using one laptop under 2 identities? (Not that impossible.)

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#263

Post by bricestacey »

_delirium wrote: post #259
bricestacey wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

50k is cheap as hell. UMass Boston had 125,000 JSTOR downloads last year. Let's assume we pay $50k (close enough), that's 40 cents an article. This is cheap as hell compared to other databases that charge more than that for a single search!

It's further harming the possibilities of being an independent scholar or even reading academic literature outside academia, though, which I think is a significant detriment to academia. I'm not as worried about the $50k a university library has to pay, but if you're an independent scholar for even one year, it becomes clear how harmful to the research community JSTOR is. Journals that used to sell archive access to…

I see your point, but you could just as easily walk into your local university, use their network as a guest, and access millions of dollars worth of content for free. Most databases allow you to download PDFs so you can download a bunch of articles and take them home, legally. Proxying through your grad student friends is breaking the law.

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#264

Post by qq66 »

rhizome wrote: post #245
cube13 wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only he's a fellow at Harvard, not an MIT student or faculty. So no, they couldn't handle this internally. Possibly with the local police, but that may have been what caused it to escalate.

Evidently you're unaware of MIT's history of pranks.

Even with MIT's charitable (but declining) tolerance towards student hacking/pranking, they take a very dim view of non-students doing the same (even alumni).

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#266

Post by queensnake »

I'm probably Advocating Crime but, couldn't a bunch of people coordinate and do what he was doing, over a year or two, distributed, from several universities? You totally could. The more, the less noticeable, and punishable.

edit: it wouldn't surprise me if something like that showed up; the problem has been highlighted, the legal issues made clearer, and JSTOR bloodied. Go Aaron.

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#267

Post by jfager »

jillsy wrote: post #227
stephth wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds very hypocritical. If their "Mission and Work" is to support scholarly work and academic usage, and encourage usage of large sets of data, why are they suing Aaron's ass instead of working with him to further understand what were his needs that their system was lacking and how they could reduce that gap? Why else would Aaron hack their system if not for research? Sounds like instead of spending money in i…

Here's what's supposed to happen: A student on campus wants to do a research project analyzing a large number of journal articles, or even just the metadata around a large number of journal articles. They approach their librarian, the librarian approaches the journal vendor (JSTOR or someone else), and everyone works together to find a way to get the student their data. Maybe the vendor hands over a special dataset.…

It's outright sociopathic to suggest that justice for a few weeks inconvenience is 35 years in prison and a million dollar fine.

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#268

Post by Aloisius »

There is a riser closet in my office with various internet service providers wiring in it feeding the entire building.

If I were to enter this riser closet and plug into my laptop into one of these lines, I would be charged with theft of service and deservedly be sent to jail. It doesn't matter if the door is locked or not. It doesn't matter what kind of security they put in place or not. It doesn't matter if I only sent a few bytes of data on their network and didn't harm anyone elses' service. It is still theft of service.

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#269

Post by Homunculiheaded »

bricestacey wrote: post #263
_delirium wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's further harming the possibilities of being an independent scholar or even reading academic literature outside academia, though, which I think is a significant detriment to academia. I'm not as worried about the $50k a university library has to pay, but if you're an independent scholar for even one year, it becomes clear how harmful to the research community JSTOR is. Journals that used to sell archive access to…

I see your point, but you could just as easily walk into your local university, use their network as a guest, and access millions of dollars worth of content for free. Most databases allow you to download PDFs so you can download a bunch of articles and take them home, legally. Proxying through your grad student friends is breaking the law.

Even among state universities access to electronic journals for guests is becoming increasingly rare (usually prohibited in the license agreement). Also if you look to much into how scholarly communications works, the idea of charging 50k is insane since that vast majority of the cost of journals are actually paid for by universities in the first place.

edit: although I do agree with your point that in with the current state of things the cost per usage of JSTOR is significantly less than most other electronic journal collections

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#270

Post by qq66 »

tesseract wrote: post #247
ianb wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems contrary to Demand Progress's statement: “It’s even more strange because the alleged victim has settled any claims against Aaron, explained they’ve suffered no loss or damage, and asked the government not to prosecute,” Segal added.

I got the impression Demand Progress was referring in that sentence to MIT as the "alleged victim", which seems slightly disingenuous to me. It also seems plausible that MIT would behave in the manner described. However I have not yet seen a statement from MIT that would corroborate this, either.

And even if it were true, the "alleged victims" don't get to decide whether the government prosecutes. The only cases where the victim can force the prosecution to abandon their case are those crimes such as spousal abuse where the only hard evidence is the testimony of the victim themselves. In other cases, the government can get all of the evidence it needs through subpoena.
Post reply on HN