Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a coherent argument, but then I feel like I get to point out that you're litigating the whole concept of the justice system, not Keys sentence in particular. Keys is both extremely lucky and extremely privileged compared to the average person serving a multi-year sentence.
I'm much more concerned with the obvious flaws of the system than I am with the "concept" of the system. I'm sure Keys would prefer not to trade sentences with e.g. the average drug "offender", but I doubt he'd consider himself "extremely lucky and extremely privileged". What could that even mean, for a person who shouldn't have been incarcerated a day, convicted, with evidence circumstantial at best, of an act that…
Former Reuters Journalist Matthew Keys Sentenced to Two Years for Hacking
31–40 of 67 posts
Re: Former Reuters Journalist Matthew Keys Sentenced to Two Years for Hacking
#32If someone broke into the tribune's printing office (which perhaps didn't collect the key or change the lock when they fired someone) and that person changed the headline and a byline for an article in the paper that went out to thousands of people, I still have a hard time believing a court would put that person in prison for 2 years because of it. At some point we have to acknowledge these tough cyber laws do nothi…
So one way to look at this is that he got the same amount of time, or less, he likely would have gotten if he had physically broken in and changed the title of the physical print of the paper (or had been an accomplice to others who actually perpetuated the criminal acts).
Re: Former Reuters Journalist Matthew Keys Sentenced to Two Years for Hacking
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this case, the problem wasn't so much that Trib Corp had poor security (they probably do though), but rather that an insider exfiltrated credentials to one of their servers to an IRC channel. There are a few companies in our industry where that attack wouldn't be devastating, because of very carefully designed security programs. But there are not many of those companies. Most companies you've heard of are just as…
Those keys were those of an ex-employee. When you let a person go or they leave the company those credentials should have been changed.
A failure to change the locks does not mean you have created an attractive nuisance to former employees.
Re: Former Reuters Journalist Matthew Keys Sentenced to Two Years for Hacking
#34For those catching up, I made a timeline of the case: http://newslines.org/matthew-keys/
Re: Former Reuters Journalist Matthew Keys Sentenced to Two Years for Hacking
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those keys were those of an ex-employee. When you let a person go or they leave the company those credentials should have been changed.
They should have. He also should not have given out the password. A failure to change the locks does not mean you have created an attractive nuisance to former employees.
However, failure to collect keys get's into murky situations.
Re: Former Reuters Journalist Matthew Keys Sentenced to Two Years for Hacking
#36That's like saying you can get in trouble for giving someone a key to your old apartment, and then they go use it to unlock the door and do whatever they feel like inside. Or can you get in trouble for this, as maybe, an accessory?
Re: Former Reuters Journalist Matthew Keys Sentenced to Two Years for Hacking
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm much more concerned with the obvious flaws of the system than I am with the "concept" of the system. I'm sure Keys would prefer not to trade sentences with e.g. the average drug "offender", but I doubt he'd consider himself "extremely lucky and extremely privileged". What could that even mean, for a person who shouldn't have been incarcerated a day, convicted, with evidence circumstantial at best, of an act that…
Wait, you think that exfiltrating a password to a giant newspaper's CMS to a hacker group and exhorting them to "fuck shit up" shouldn't be a crime?
Rather, when it's heard, it's quickly silenced as in this case. (Keys was explicitly fired for political reasons. Who doubts he was prosecuted for the same reasons?) There isn't a chance that a similar episode at a small-town newspaper or independent broadcaster or even a popular online-only media site would receive the publicly-funded attention of a federal prosecutor. Most of those dream of higher public office, and they all know whom to make happy and whom to ignore, to make those dreams come true.
Resident HN Qin Dynasty fans might think the problem I describe is one of insufficient enforcement, that if only every knucklehead site defacement could be punished with the full weight of the USA-Justice Dept., we'd live in a utopia. Please realize, however, that this arbitrary authoritarianism is the only possible use of such a law, because it is the design of the law. There will never be enough federal prosecutors to send everyone involved with any defacement anywhere to prison. The point is not to prevent site defacement. The point is to centralize, to provide every benefit to large corporations and deny the same to other firms. That's actually the point of most laws that get passed nowadays. In this case, since this is a media company, the specific point is to control public discourse and destroy those who challenge it, and thereby to keep those profits and campaign donations up. For the rest of us, the cure is worse than the disease.
Security experts are the real fools, when they support the criminalization of minor shit like this. You're going to get paid anyway, whether someone goes to FPMITAP or not. In fact, you'd probably get paid more, if more people were comfortable poking giants in the eye. Executives bitch about all consultants, but do you imagine there is any particular type of consultant they'd be happier to fire? Giant corporations are not good, they are not your friends, and you owe them only the services they purchase. You don't owe them any political allegiance, and sending people like this to prison actually harms you in the long run.
Re: Former Reuters Journalist Matthew Keys Sentenced to Two Years for Hacking
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
They should have. He also should not have given out the password. A failure to change the locks does not mean you have created an attractive nuisance to former employees.
Attractive nuance is supposed to apply to children. However, failure to collect keys get's into murky situations.
Re: Former Reuters Journalist Matthew Keys Sentenced to Two Years for Hacking
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait, you think that exfiltrating a password to a giant newspaper's CMS to a hacker group and exhorting them to "fuck shit up" shouldn't be a crime?
Despite the big scary words [seriously, "exfiltrating" and "exhorting" in a single sentence; whom are we trying to convince?], it shouldn't be a crime. No fraud took place here. No personal or business data was stolen. No one was hurt. The damage was the online equivalent of "Kilroy was here" on a bathroom wall. The "victim" in the case is a giant media conglomerate responsible for the silencing of thousands of indep…
I suppose there's a completely coherent argument to be made that anything you do with a computer to someone else's computer that doesn't cause physical, kinetic damage shouldn't be a crime. I'm unlikely to agree with that argument, though, so while it's good to know that that's what you think, we're probably at diminishing returns on this thread.
Re: Former Reuters Journalist Matthew Keys Sentenced to Two Years for Hacking
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Attractive nuance is supposed to apply to children. However, failure to collect keys get's into murky situations.
Can you be more specific about the murky situation we're talking about here? I moved offices from Oak Park back into Chicago a few months back. The landlord never collected the key. My old office was rented out (I can see from the window). Can I go look around inside it?
If a lessor or landlord in Illinois does not change or rekey the unit's lock before the day the new tenant or lessee takes possession, and a THEFT occurs at that dwelling unit that is attributable to the lessor's failure to change or rekey the lock, the landlord is liable for any damages from the theft that occurs as a result of the lessor's failure to comply with the law http://www.securitydepositlaw.com/blog/chicago-tenants-right...