Re: Honeypots Illegal?

"mr.b" <mist@xxxxx> writes:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:58:36 +0000, Unruh wrote:

"mr.b" <mist@xxxxx> writes:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 01:32:10 +0000, Unruh wrote:

"mr.b" <mist@xxxxx> writes:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 03:03:48 +0000, Unruh wrote:

"s. keeling" <keeling@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Randy Yates <yates@xxxxxxxx>:
I sure hope things have changed in the last four years:

http://www.securityfocus.com/news/4004

Is this still illegal? What a load of crap.

You log onto my client's computers and you're warned with a banner
that it's private property, your actions may be monitored and
captured, and anything done on the machine may become public
knowledge, as in used as evidence in court. If you continue and
you're not authorized to do so, you're trespassing and are yourself
guilty of theft of communications.

It is NOT trespassing and it is NOT theft of communications, since
they are not a real property that could be stolen.

IYHO, but I disagree IMHO. Who owns the hardware? Who pays for the
connection? If you sit down at the wheel of my Jag parked on the
street, and decide to take it for a ride without my permission, have
you not stolen it?


Get out your lawbooks or the laws of your country and read the
definition of trespassing and of theft. You are using analogies which
are usually dangerous.
What the hell has sitting in Jag got to do with doing anything on a
computer. Unless you are asking about someone coming into your house,
taking the cover off your computer and sitting in it, your analogy is
inappropriate and irrelevant.

hmmm...I guess I'll have to simplify this for you. I have a thing and it
is mine, not yours. You help yourself to my thing without my permission.

Problem 1. You do not have a "thing". A "thing" is tangible property- it
can be touched, lifted.

Interpretation on your part I think. If you access my vaporous web
presence in Canada, without my permission, it's a Criminal Code offense.
There must be a rationale for this codifying of the "intangible" as you
see it

It may be a Criminal Code offense but the offense is NOT theft.
Note it is an offense under the Criminal Code of Canada for you to access
your own vapourous web presence, or at least to alter anything in it.


You have stolen my thing. It doesn't matter what the thing is.
Mine=not

I have not stolen your "thing" since there was no thing to steal. s in
copyright, a "thing" has the property that one and only one person can
possess it at a time. It has premanance in time and uniqueness in space.

See above

Yes, read the Criminal Code on Theft. And notice that the law you quote
does not occur under the sections on theft.


yours. Law regarding unauthorised access to computers is just about as
clear, and as simple. My analogy was both relevant and appropriate,
your not so humble opinion notwithstanding. Your interpretation of real
property etc. appeared to me as little more than semantic dithering. Are
you a lawyer by any chance?

Why? YOu think that a lawyer talking about the law would be a bad thing,
would get in the way or your attempt to generalise the concept of theft
out of all recognition? No I am not. I do however attempt to use
language precisely and recognize that analogy is not identity. One of
the key aspects of law is its attempt at both precision and generality.
This is to ensure that a person actually can recognize when he is
breaking a law. If any analogy dreamt up by a prosecutor is valid, then
all actions are illegal, since an analogy can be found ( sometimes far
fetched) to link any activity with any law.

The last half I agree with, the first half no. I ask not to invalidate
the opinion of a trained lawyer but to clarify your potential for having
personal practical knowledge...which wouldn't of course exclude the
possiblity that some lawyers make their bread by dithering semantically ;-)

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Copyrights and copywrongs
    ... Copryright infringement is not classified as theft under US law. ... it's probably a bad idea to do that to a lawyer. ...
    (comp.robotics.misc)
  • Re: Honeypots Illegal?
    ... It is NOT trespassing and it is NOT theft of communications, ... My analogy was both relevant and appropriate, ... YOu think that a lawyer talking about the law would be a bad thing, ...
    (comp.os.linux.security)
  • Re: Honeypots Illegal?
    ... It is NOT trespassing and it is NOT theft of communications, ... My analogy was both relevant and appropriate, ... YOu think that a lawyer talking about the law would be a bad thing, ... the key aspects of law is its attempt at both precision and generality. ...
    (comp.os.linux.security)
  • Re: "Chet Atkins Picks on Jerry Reed"
    ... has a lawyer who gets paid to deal with exactly that sort of question. ... Still think you know more about US copyright law than I do? ... infringing copyrights is okay, legal, or moral; ... prosecute you for the theft. ...
    (alt.guitar)
  • Re: Embedded systems publishers
    ... One is personal use copying, involving no money - it is "copyright infringement" and is illegal, meaning you can be sued for it in a civil court. ... In neither case is it theft, but copyright infringement. ... People who sell unlicensed copies of books, software, music, or whatever are not thieves - but they *are* criminals, and should be treated as such by law enforcement and justice systems. ...
    (comp.arch.embedded)