, 2003-09-08
How a recent federal appeals court decision makes virtually everyone a computer criminal.
Expand all |
Post comment
Forgive Me My Trespasses
2003-09-08
Paul Lawrence (3 replies)
Paul Lawrence (3 replies)
Forgive Me My Trespasses
2003-09-09
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)
The appeals court ruled properly in this case regarding the improper subpoena, which was the principal issue they were asked to decide.
The author's argument runs down the instantly fallacious path of "in effect the court has said ..." rather than the path of "in fact the court has said ..." If someone tried to actually use this appeal as precedent in the preposterous fashion the author describes, I'm sure any opposing counsel with positive IQ would demolish the case. It would be a foolhardy counsel indeed who attempts to demonstrate precedent solely with their personal conclusions about the underlying intent or social implications of an appellate decision.
Besides, as others pointed out, the subpoena author social-engineered their way into private and unrelated computer records. It's as much a hack as identity theft. (Hi, I'm Jim Smith, I lost my password, could you email it to me at idiot@sucker.com?)
And in my own personal and thoroughly unsolicited opinion, it's about darned time the bench starts slapping back at sloppy lawyers and officers of the court or law who don't understand technology well enough to quantify their demands, and cause a mess all around. Every ISP gets nutty subpoenas at a reasonably current rate. For example, I know a client who was subpoenaed for "a record of all IP traffic passing through their computer systems during the months of January through July..." Which, even if it could have been produced, would amount to some untold number of terabytes. And oh the hilarity that ensued when they responded that they could not comply with the demand. It's time that this silliness stops.
Let's not fret about arcane potential constructions of the future implications of this appellate decision. If the corner drug dealer gets off on an evidentiary technicality, I don't jump to conclude that all drug dealing is suddenly legalized, or that cops will no longer produced drug dealers. At some point rationality has to step in.
[ reply ]
Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/183/22122#22122