, SecurityFocus 2000-04-25
Ex-hacker plans his return to court after his ban on computing is extended to speaking and writing.
“
I'm helping to protect people from the very conduct that I was once engaged in
”
"In regards to the numerous requests you have received concerning writing and critiquing articles and speaking at conferences, we find it necessary to deny your participation and recommend that you pursue employment in a non-related field," reads an April 12th letter to Mitnick from the Ventura, California U.S. Probation Office that supervises him.
"Right now, I've retained counsel to go ahead and try to get this clarified," Mitnick said Monday. "I'm surprised, because all I was trying to do through my writing and speaking was to tell people how information security is important."
Mitnick is arguably the world's most well-known hacker. His current notoriety came after he cracked a string of computers at cell phone companies, universities and ISPs. He pleaded guilty in March, 1999 to seven felonies, and was released from prison on January 21st, 2000 after nearly five years in custody.
In February, Mitnick testified before a Senate committee about U.S. government computer security. The same month, he wrote a five-hundred-word commentary for Time Magazine opining on the high-profile denial of service attacks that briefly struck down some of the most widely used e-commerce sites on the web.
A disclaimer under
Until this month, the Probation Office apparently didn't interpret that broad order -- which was upheld by an appeals court in 1998 -- as an obstacle to Mitnick's career ambitions.
"I wanted to work on a book," says Mitnick. "I wanted to work in these speaking engagements and articles, and it was something that was satisfying to me and something I could do" without using computers.
One source says that Mitnick had as much as $20,000 worth of speaking engagements scheduled through August, when the April 12th decision put his plans in limbo, and forced him to cancel a scheduled appearance last week on an information security panel in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Mitnick said he warned organizers of the Utah NetTrends 2000 computer conference from the start that his appearance would hang on the Probation Office's approval, and he's miffed that a press release issued by the conference incorrectly claimed that a last minute court ruling caused the cancellation.
In addition to speaking engagements, Mitnick had been entertaining more offers to write for a variety of newspapers, magazines and web sites, and had agreed to author a monthly column for Contentville, an e-commerce site set to begin reviewing and selling books and magazines this summer.
"I wanted Kevin to write about consumer computer magazines," said Michael Hsu, the Contentville editor who recruited Mitnick. "His situation, where he can't touch computers or use cell phones, is unique, and I thought he could bring an interesting perspective.
"From what I've been told about it, [the restriction] doesn't make any sense, and I think if he has the legal resources he should be able to challenge it successfully," said Steven Brill, Editor in Chief of the media watchdog magazine Brill's Content, and founder of Contentville.
Brill said it's one thing to prevent a defendant from profiting from his crimes... "It's quite another thing to say he can't talk to anyone about anything. It just doesn't make any sense," said Brill, who still holds some hope that Mitnick will be writing for Contentville. "If he is not going to be able to do it, I'd be very disappointed,"
"The government can impose any restrictions so long as they are reasonably related to sentencing goals, and are no more restrictive then necessary," says Eugene Volokh, a UCLA Law School professor and expert in First Amendment issues. "Off the top of my head, it's hard for me to imagine how banning him from writing about computer magazines is consistent with those goals. But I haven't heard the probation officer's point of view"
Reginald Valencia, Supervising United States Probation Officer, said office confidentiality rules prevent him from commenting on the case. "Not in any shape manner or form could I discuss it," said Valencia.
Volokh notes that sentencing judges and probation officers are generally afforded great discretion in imposing supervision restrictions.
Mitnick acknowledges his chances are poor if he takes his fight up to the appellate courts, but he adds that he and his new attorney, Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer Sherman Ellison, don't plan on entering Judge Pfaelzer's courtroom sprouting case law and statutes.
"I'm helping to protect people from the very conduct that I was once engaged in," said Mitnick. "We're going to go in there and explain to the judge that this is good for the public and good for my rehabilitation."
