RE: Disclose a bug, do not pass go, go directly to jail

["Richard M. Smith" <rms () computerbytesman com>]

I just found this FBI press release on the case which says something a
bit different.  It claims that Bret set up a Web site that give details
of the problem:

http://www.fbi.gov/fieldnews/march/la032503.htm

The FBI also portrays Bret as a spammer for sending out 14,000 email
messages on three occasions.  How come none of the real spammers who
send out millions of unsolicited spam email messages everyday aren't in
jail for overloading email servers?  For example, two years ago Verizon
email basically stopped working for a week because of a spammer attack.

Richard 

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Clowater [mailto:steve () stevesworld hopto org] 
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 2:32 PM
To: Richard M. Smith; full-disclosure () lists netsys com
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Disclose a bug, do not pass go, go
directly to jail


No, Bret had fears that the bug may be exploited once it was disclosed
on a
List, so he emailed the customers to only let them know about the bug.
In
hopes of heading off a mass-owning of the software, while making sure
the
customers were informed. So that the bug would be fixed

Or that was what he testified to when he took the stand, and he
maintained
it during cross-examniations.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard M. Smith" <rms () computerbytesman com>
To: <full-disclosure () lists netsys com>
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 11:18 AM
Subject: [Full-disclosure] Disclose a bug, do not pass go, go directly
to
jail


> Does anyone know if this Tornado bug was ever disclosed on Bugtraq or
> any other security list?
>
> For the description of this incident, it sounds to me like there might
> be a civil case against Mr. McDanel, since he worked for Tornado and
> likely signed some sort of employee agreement, but this hardly
qualifies
> as a criminal matter.
>
> Richard
>
> Jailbird appeals in bug disclosure case
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/32237.html
> By SecurityFocus
> Posted: 08/08/2003 at 07:45 GMT
>
> Bret McDanel already served his 16 months in federal prison for
> violating the Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Now he wants to
> clear his record.
>
> McDanel was wrongly convicted under the federal computer fraud
statute,
> criminal code 18 U.S.C. 1030, claims a 62-page appeal filed on
McDanel's
> behalf by his new attorney, Jennifer Granick, clinical director for
the
> Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School. The criminal
> code was misinterpreted to bring about his conviction, and McDanel's
> public defender denied him a fair trial, asserts the brief, filed
> Wednesday in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
>
> Between August 31 and September 5th, 2000, the 29-year-old McDanel,
> under the moniker, "Secret Squirrel," sent 5,600 e-mail letters to
> customers of his former employer, Tornado Development, Inc., a Los
> Angeles-based unified messaging business that provided Web-based
e-mail,
> voice mail and other communications. McDanel's e-mails informed
> Tornado's customers of a serious vulnerability in the e-mail system
> which left e-mail login credentials, called Network Identifiers or
NIDs,
> in plain view in their Web browser address boxes, which could then be
> scooped up by Web sites that harvest surfing information from
visitors'
> browsers.
>
> According to prosecutors, McDanel intended to cause damage to
Tornado's
> mail server by overloading it with too many messages, and caused a
> costly public relations problem by making public confidential
> information that was damaging to Tornado's reputation.
>
> But the appeal brief claims that the e-mails did not cause a denial of
> service. Instead, the systems were taken down to repair the security
> flaw, which McDanel had pointed out a year earlier at Tornado.
>
> The government's other argument was that McDaniel impaired system
> integrity by exposing the vulnerability publicly. Granick says that
> doesn't fly under existing law.
>
> ....
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html