Re: Hackers Post On DuPage County Election Website

["Dude VanWinkle" <dudevanwinkle () gmail com>]

On 10/29/06, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 19:04:35 EST, Dude VanWinkle said:
> > I understand that finding the most applicable law may be an ordeal
> > from the computer intrusion perspective. I was thinking more along the
> > lines of defrauding the voters-type legislation.
>
> If "defrauding the voters" was an actual crime, I'd rather see them chase
> Diebold than this guy.  Also, the prosecution may have to show that some voters
> were actually impacted by this and didn't get to vote, or similar - the fact
> it's a county election website doesn't mean it actually matters for next
> week's elections.
>
> > Still, I wish they had said "Officials are trying to figure out WHICH
> > laws have been broken", because not only was one law obviously broken,
> > but multiple laws have obviously been broken.
>
> Given that 'WHICH' could very well be the empty set, "figuring out if ANY
> laws were broken" is more correct.  As I pointed out previously, it's
> not at all "obvious".  If you're convinced it's "obvious", it should be a
> no-brainer to cite the relevant statutes and explain why they apply, right? :)

Homie dont play that. I am speaking from the point of "I know many
people who have been sentenced to jail for less"

I have one friend who was convicted of hacking a former employer from
home based on logs with non-routable IP's in them.

I didnt mean any insult when I said no-brainer, sorry for the poor
choice of words buddy

-JP
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.