I agree. In this case Marko is correct. There is no proof that someone ‘hacked’ anything. All we know is that someone had access to their network in one form or another and downloaded some emails. To someone who knows what they are doing thats super easy, no ‘hacking’ necessary. Your more likely to be subject to social engineering rather than hacking. The contents were pulled looked like the job of an insider, not a hacker.
Those that lost their data don’t understand this though so they just arbitrarily called it a hacker.
The truth is it was a school, a state univsertiy I think? And most state university campus’s have crappy network’s with crappy security. The state should try to employ the free market and make a half descent campus instead of bitching.
You guys are taking this from the standpoint that someone who was not suppose to entered their network did. Odds are FAR greater that it was someone who WAS granted access to the network. I seriously doubt it was the job of an actual ‘hacker’.
Has there been any reporting of how the person took the data?
It was neither, so I suggest that you take your whining to your mother. I’m sure she’ll give you a cookie and tell you that you’re really special and all that. I, OTOH, am not here to make you feel better about yourself, nor am I here to validate your feelings. I’m giving you the no-nonsense approach. If you do not like it–get some coping skills.
Such as kicking the user offline. You really need to stop creating hyperbole, too. It makes you sound like a whining little brat.
Irrelevant. Gaining access to a network which you did not have permission has nothing to do with IP. Kill your red herring now.
And you agree that the person so doing should not have access. Good. We agree.
Like a password-STEALER? Keylogger? Those sorts of things which the user clearly did not accept willingly and which are trespassing upon that person’s property–and which I have to clean up on an almost every-day basis at work?
Your question as to who sent it furthers the case that you simply desire to justify vandalism and theft. By attempting to make property-right violations meaningless, you seek to have consequences be null. Grow up.
Now I see why you are throwing insults instead of arguing your point.
Answer me this if you can: If someone telephones a bank over and over again, trying to guess somebodies bank password, should they be arrested an prosecuted for trespassing?
In principle I agree whole heartedly. That doesn’t negate the responsibility of the property owner to protect his assets. After all, when property gets stolen it’s the loss of the property owner. This is of coarse the whole reason for insurance providers and PDA’s ect…
Also I wanted to make a distinction between a general trespasser and a hacker. I doubt someone actually hacked anything. Such activities are not really common in 1st world countries were software is up to date. Though we are talking about a state university so I may be wrong. They tend to have crap in the way of hardware and software.
Also what if the data that was leaked was the property OF the person who leaked it and not of the university?
Reconsider your role as an ambassador of Austrian views. I have tried to keep this discussion as passive and on-topic as possible.
Trespass is a prosecutable offense. I do not believe it can be properly defined in the context of computer communications because only instructions, words and thoughts are transmitted between computers.
I have never said that the owner of a computer has no rights over it: they have every right to kick or ban or whatever.
You just have to ignore Baawa’s open hostility, though you will find he’s usually right.
On a side note. What if I constructed a very long shovel. From my property it could reach your window. I use it to stretch out to your property and bash all your windows. Am I not trespassing? Similarly computer programs and instructions are ‘tools’ just as the shovel was a ‘tool’. It’s generally pretty easy to find out if someone’s intentions are malicious or not.
If I am entering into someone else’s network without consent principly I am violating their property rights. Now if I left my network wide open, like a WIFI network without any Layer 2 encryption than I to as the property owner share in some of the responsibility for my breached network.
I push the keyboard. Dozens of computers all interlinked forward my packets over the internet, changing and mutating the form the information takes, but leaving the information intact.
so what, that is what they are there for. now when your packets get to the destination you ordered them to go to. a destination that they arent allowed to go. why isnt that your fault.
hell, if you let your dog off its leash and it tramps around a neighbours garden. you have trespassed. or polluted. whatever.
You believe incorrectly. Who owns the computer? Yeah, see how that destroys your view? If not, I suggest you re-read the sentence over and over until you realize that the computer is the property of someone, and that someone did not give the intruder permission to “transmit” anything. Nor was the intruder invited. Nor anything like that.
When you realize that, you’ll see how terribly wrong-headed you’ve been.
