> > I read an article about p2p apps, etc and how Joe User > tends to share his > > entire hard disk which exposes virtually everything to the > outside world - ... > The same is true if they use Windows at home and surf the net > (Getting > infected by BackOriface and its relatives.) Disclaimer: IANAL This particular situation is, I think, a bit more troubling than BackOrifice or other malware that compromises a system without the owner's permission. It's my understanding that some of the most common cybercrime prosecution tools relate to, "unauthorized access", as this may be much easier to prove than other charges related to actual damage of systems. If a system owner intentionally installs a program to allow public access, and even if unintentional and through ignorance, offers sensitive files via that application, one could argue that any access of those files was not unauthorized, but was in fact expressly authorized - precluding prosecution for mere access. I think most people would agree that voyeuring though other people's files is ethically troubling, and misusing that information to commit crimes such as identity theft could still be prosecuted under other laws. None the less there could be a lot of damage and/or embarrassment within the law. Perhaps we could prevail on some of our list members with legal or cybercrime prosecution experience to weigh in on the subject... George? Mark? Dick?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Sep 09 2003 - 10:51:07 PDT