Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: Cynic <cynic_999@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:23:29 +0100
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 00:56:51 +0100, Chris Lawrence
<news03@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>I don't see that there are any chances being taken. And coming back to
>my original point, I don't see how your advice is workable, even if we
>got around the thorny issues of what is meant by "published" and what
>constitues a "path" in a URL.
Why do you think it is not workable? As I have pointed out, it means
behaving no differently to the way that 99.9% of web users behave all
the time - because they don't know how to do anything different.
>> In this case, the reason was far simpler. The defendant openly
>> admitted that what he did was an attempt to access a part of the
>> server that he knew he had no permission to access. He made the
>> admission because like many posters in this thread, he believed that
>> he was entitled to enter whatever path he wanted on a public server to
>> see whether it granted him access. He now knows that the law does not
>> agree. And also that ignorance of the law is no excuse.
>You're confusing two separate things which should not be confused, and
>which were not confused in the ruling. One is editing a URL. The other
>is trying to access part of a filesystem which lies beyond that served
>by a web server.
Well, if you ever get accused, I wish you good luck in trying to
explain the difference to the average magistrate or jury.
--
Cynic
.
- References:
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: Chris Lawrence
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: Chris Lawrence
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: Cynic
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: Chris Lawrence
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: Cynic
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: Chris Lawrence
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: Cynic
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- Prev by Date: Re: Speed camera convictions drive the number sentenced in court to record
- Next by Date: Re: Speed camera convictions drive the number sentenced in court to record
- Previous by thread: Re: Computer Misuse Act
- Next by thread: Re: Computer Misuse Act
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading