Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: Alex Heney <me8@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 01:08:21 +0100
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 15:42:52 -0700, p0acher <2600mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On 19 Sep, 23:27, Alex Heney <m...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:04:03 -0700, p0acher <2600m...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On 19 Sep, 18:39, "R. Mark Clayton" <nospamclay...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
"p0acher" <2600m...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1190217874.929762.117270@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 19 Sep, 16:32, "mentalguy2004" <n...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
"p0acher" <2600m...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1190215060.078886.266090@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Section 1. Unauthorised access to computer material.......
I've done a lot of searching trying to find out of there is any
exemption for law enforcement for this offence.
The scenario is: If the police gain access to a non-public area of a
web site, i.e. an employees only link and use that access to download
company files or financial records we have a clear and complete
offence as clicking upon the link marked "employees" while knowing one
isn't an employee has all the elements required.
Is there any well hidden piece of legislation which allow the police
to do this?
Is their access part part of a crime investigation?
Moot point. Because in this case they were fishing to find an
offence, at the time (and subsequently) there was no evidence of any
criminal offence. Even if there were I would suspect that the proper
course of action would have been to get a court order for the hosting
company to provide a certified copy of the site, rather than what
amounts to "hacking" the site.
If they suspect and offence then searching for evidence is exempt from the
act.
Who is to say if "private" links are left open it is not intentional.
Ok, what act gives them this exemption? I've been looking for the
best part of a week and can find nothing.
Perhaps you should try using your eyes then.
It is section 10 of the Computer Misuse Act itself.
It took me 30 seconds to find that, and most of hat time was waiting
for the page to load.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Variables won't; constants aren't.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
Ok so what does this mean exactly?
10 Saving for certain law enforcement powers
Section 1(1) above has effect without prejudice to the operation-
(a) in England and Wales of any enactment relating to powers of
inspection, search or seizure; and
(b) in Scotland of any enactment or rule of law relating to powers of
examination, search or seizure.
I have hitherto interpreted that to apply to seized material. So does
this mean the police have carte blanch?
It has nothing to do with seized material in particular, although that
is of course also covered by it.
But if you look up the act on www.statutelaw.gov.uk, you will find
that the Act has been amended to add the following to section 10:
-----------------------------------
and nothing designed to indicate a withholding of consent to access to
any program or data from persons as enforcement officers shall have
effect to make access unauthorised for the purposes of the said
section 1(1).
In this section “enforcement officer” means a constable or other
person charged with the duty of investigating offences; and
withholding consent from a person “as” an enforcement officer of any
description includes the operation, by the person entitled to control
access, of rules whereby enforcement officers of that description are,
as such, disqualified from membership of a class of persons who are
authorised to have access.
----------------------------------
So basically, yes. It pretty well gives them carte blanche.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Despite the high cost of living, it remains popular.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: PeteM
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: p0acher
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- References:
- Computer Misuse Act
- From: p0acher
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: mentalguy2004
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: p0acher
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: R. Mark Clayton
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: p0acher
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: Alex Heney
- Re: Computer Misuse Act
- From: p0acher
- Computer Misuse Act
- Prev by Date: UK courts 'Open to all'
- Next by Date: Re: Wy are foreign workers not taxed like foreign cigarettes?
- Previous by thread: Re: Computer Misuse Act
- Next by thread: Re: Computer Misuse Act
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading