Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Sys-Admins and the law.


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 Chris Cosgrove

Chris Cosgrove

  • Moderator
  • 6,432 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:01:52 AM

Posted 23 February 2017 - 07:43 PM

I see a Texan, Michael Thomas, is appealling against a conviction for "Intentionally causing damage without authorization, to a protected computer." on the grounds that at the time he was authorised to make such alterations to his employeer's systems.

 

The case is interesting because, if he wins, a lot of employers are going to have to re-think their IT policies and, if he loses, a lot of Sys-Admins are going to be looking over their shoulders, always assuming the facts as reported are correct. For the whole article see -

 

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/23/michael_thomas_appeals_conviction/

 

Chris Cosgrove



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 NickAu

NickAu

    Bleepin' Fish Doctor


  • Moderator
  • 12,879 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:127.0.0.1 Australia
  • Local time:10:52 AM

Posted 23 February 2017 - 07:54 PM

I can't see him winning, He was not authorized to willfully trash his employer's network, I totally disagree with what he did.



#3 Chris Cosgrove

Chris Cosgrove
  • Topic Starter

  • Moderator
  • 6,432 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:01:52 AM

Posted 23 February 2017 - 08:13 PM

I too don't agree with what he did, but the law is a very strange beast. And if the Appeals Court upholds the conviction I think their judgement is going to have to be very carefully worded.

 

Chris Cosgrove



#4 TsVk!

TsVk!

    penguin farmer


  • Members
  • 6,230 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Antipodes
  • Local time:10:52 AM

Posted 23 February 2017 - 08:25 PM

I can see his point... whilst what he did was clearly immoral, the whole "unauthorized" thing is just trumped up.

 

Sysadmins have the authority to do whatever the hell we like to our systems. Otherwise we wouldn't be able to do our jobs. We'd never get anything done if we had to ask for permission to make system changes.

 

It's a big heads up for management who think sysadmins are just glorified janitors. Treating us poorly can have much greater ramifications than just an uncleaned bathroom.



#5 bumping

bumping

  • Members
  • 37 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:06:52 PM

Posted 24 February 2017 - 01:23 PM

it's called, industrial espionage

 

companies should include something in their documentation stating employees must act i the co's best interest.

especially for broad reaching positions like booking keep and it

 

to many think they are owed and that's it's a single direction


Edited by bumping, 24 February 2017 - 01:30 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users