Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: Gord Deinstadt Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Federal Indictment of Len Rose Message-ID: <11002@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 16 Aug 90 11:07:23 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Organization: GeoVision Corp., Ottawa, Ontario Lines: 31 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 578, Message 2 of 13 >Access to source code permits a computer user to change the way >in which a given computer system executes a program, without the ^^^^^^^^^^^ knowledge of the computer system administrator. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >each program, are source code. Users who have source code are able to ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >see all of the commands that make up a particular program. They can ^^^ >change these commands, causing the computer to perform tasks that the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >author of the program did not intend. The authors of the indictment seem to think that merely posessing source code somehow gives one the ability to modify executable files on any system to which one has access. Since the indictment specifically talks about Unix systems, this is simply false; without the sysadmin's (root's) permission you can't modify executables in the public directories. In the case of "su", the executable file *must* be owned by root, so the sysadmin would have to be grossly negligent or act willfully to let an ordinary user alter it. This may or may not make a difference to the case against Leonard Rose, but it reflects a view of the world that ascribes great powers to those with technical knowledge, powers they (we) simply don't have. It's that view of the world that threatens us with the labels "hacker" and "phreak" simply because we program computers or read the TELECOM Digest.