Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: hacker = computer criminal
Message-ID: <20225:Oct319:48:5690@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 3 Oct 90 19:48:56 GMT
References: <4761@bone25.UUCP> <69148@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV>
Organization: IR
Lines: 22

In article <69148@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> howell@grover.llnl.gov (Louis Howell) writes:
> I was also disappointed in the way the show completely ignored privacy
> issues, both for the "hacker" and for the other users.  Stoll was shown
> making printouts of login sessions, tapping phone lines, and so on,
> without any mention whatsoever that there might be other ethical issues
> involved than "get the bad guy at all costs".  I expect gibberish from
> the mainstream press, but Nova usually displays higher standards.

Be serious. There are lots of legal issues involved, but it's perfectly
ethical for (e.g.) a corporation to videotape an employee in the hall if
they suspect that he's been stealing things, trying office doors other
than his own, etc. Do you see the analogy?

Sure, Stoll made printouts of every dial-in session; the corporation
makes videotapes of everybody in the hall. It's just not possible to
selectively record an event if you don't know when that event happens.

Sure, Stoll tapped a phone line---a phone line he was responsible for.
The corporation makes videotapes of a hall in its own building. What's
wrong with recording what goes on under your own roof?

---Dan