Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!netsys!daemon From: niu.bitnet!TK0JUT2@netsys.NETSYS.COM Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: re: hacker = computer criminal --- (argh) Message-ID: <185@netsys.NETSYS.COM> Date: 4 Oct 90 06:17:47 GMT Sender: daemon@netsys.NETSYS.COM Lines: 48 brnstnd@KRAMDEN.ACF.NYU.EDU(Dan Bernstein) writes: >>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? You'll have to explain the analogy to some of us denser folk. There's a rather significant difference between authorized security folks in a corporation spying on employees and individual employees acting as vigilantes spying. The NOVA program did not address this hardly subtle difference. >>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? Employers have no right to tap phone lines. There is both a technological and a legal difference between "tapping" and simple in-house monitoring. Further, as Stoll notes in his book, he did not have authorization for much of this activity. Nova failed to address these distinctions. The similarities between Stoll's behavior and the hacker(s) he was pursuing were ignored, and Nova treated the chase uncritically. Many of us have been critical of Stoll's a-moral chase and contemptuous of his irresponsible and one-sided depiction of "hackers." Some of us had second thoughts about the stridency of our critiques. One mark of intellectual maturity is the ability to reflect on past behavior and use the wisdom of this reflection to develop deeper understandings and insights into the world around us. Judging from the Nova program, it appears that Stoll has remains mired in the self-righteousness of his quest, and neither he nor the producers of Nova seem to recognize the affinity he and his quarry have in common: The obsessive games of both led to violations of privacy, ethics, and perhaps the law. Is it really permissible for Stoll to "appropriate" equipment and have Nova portray it as a semi-comedic scene? Is there really any difference between Stoll's "social engineering" to obtain numbers? How could Nova so glibly pass over the issue of privacy by making it seem a 'crime' that telecom people in one state wouldn't give out information on a phone line because the warrant wasn't good for that state? A few months ago I was feeling quite badly for the tone of a review I had written about Cuckoo's Egg. However, after seeing Nova, one wonders why Stoll seems to have learned virtually nothing from the critiques of his work? Anybody know if he got paid for the program, and if so, how much??