Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!apple!snorkelwacker!paperboy!tonic.osf.org!mbrown
From: mbrown@tonic.osf.org (Mark Brown)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: hacker = computer criminal
Message-ID: <14455@paperboy.OSF.ORG>
Date: 5 Oct 90 21:40:26 GMT
References: <4761@bone25.UUCP> <69148@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <20225:Oct319:48:5690@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <1990Oct4.152821.3150@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: news@OSF.ORG
Reply-To: mbrown@tonic.osf.org (Mark Brown)
Distribution: na
Organization: Open Software Foundation, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Lines: 26


|> In article <20225:Oct319:48:5690@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>,
brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
|> > 
|> > 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?

I'm not even sure why this thread exists...Stoll was monitoring 
**the serial port** of a **computer he was responsible for**.
(note that Stoll was on the other side of the modems...)

The issues raised here seems to be,
"In the absence of an explicit policy or law(s) concerning privacy, is there 
an *implicit* right to privacy granted the users of a given service (computer,
or other)?"

and

"Given the above, are unauthorized users protected?"

----
Mark Brown   IBM AWD / OSF  |"Coffee for my breakfast, whiskey by the side
The Good     mbrown@osf.org | it's a dark and gloomy mornin',
The Bad     uunet!osf!mbrown| gonna rain outside, outside ---
The Ugly     (617) 621-8981 |              ...and the forecast calls for pain."