Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sbcs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!seismo!cmcl2!philabs!sbcs!debray
From: debray@sbcs.UUCP (Saumya Debray)
Newsgroups: net.misc
Subject: Computer break-ins: determining intent
Message-ID: <633@sbcs.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 15-May-84 22:06:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: sbcs.633
Posted: Tue May 15 22:06:41 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 18-May-84 00:48:43 EDT
References: <7733@watmath.UUCP>
Organization: SUNY at Stony Brook
Lines: 19


	> In many cases there will be clear indications of what the
	> intent was.  If no such clear indications exist, well that's
	> what we pay judges for.

While intent is one of the factors taken into account by courts in
sentencing, the problem is much harder for computer break-ins.  Once a
person has gained unauthorized access to a system, it'd probably be
impossible to say, later, which files he'd looked at: and the files read
might very well be the only thing distinguishing the "doing-it-for-fun"
person from the one snooping with malicious intent.
-- 
Saumya Debray, 	SUNY at Stony Brook

	uucp:
	    {cbosgd, decvax, ihnp4, mcvax, cmcl2}!philabs \
		    {amd70, akgua, decwrl, utzoo}!allegra  > !sbcs!debray
	       		{teklabs, hp-pcd, metheus}!ogcvax /
	CSNet: debray@suny-sbcs@CSNet-Relay