[tlug] RE: Tlug Digest, Vol 19, Issue 53

[<burlingk@example.com>]

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 14:04:39 +0900,
"Josh Glover" <jmglov@example.com> wrote
in <d8fcc0800707122204j5195a389i9d3b7894d8155b59@example.com>:

> On 13/07/07, Keith Bawden <keith@example.com> wrote:
> > Ignorance is no defence in a court of law.
> 
> Ignorance *of the law* is no defence; ignorance of your home
> networking equipment probably is. 
<snip>
> I could not imagine someone being convicted of a crime because his
> Windows PC was owned and stuck in a botnet;
>
> not just your equipment being used. After all, in the US where owning
> a gun is legal, you cannot be charged with a crime if that weapon is
> used in a murder unless they can prove you dunnit. Or unless you
>

Actually...  In many states, especially those who are run by the
NRA, you can and WILL get hit with some sort of charges if your
weapon is left where another person can get ahold of it, and they
use it in the commission of a crime.  At the very least negligence.
Negligent homicide is a quite possible charge as well.  I am not
saying that there is no defense against it, but unless they can
prove that they took adequate measures to secure their gear, they can
get slammed and slammed hard.  And even if the legal proceedings
go no where, there is still the potential issue of civil suit. :/

Many states now even go as far as to requireing balistic testing
and finger printing of every gun that is sold.  That way, if the
gun was legaly purchased, they can identify it by the bullet without
the gun even being present.

Now on with the gun analogy.  In todays environment a network
can very much be a weapon.  Access to use that network is a liscense
to use that weapon.  Unlike a gun or a knife, there are different
levels of restriction that can be applied to this weapon.  The
question is, how much access do we want to give to someone who
might want to take hold of a network?

If it goes to court, you may get a judge that has no clue how the
modern world actually works.  Most people don't, so your chances
are pretty good.  However, a technically savy judge might not be
your friend in a case involving net crime.  As was already stated,
if we were any other group we could make a solid argument that the
network hardware is a mystery too us that the manufacturer should
have configured propperly.  There is a lot of presedence for blaming
the company who made a product instead of the owner of the item.
The modern court system is just that jacked up. ^^;