3 ms·
Can you explain this any further? I am also inclined to believe Kaspersky is in the wrong here, especially given the publicizing of personal data from a custom
by willstrafach 9y ago
Can you explain this any further?
I am also inclined to believe Kaspersky is in the wrong here, especially given the publicizing of personal data from a customer's computer for PR purposes, but I am having trouble understanding how the Espionage Act applies?
- walshemj 9y ago"As it is currently written, the Espionage Act of 1917 makes it a crime to hurt the United States or benefit a foreign country by collecting or communicating information that would harm the national defense. It is also a crime to enter an installation or obtain a document connected to the national defense in order to hurt the United States or benefit a foreign country. Knowingly receiving classified information that has been obtained illegally, as well as passing it on, also runs afoul of the Espionage Act." https://www.rcfp.org/browse-media-law-resources/news-media-law/wikileaks-and-espionage-act-1917 https://www.rcfp.org/browse-media-law-resources/news-media-l...
- willstrafach 9y agoInteresting. That language gives me the idea that such prosecution could be very tricky, given the many instances of purported-classified information being relayed to press (In fact this would presumably apply to the information relating to Israel accessing Kaspersky systems and allegedly watching Russians exfil interesting data).
- Anderkent 9y agoHow is accidentally downloading a document and then deleting it immediately 'knowingly receiving classified information'?