5 ms·
I don't mean to be nit-picky, but if you make a router store data so it can do its job, then it is by definition designed to store data. Even of that is not its
by exch 16y ago
I don't mean to be nit-picky, but if you make a router store data so it can do its job, then it is by definition designed to store data. Even of that is not its main purpose.
Something as simple as the configuration files for the router (or a web front end to edit said config) would make it qualify.
The law is indeed not a computer program, but it does in general seek to be extremely explicit about everything it defines. It has to be. And in this case as well, it is very explicit about what defines a 'computer'. The way I see it, the judge did not really understand what a router really is (or can be). And consequently made an incorrect ruling that is likely to influence future rulings in similar cases.
This is one case where I am happy that one ruling does not require other judges to abide by the same ideas. One can only hope that other judges are more informed if and when the situation arises.
- SoftwareMaven 16y agoI think you have it backwards and the judge actually did rule correctly by ruling based on its intended use. A television processes data, stores data, and transmits information, but hacking a TV is not hacking a computer. If courts don't make this distinction, then the definition of computer becomes meaningless because everything becomes a computer.
- ugh 16y agoAnd that's why I'm glad that nerds are not judges (or that judges are usually not that kind of nerd).
- Someone 16y agoI am pretty sure this judge knew the router stored data; that is where the police found the MAC address of the person accused. Also, law is not explicit about what constitutes a 'computer'. All it says is: "Onder geautomatiseerd werk wordt verstaan een inrichting die bestemd is om langs elektronische weg gegevens op te slaan, te verwerken en over te dragen." "with automated work, we mean an apparatus intended to e used to store, process, and transport data using electronics means." The only thing explicit here is that it must be electronic; breaking into hydraulic computers is not illegal. All others are open for interpretation (is copying data from an input port to an output port processing? Is digitally storing configuration data really different from having hardware switches?) I suspect law will evolve nuances over time. For example, would an external hard disk with built-in encryption be an automated work? A SAN with built-in encryption? A home server? My guesses would be no (no real processing of information), no, and yes.