> I don't think GP is in disagreement with you I am confused about how(/whether?) confused you are about what I said. > > > The officer's actions were unautho

> I don't think GP is in disagreement with you I am confused about how(/whether?) confused you are about what I said. > > > The officer's actions were unauthorized on a system he was provided access to. The CFAA does not apply here, because the officer's actions on the system were authorized. He did not "failed to follow the rules on a system he already had access to", he followed those rules, then separately did something illegal[see previous footnote] with the information he obtained in accordance with those rules. If his actions (on the system) were unauthorized, that would be a CFAA violation, even he was authorized to access the system in some other way.