3 ms·
Apply the same logic to using computers in an Apple store to launch a DDOS. You hardly have to change your argument, and yet it reveals how absurd it is.
by sorbus 15y ago
Apply the same logic to using computers in an Apple store to launch a DDOS. You hardly have to change your argument, and yet it reveals how absurd it is.
- guelo 15y agoThere are specific laws against launching a DDOS. What law are you suggesting he violated?
- sorbus 15y agoNeither of us are lawyers; we are not qualified to have a discussion of which laws he violated. I am pointing out that - ignoring the legality of what he did (I suspect the response might involve suspicions of keyloggers present in the his code, because I'm a bit paranoid) - your argument makes no sense.
- tptacek 15y agoWhat law are you referring to?
- guelo 15y agoDDOS attackers are charged under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. They charged one of the kids from the Anonymous DDOS on Scientology with "unauthorized impairment of a protected computer in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (a) (5) (A) (i), (B) (i)." http://secretdox.wordpress.com/2008/10/18/usa-v-guzner-plea-agreement-for-defendant-dmitriy-guzner/ http://secretdox.wordpress.com/2008/10/18/usa-v-guzner-plea-... I realize this is the same statute that they are going to come after this guy but they couldn't get him for impairment of a protected computer. They would have to try charging him for unauthorized access, but my point is that Apple is implicitly authorizing everyone in their stores to access their computers.