> the public prosecutor was scathing in his condemnation. Edwin’s actions, he charged, had been “malicious and deliberate” and caused “imminent danger to life”

> the public prosecutor was scathing in his condemnation. Edwin’s actions, he charged, had been “malicious and deliberate” and caused “imminent danger to life” The kid got into a network using a known vulnerability and all he did was send an IRC message from it and install a backdoor that probably had better security than the network itself. Deliberate yes, but not malicious and certainly not any kind of danger to anyone. > He could control 514 computer servers. He could even access the core router, the backbone of KPN’s entire network. He could see the data of 2.1 million KPN customers. He could block hundreds of thousands of people from connecting to the national emergency telephone line. He could redirect internet traffic so that people who wanted to visit, say, a news site, would wind up somewhere completely different. Edwin could do whatever he wanted and KPN wouldn’t know a thing. See how the word COULD keeps popping up, but not a single example of something bad he DID. I am currently sitting on a bus and there's a pocket knife in my jacket. I could stab the guy next to me. I have the capability and access. Are they going to send me to prison too? At worst what he did was equivalent to trespassing. He didn't steal or break anything. It's digital urbex - illegal only in principle, not because of any harm done.