4 ms·

You transposed my text a bit. The "wrong" reference was to me webscraping journals via curl. I realize that sneaking into Wiring Closets and plugging in a lap

You transposed my text a bit. The "wrong" reference was to me webscraping journals via curl. I realize that sneaking into Wiring Closets and plugging in a laptop to get onto a privileged vlan isn't something sanctioned by the school. If I was caught, I probably would expect to get my hand slapped if I'm a student, and if I'm not a member of the community maybe even charged with trespass (though, I understand at MIT they dropped those charges) But if I was a student, I wouldn't (and didn't) consider that behavior to be "criminal." But what I find astonishing about the MIT case is that they pulled the secret service into the case (A) Just because someone was webscraping from a laptop and (B) Before they knew that the person doing the webscraping wasn't a student. If it were me in charge of IT - I would have probably just asked campus security to lock the closet moving forward, make sure there are locks on all the wiring closets, and replace the laptop with a sign explaining campus-security had confiscated the laptop, and please go have a conversation with them to pick it up - return of Laptop being subject to (A) Apology for slamming JSTOR, and (B) Return of all the JSTOR IP.

danielweber 14y ago
Please read the indictment. It wasn't like he walked in on Monday to do this and they called the police on Tuesday. They were repeatedly trying to keep him out, and he knew it, and he kept on trying to get back in anyway. This went on for months. When they finally had a piece of physical evidence they called the Secret Service because they could get the guy. And he fled when campus police approached him.
- waterlesscloud 14y ago
  They made a choice to involve the feds. This could very easily have been handled internally, and the result would have been effective from their viewpoint. Catch him using the same methods and give him a stern talking to from campus police, then not press charges. Pretty much what happened to people bending and even openly breaking the rules on campuses around the world for decades, if not centuries. But someone at MIT wanted to call in the feds. Make case hard and tough and send someone to prison for causing them inconvenience. This was a decision someone there made.
  - danielweber 14y ago
    They made a choice to involve the feds. Yes, because someone -- they did not know who, but someone -- kept on breaking into their network. Over and over and over and over. handled internally He wasn't a student. the result would have been effective from their viewpoint They kept on telling him "no" and he kept on going in anyway. It seems you think the 13th time they told him "no" he would have stopped, when he ignored the first 12 times. By the time you get to the police chasing someone through the halls, you have passed the point where you can expect to get away with "a stern talking to." (I shouldn't have to say it, but I will anyway: that doesn't mean that a Federal prosecution for decades in prison is the proper response, either.)
    - waterlesscloud 14y ago
      Whether or not he was a student has nothing to do with whether or not MIT could choose to handle it internally. And yes, I do believe that being taken in by campus law enforcement and read the riot act, so to speak, would have been effective. That's much more serious than the previous attempts to tell him no.
- ghshephard 14y ago
  I've read through the case - I understand what happened. It's just that everything that was described was the type of thing that my university had to deal with all of the time. People were always spoofing MAC addresses, trying to get onto privileged VLANs, and the Campus IT was always playing Cat and Mouse with them, and, in a very, very few rare circumstances where the student did something really stupid, brought Campus Police into the conversation. But Campus police was the absolute escalation - I don't ever recall my university calling in the RCMP (Canadian Federal Police, and municipal as well) to investigate someone doing the equivalent of what Aaron had done. I absolutely agree with Aaron's parents. MIT and the Prosecutor over-reacted, and, when the truth of the matter surfaced, failed to course correct.

danielweber 14y ago

Please read the indictment. It wasn't like he walked in on Monday to do this and they called the police on Tuesday. They were repeatedly trying to keep him out, and he knew it, and he kept on trying to get back in anyway. This went on for months. When they finally had a piece of physical evidence they called the Secret Service because they could get the guy. And he fled when campus police approached him.

waterlesscloud 14y ago
They made a choice to involve the feds. This could very easily have been handled internally, and the result would have been effective from their viewpoint. Catch him using the same methods and give him a stern talking to from campus police, then not press charges. Pretty much what happened to people bending and even openly breaking the rules on campuses around the world for decades, if not centuries. But someone at MIT wanted to call in the feds. Make case hard and tough and send someone to prison for causing them inconvenience. This was a decision someone there made.
- danielweber 14y ago
  They made a choice to involve the feds. Yes, because someone -- they did not know who, but someone -- kept on breaking into their network. Over and over and over and over. handled internally He wasn't a student. the result would have been effective from their viewpoint They kept on telling him "no" and he kept on going in anyway. It seems you think the 13th time they told him "no" he would have stopped, when he ignored the first 12 times. By the time you get to the police chasing someone through the halls, you have passed the point where you can expect to get away with "a stern talking to." (I shouldn't have to say it, but I will anyway: that doesn't mean that a Federal prosecution for decades in prison is the proper response, either.)
  - waterlesscloud 14y ago
    Whether or not he was a student has nothing to do with whether or not MIT could choose to handle it internally. And yes, I do believe that being taken in by campus law enforcement and read the riot act, so to speak, would have been effective. That's much more serious than the previous attempts to tell him no.
ghshephard 14y ago
I've read through the case - I understand what happened. It's just that everything that was described was the type of thing that my university had to deal with all of the time. People were always spoofing MAC addresses, trying to get onto privileged VLANs, and the Campus IT was always playing Cat and Mouse with them, and, in a very, very few rare circumstances where the student did something really stupid, brought Campus Police into the conversation. But Campus police was the absolute escalation - I don't ever recall my university calling in the RCMP (Canadian Federal Police, and municipal as well) to investigate someone doing the equivalent of what Aaron had done. I absolutely agree with Aaron's parents. MIT and the Prosecutor over-reacted, and, when the truth of the matter surfaced, failed to course correct.