4 ms·

MIT has a pretty open unofficial policy when it comes to trespassing, as one would expect from any school with a dominant hacker culture. People used to go into

by ericd 14y ago

MIT has a pretty open unofficial policy when it comes to trespassing, as one would expect from any school with a dominant hacker culture. People used to go into network closets, pick locks, go into maintenance tunnels, etc. There's a very visible/popular student club on campus devoted to this.

rayiner 14y ago
That doesn't mean there aren't limits, and MIT clearly thought those limits were violated here.
- tptacek 14y ago
  Which is something that apparently shocked Swartz. In fact, whatever the administration at MIT may have felt at the time, Swartz wasn't violating the community norms as I understood them. Maybe there's something sacred about wiring closets at MIT, but every other place there seems to be a hobbyist lockpicking playground. This is obviously a situation where the community norms of MIT have collided painfully with the policies of its administration. Swartz thought the norms would be controlling; he miscalculated: it was the policies that mattered.
  - marshray 14y ago
    Is there any evidence that MIT's 'policies' were anything other than made up on the spot? As far as I can tell it looks like "OMG! The attacker has changed his MAC address! We don't know how to stop him! He's stealing all the priceless research papers...call the DHS cyber-espionage defense unit for help! the packets are coming from INSIDE THE WIRING CLOSET!!"
    - danielweber 14y ago
      "Let's stop the guy who keeps on breaking into our network" is not "made up on the spot." MIT gives you wide power on the Internet. You aren't firewalled at all. I'm not even sure if they filter port 25. But you also have the responsibility that comes with that power. The fact that they don't wrap you in bubble-wrap doesn't mean you can't hurt yourself or others.
      - marshray 14y ago
        > MIT gives you wide power on the Internet. You aren't firewalled at all. So since Swartz was considered a guest on the MIT campus, he could hardly have been "breaking in" to this wide-open non-firewalled network.

by ericd 14y ago

rayiner 14y ago

That doesn't mean there aren't limits, and MIT clearly thought those limits were violated here.

tptacek 14y ago
Which is something that apparently shocked Swartz. In fact, whatever the administration at MIT may have felt at the time, Swartz wasn't violating the community norms as I understood them. Maybe there's something sacred about wiring closets at MIT, but every other place there seems to be a hobbyist lockpicking playground. This is obviously a situation where the community norms of MIT have collided painfully with the policies of its administration. Swartz thought the norms would be controlling; he miscalculated: it was the policies that mattered.
- marshray 14y ago
  Is there any evidence that MIT's 'policies' were anything other than made up on the spot? As far as I can tell it looks like "OMG! The attacker has changed his MAC address! We don't know how to stop him! He's stealing all the priceless research papers...call the DHS cyber-espionage defense unit for help! the packets are coming from INSIDE THE WIRING CLOSET!!"
  - danielweber 14y ago
    "Let's stop the guy who keeps on breaking into our network" is not "made up on the spot." MIT gives you wide power on the Internet. You aren't firewalled at all. I'm not even sure if they filter port 25. But you also have the responsibility that comes with that power. The fact that they don't wrap you in bubble-wrap doesn't mean you can't hurt yourself or others.
    - marshray 14y ago
      > MIT gives you wide power on the Internet. You aren't firewalled at all. So since Swartz was considered a guest on the MIT campus, he could hardly have been "breaking in" to this wide-open non-firewalled network.