PDA

View Full Version : Briton Jailed - Hacked Top Secret Military Computers.



RyanDOT
30-07-2008, 05:18 PM
Source from BBC News.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7532713.stm

A Briton accused of hacking into top secret military computers has lost a Law Lords appeal against being extradited to stand trial in the US.
Glasgow-born Gary McKinnon could face life in jail if convicted of accessing 97 US military and Nasa computers.
He has admitted breaking into the computers from his London home but said he was seeking information on UFOs.
The 42-year-old's lawyers said they would apply to the European Court of Human Rights to prevent his removal.



Mr McKinnon first lost his case at the High Court in 2006 before taking it to the highest court in the UK, the House of Lords.
He was arrested in 2002 but never charged in the UK.
The US government claims he committed a malicious crime - the biggest military computer hack ever.
The authorities have warned that without his co-operation and a guilty plea the case could be treated as terrorism and he could face a long jail sentence.
A statement by solicitors for McKinnon, who was not at the Lords to hear the judgement, said: "Gary McKinnon is neither a terrorist nor a terrorist sympathiser.
"His case could have been properly dealt with by our own prosecuting authorities. We believe that the British government declined to prosecute him to enable the US government to make an example of him.
"American officials involved in this case have stated that they want to see him 'fry'.
"The consequences he faces if extradited are both disproportionate and intolerable."
'Computer nerd'
Their client is accused of hacking into the computers with the intention of intimidating the US government.
It alleges that between February 2001 and March 2002, he hacked into dozens of US Army, Navy, Air Force, and Department of Defense computers, as well as 16 Nasa computers.
.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gif http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/start_quote_rb.gif American officials involved in this case have stated that they want to see him 'fry' http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/end_quote_rb.gif


Gary McKinnon's lawyers

Prosecutors say he altered and deleted files at a naval air station not long after the 11 September attacks in 2001, rendering critical systems inoperable.
Mr McKinnon, who is unemployed, has admitted that he accessed computers in the US without authority.
But he has said he is merely a computer nerd, whose motives were harmless and innocent. He denies any attempts at sabotage.
He said he wanted to find evidence of UFOs he thought was being held by the US authorities, and to expose what he believed was a cover-up.
Repatriated
The Law Lords were told by Mr McKinnon's lawyers that extraditing him would be an abuse of proceedings.


Gary McKinnon talks to Huw Edwards on BBC News in July 2006

US authorities had threatened him with a long jail sentence if he did not plead guilty, they said.
If the case was treated as terrorism it could result in a sentence of up to 60 years in a maximum security prison, should he be found guilty on all six indictments.
With co-operation, he would receive a lesser sentence of 37 to 46 months and be repatriated to the UK, where he could be released on parole and charges of "significantly damaging national security" would be dropped.
But Clare Montgomery QC, representing the home secretary, argued no threats were made, and the extradition should go ahead.


http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44750000/jpg/_44750384_mckinnon_getty_226b.jpg

N-Dubz
30-07-2008, 06:27 PM
American officials involved in this case have stated that they want to see him 'fry'

SORRY BUT LOL

& the NASA deserve this anyways they keep all the UFO things top secret.

--ss--
30-07-2008, 06:33 PM
American officials involved in this case have stated that they want to see him 'fry'

SORRY BUT LOL

& the NASA deserve this anyways they keep all the UFO things top secret.
Lolol, far too much irony :p

It's their fault for having rubbish protection? If they are as serious about their security as they claim they are then he shouldn't have been able to get in. They should be thanking him, what if a real terrorist got in?

Spiffing
30-07-2008, 06:33 PM
OMG
GENIUS
GET HIM ON THE PHONE NOW
WE HAVE PLANS TO MAKE!

Dentafrice
30-07-2008, 06:37 PM
You do have to realize this was in 2001-2002, their security probably wasn't as great as it should have been.

I think he deserves what he gets.. if he doesn't plead guilty.

Mr.Sam
30-07-2008, 06:39 PM
he should be killed for looking for ufo information? bit harsh really.

Dentafrice
30-07-2008, 06:46 PM
And you believe him? He was looking for UFO information.. that seems like a likely story when he was breaching into US Army, Navy, Air Force, and Department of Defense computers as well..

I'm sure the US Navy and US Army keeps information on UFOs..?

Nasa and the DOD would be the two main services that would store that kind of information, so what is his excuse for the other services?

Mr.Sam
30-07-2008, 06:48 PM
Well he obviously didn't do anything with the information.

Dentafrice
30-07-2008, 06:50 PM
That's like saying, "Well he hacked into one of the largest banks in the world.. but he didn't do anything with their bank information.. so it's okay.."

No.. it isn't okay, it doesn't matter what he did with the information, he still did it/attempted it..

That's also like saying "Well he held up a bank, but he returned the money a week later. should we just let him go?"

Mr.Sam
30-07-2008, 06:53 PM
No those examples are wrong.

It's more like someone left a room full of information open, he walked in looked around and walked back out, then the room owner locked the room up after the man alerted them to the problem and decides to kill him, where as if the man didn't walk in an evil man could have and got information for other purposes.

Dentafrice
30-07-2008, 06:56 PM
But it wasn't just left 'open' for someone to walk in, I have to say your example there is wrong..


He has admitted breaking into the computers from his London home

Breaking into.. not just accessing, but breaking into, when someone breaks into a house, and walks back out the front door.. that is still breaking and entering.

Mr.Sam
30-07-2008, 06:59 PM
well it obviously couldn't have been secure if one man got in, I'll edit my example.

someone left a room full of information open with only an old rotten gate in the way, he broke the old rubbish gate, walked in looked around and walked back out, then the room owner locked the room up after the man alerted them to the problem and decides to kill him, where as if the man didn't walk in an evil man could have and got information for other purposes.

Dentafrice
30-07-2008, 07:05 PM
"Prosecutors say he altered and deleted files at a naval air station not long after the 11 September attacks in 2001, rendering critical systems inoperable."

Didn't do anything with the information? Hmm..

It doesn't matter if it was secured or not, it was still Unauthorized Access, which is defined as:


"Unauthorized access" entails approaching, trespassing within, communicating with, storing data in, retrieving data from, or otherwise intercepting and changing computer resources without consent. These laws relate to either or both, or any other actions that interfere with computers, systems, programs or networks.

It doesn't say anything such as "unless the computer was not secured", or "unless the user did not do anything to the information"..

The federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act states all of this.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/computer-hacking/

alexxxxx
30-07-2008, 07:15 PM
He shouldn't have been extradited because the US refused to extradite soldiers resposible for the killings of british journalists in Afghanistan and he didn't even commit a crime in the USA, he commited it here in the UK. He also shouldn't be extradited because of the USA's terrible human rights record with prisoners as they have been proven to torture.

The European Court of Human Rights will block the extradition. I hope.

Jordy
30-07-2008, 07:59 PM
I must say he makes me proud to be British. Everyone's saying we're no longer World Leaders in this and that, however this guy is a World Class hacker, kudos to him!

Leetzgirl
30-07-2008, 08:12 PM
Why kill him when top services can use him to hack things? :|

******s

N-Dubz
30-07-2008, 08:22 PM
he shouldnt be killed for there own problem, they should have had better security considering all the secrets the NASA have.

or hey.. maybe we shouldnt store everything on computers!!!!

Pyroka
30-07-2008, 08:51 PM
Why kill him when top services can use him to hack things? :|

******s

Well, theyre dumb aren't they. Not many great hackers around nowadays... Instead of killing him, sentence him to working in the CIA with a reduced payment scheme. Is that such a bad life?

GommeInc
30-07-2008, 09:38 PM
Killing someone for not doing damage? Stupid really, he shouldn't be given a lengthy prison sentence nor "fried" when he did no apparent damage. It could of been worse, he could of done serious damage.

Leetzgirl
30-07-2008, 11:43 PM
Well, theyre dumb aren't they. Not many great hackers around nowadays... Instead of killing him, sentence him to working in the CIA with a reduced payment scheme. Is that such a bad life?

I knoww.

Maybe they can have tighter secruity on that but still; i would work for CIA if i hacked the system.

Spiffing
31-07-2008, 10:08 AM
kay so wait
theyre all like oh no hes not a terrorist
but if a muslim in london hacked the computers
yeah he's definitely a terrorist

he is and should be treated like one.
theres nothing stopping him from gettin things and telling a group or groups of people that are terrorists what he saw which could lead to gaps in defense systems.

Jordy
31-07-2008, 10:16 AM
kay so wait
theyre all like oh no hes not a terrorist
but if a muslim in london hacked the computers
yeah he's definitely a terrorist

he is and should be treated like one.
theres nothing stopping him from gettin things and telling a group or groups of people that are terrorists what he saw which could lead to gaps in defense systems.There's no proof linking him to terrorist organisations though so it would be unfair to treat him like that, however you've raised a good point, I bet if he was a Muslim he would of been defined as a Terrorist straight away?

Dentafrice
31-07-2008, 12:58 PM
It doesn't matter if he is linked to a terrorist organization or not.

Definition:

One who utilizes the systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve political objectives, while disguised as a civilian non-combatant. ...

Which seems like he used the intimidation part, the political objectives is the whole UFO thing,.

AndrewByrne
31-07-2008, 01:04 PM
Its SonicMouse!!

Lol :P

efq
31-07-2008, 04:19 PM
YAY HES A TRANSFORMER

Jordy
31-07-2008, 10:28 PM
Its SonicMouse!!

Lol :PWAIT NO, FINCH HIMSELF IS BACK, LOCK YOUR ROOMS!

lScottl2
04-08-2008, 06:49 AM
The US Army/Navy would have info on UFO's.

longlyfe
04-08-2008, 08:40 AM
No those examples are wrong.

It's more like someone left a room full of information open, he walked in looked around and walked back out, then the room owner locked the room up after the man alerted them to the problem and decides to kill him, where as if the man didn't walk in an evil man could have and got information for other purposes.

yeh but he shouldnt have walked in, in the first place.. there was no need for blank password checking..

its like, trying the test every doors of peoples homes and see which one isnt locked lolz

Markeh
10-08-2008, 11:33 AM
Well, its Nasa's fault. They should have installed Norton :)

Want to hide these adverts? Register an account for free!