This legal crap makes my blood boil. You can mow down a kid in your car and get off with a fine or suspended sentence. But hack into a US set of computers and you're dead in the water. Truly.
I detect a certain, rather peculiar slant to his thinking here: most people who do mow down kids in their car certainly do not set out to do so. And I'm fairly certain that even though any person who did so who probably punish themselves more harshly for the rest of their lives than the CPS would, a fine or suspended sentence for a driving death is not likely to be on the cards. Finally, Mr Gold seems to have something against motorists overall: why leap in with the emotive example of an accidental, unintended death, when there are so many examples of young people being knifed or shot, or people being targeted by actual, malicious and above all intentional criminals?
And let's just back off from the emotive language here: McKinnon knew that he was committing a crime. As a consultant, I connect to many different systems, and military systems always get plastered with zillions of warnings about how you're committing a crime if you're accessing this without due authorisation.
Funnily enough, last time I looked, "wanting proof about UFOs" did not constitute due authorisation, even if the security was lax (and I'd require some serious convincing of that, too.) He's claiming that he did no damage, the Americans are blaming him for all sorts of shit. Somewhere in the middle is the truth, I suspect.
However, the papers say this:
Mr McKinnon had become obsessed with a theory that the US was using alien technologies to create weapons and “free energy”. He gave up his job and spent hours every night hacking in search of evidence. [You may want to remember this!]
He hacked into 53 US Army computers and 26 US Navy computers, including those at US Naval Weapons Station Earle in New Jersey, which is responsible for replenishing munitions and supplies for the Atlantic Fleet. Calling himself Solo, he left a threatening message: “US foreign policy is akin to government-sponsored terrorism these days? It was not a mistake that there was a huge security stand-down on September 11 last year . . . I am SOLO. I will continue to disrupt at the highest levels.”
He was caught in November 2002 as he tried to download a grainy black-and-white photograph that he believed was of an alien craft held on a Nasa computer in the Johnson Space Centre in Houston, Texas. [You may want to remember this, too!] He was easily traced by the authorities because he used his girlfriend’s e-mail account.
So, he definitely hacked, he left threatening messages after 9/11 and he disabled military computers. I'm struggling to find sympathy.
And what awful sentence is he facing? Because old Gold seems to think he's facing the death penalty or something:
If extradited, Mr McKinnon faces trial on eight charges of computer fraud. Each charge could carry a sentence of ten years in jail and a $250,000 fine. It is likely that he would receive a much lighter sentence and that, under a plea bargain offer, he would spend six to 12 months in a US jail before being returned to Britain to serve the rest of his sentence.
Given that this was the biggest hack of all time (allegedly), this seems like a pretty reasonable trade. The Americans get to save face back home, Gazza comes home and spends the rest of his time smoking weed and playing a PS3 at taxpayer's expense in some light security prison. And when he comes out, a lucrative career as a white hat hacker, money-spinning book deals, ego-stroking speaking engagements ... it all beckons.
The difference between Gaz (and Mr Gold) on the one hand and the Yanks on the other is that Gaz seems to think he has suffered enough. Just being caught and threatened with jail is bad enough. Well, folks, I think he's clearly committed criminal activities, he's confessed to them, he should stand trial and if he's found guilty, he should pay the price. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
Oh, those things I said you may want to remember? Well, have a look at this:
Mr McKinnon has previously said: “What I did was illegal and wrong, and I accept I should be punished. But I am not a member of al-Qaeda. I believe my case is being treated so seriously because they’re scared of what I’ve seen. I’m living in a surreal, nutter’s film.”
You reckon, Gary? I agree. The difference is, I think you're the director.
Anyway, back to Mr Golden Showers:
I'm really very, very, VERY angry about the McKinnon case. It's been badly handled from beginning to end. The Yanks will now get their xenophobic and misanthropic legal paws on a Brit and the UK government has done Jack for him.
I'm beginning to understand how Russia feels when it sees the Yanks swaggering around the Baltics. I hope the Yanks get their nose bloodied in the Baltics. It will serve them right for being the overbearing, hypocritical nation they are...
Me? I'm beginning to understand why Americans think we're self-important, overweening cocks who haven't got the balls to do anything for ourselves but go running to everyone else whenever someone stands up for their own rights. If Mr Gold thinks that a resurgent Russia bodes well for England, he's fucking wrong about that ... as well as everything else.
And if an American ever hacks Mr Gold's servers, see who does more to punish the guilty.
9 comments:
What a cretin! And I see he's whining on another post about how Best Western aren't too hot on security...
There is a valid underlying point in all of that dross about the inequality of extradition arrangements between the UK and US - as experienced by the Nat West three. If McKinnon was a US citizen who had hacked into a UK system, it is probable that he would not be extradited. Now, that certainly isn't right.
Silly old clown!
He's only using the nulab defence- after I've been caught, because I now don't mean to cause any harm and because I have just pood myself, no crime has in fact been committed and therefore "no punishment" is the appopriate response.
If you don't keep up to date with the latest changes in the, err, "law", how on earth can you stand up as a paragon of virtue?
Oh, sorry, you weren't doing that anyway, were you?
What Longrider says.
We ought to tell the USA to f*** off in no uncertain terms, and if they don't like it we'll employ McK as 'Minister for hacking into their f***ing computers'. And the NatWest Three for international banking supervision.
@Mark: I do agree with what Longrider says, but I disagree with you. :o)
The Americans are not to blame for the weakness of the British government in not getting mutual extradition treaties. The British government in particular, but also a large part of the British public seem to feel that if we play poodle to someone else, they'll give us a fair return on our behaviour. The world isn't like that. I bet that "asshat" [sic] Bliar didn't even ask for a mutual extradition treaty, he just gave the Americans what they wanted and didn't ask for anything back.
But if you don't ask, you sure as fuck are not going to get.
I'd be appalled at the idea of a citizen of any country being able to hack the computers of another country without any comeback.
The NatWest three were by no means innocent, either. It was just that the UK authorities were too incompetent to put together a decent case to prosecute them in the UK and so they also spinelessly stood by and let the Americans do their dirty work for them.
By all means, be pissed off. But be pissed off with the right people.
It's not the treaty which is the problem. AFAICS it is the extradition act, an internal instrument, not an external one - which means we hand over citizens on demand. So the treaty has no effect in practice, it is more like political window dressing.
Wiki (Extradition Act) says:
"...there was no requirement on the U.S. to provide prima facie evidence when requesting the extradition of UK residents, both foreign nationals and UK citizens, but as provided by the UK Act it maintained the requirement for the UK to provide such evidence to the U.S. in the reverse situation."
The court had no option with the NW3 - Parliament had already made its wishes clear. A request is indistinguishable from a demand if nobody is allowed to say 'no'. The only way to get round the act is to play the human rights card. Can't blame a guy for trying.
I complained to my MP, and he said that if ever hell froze over and he had a spare afternoon after sorting out his sock drawer, he would press for an amendment which means the evidence has to be put before a UK judge to assess probable cause before handing anyone over. I haven't checked developments over at Europlod, but that looks like it will be much the same thing; an instruction to hand over UK nationals, no arguments sonny. So I am not holding my breath for either party to start acting as if they had some role in protecting citizens and only handing them over once it had been shown they had a case to answer.
BTW, is it this Steve Gold?
@WOAR: You caught me out on a detail point there (which will make my stalker very happy!) but the principle still stands: it is our own government who has set things up in a way that diminishes the legal position of British people. It's still nothing we can blame the Yanks for.
And I've no idea if that is "our" Mr Gold, but it certainly explains the chip on his shoulder if it is. :o)
"If McKinnon was a US citizen who had hacked into a UK system, it is probable that he would not be extradited. Now, that certainly isn't right."
That's certainly true. And we know who to blame for that state of affairs...
"So I am not holding my breath for either party to start acting as if they had some role in protecting citizens and only handing them over once it had been shown they had a case to answer."
No, I can't see Dave's mob being any better on this subject, sadly.
GCSE Public Relations - sample paper
Q) Show, with illustration, how spin works. Mashed metaphors allowed. Try not to sound like a gibbering conspiraloon or Dolly Draper.
A) The NW3 case illustrates 'spinners at work'. They were successful in general, changing the focus of the story, which appeared spontaneous rather than directed. This impression is often achieved by the fact that journalists do not write 'a government spinner told me...' as they prefer to appear to have done their own research.
When the balloon went up, three unlovely bankers found themselves able to elicit public sympathy (bankers! I mean, how likely is that?) on the grounds that they were being crucified by America for the Enron crisis. They fought their own spin battle, successful in PR terms. It did not, however, prevent their extradition.
The papers all led on the asymmetrical treaty and how come the US had not ratified it - it even included people getting feverish about the US ratification process - which made it sound, on the surface, as if it was all about US imperialism and how can they be nasty to us after all we've done, special relationship, not keeping their side of the bargain blah blah.
Some law writers did try to explain that the problem was our own Act of Parliament which put that authority in the hands of foreign law bodies, but that's mere logic compared to emotional manipulation. The overwhelming direction of public sentiment latched on to the treaty. This did not prevent criticism of the UK government, but it did alter the emotional tone, allowing a reading where the UK government seem more like hapless victims of US dominance than a bunch of Judas hand-over merchants. The UK government did not have to do very much more than go along with this interpretation once it was framed that way in public.
So strong was that impression that, given an educated commentator who understands both law and IT, it still managed to get you to cast the debate in terms of treaties. While it doesn't fool you personally, people who read your comment may be side-tracked in to thinking: "it takes two to treaty". Actually, it doesn't, but even as they embrace that tar-baby, they are further deflected from the underlying problem - our own crappy legislation and government.
This is one of the ways the sultans of spin work. The nearest parallel is with hypnosis where a suggestion is inserted and pops up, unbidden, feeling authentic, and gets right past your critical faculties.
"Listen to me, listen to me - shoot the traitor now."
Post a Comment