Slashdot Mirror


Randal Schwartz's Charges Expunged

After 13 years, Randal Schwartz has had his conviction expunged. In effect, legally it never happened. If you haven't heard about this one before, my take is that as a contractor at Intel, Randal did some over-zealous white-hat cracking free-of-charge; this embarrassed some people in management (he pointed out that their passwords were terrible) and management then chose to embarrass themselves further by having him convicted of a felony under an 'anti-hacking' law. More info can be had from the Friends of Randal Schwartz.

15 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Whither $68k? by Score+Whore · · Score: 2, Informative

    No. He got his record cleared. Ie. he can apply for jobs of a sensitive nature. They haven't declared him innocent. Jesus people, get a clue. He was convicted of a crime. He was punished. Now he's received a pardon after his sentence was fulfilled. It's fairly common at the state level. At the federal level, it depends on the president. Clinton was fairly liberal with his pardons. Bush is tight with his. Whoop dee do.

  2. Expungement is the sealing of a criminal record by viking80 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Expungement is the sealing of a criminal record so it is not publicly available. The consequence might be that you can deny you have a criminal record, but it is quite different from a pardon, which is forgiveness of a crime and the penalty associated with it.

    --
    don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
    1. Re:Expungement is the sealing of a criminal record by humphrm · · Score: 3, Informative

      but it is quite different from a pardon, which is forgiveness of a crime and the penalty associated with it.

      Indeed, a pardon cannot become effective unless you admit to wrongdoing - then you are "forgiven" and the penalty is dropped.

      In this case, he could argue that he never broke the law to begin with, because he was (albeit overzealeously) exposing security issues to his own employer. So accepting a pardon would be saying, "Yeah, I did break the law, sorry." In this case, he does not have to admit wrongdoing. In this case, Randall is instead being told, "Yeah, you didn't break the law, sorry."

      Honestly every one who knows Randall probably knows about this legal blemish, and probably don't care about it.

      --
      -- "In order to have power, I must be taken seriously." -Mojo Jojo
  3. Re:Ditto; FBI can still see it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    There was a PDF file linked on the http://www.lightlink.com/spacenka/fors/Friends of Randal Schwartz site states:

    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of the Court shall forward a certified copy of this Order to all law enforcement agencies mentioned in the Court's file, including the following:
    A. The Federal Bureau of Investigation, and
    B. The Oregon State Police, and
    C. The Oregon State Corrections Division, and
    D. The Arresting Agency, Portland Police Bureau. So the FBI can't use it against him. The PDF file is a copy of the expungement order from the court.
  4. Re:Who's Randal Schwartz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    This charming example of Perl programming appeared in the first two editions of Schwartz's book "Learning Perl", published by O'Reilly. It serves as an introduction to Mr. Schwartz as well. I kinda wished they'd left it as an appendix to the book, which is now in its fourth edition.

  5. What about Chip? by nuzak · · Score: 3, Informative

    Whatever happened to Chip Salzenberg? He seems to have pretty much vanished since mid-2006.

    --
    Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
  6. Re:If you're going to blow the whistle by Matt+Perry · · Score: 4, Informative

    I didn't realise this was blowing the whistle; I thought it was part of any good IT department employees job. That is to ensure all passwords, more so management passwords, are as secure as possible.
    He wasn't an employee of Intel. He was a contractor hired to do a specific job which wasn't checking for password security.
    --
    Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
  7. Great news by mgiuca · · Score: 2, Informative

    That's great. Coincidentally enough, I just became aware of Randall Schwartz the other day when I listened to the FLOSS Weekly podcast where they interviewed him. It was a good listen (as always) - he talks about this case if anyone's interested.

  8. Re:Ditto; FBI can still see it by bladesjester · · Score: 2, Informative

    A lot of the time, agencies (and even the courts) don't follow expunge orders. They conviniently "forget", so you have to hire a lawyer to follow up and make sure the court order was actually followed.

    --
    Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
  9. Re:Whither $68k? by merlyn · · Score: 4, Informative

    First, the amount in dispute was less than $5K. Second, the lower court just reaffirmed what they said before. In other words, no net change. So yes, I still paid roughly $68K in restitution, at the end of the day.

  10. Re:How's that for revisionist history? by merlyn · · Score: 5, Informative
    "His position at Intel was not involved in security, intrusion detection, or other areas that might actually call for "white hat hacking" as part of the job function.".

    Wrong, I was a systems and network administrator. According to job description, that's part of the job.

  11. Re:Congratulations by merlyn · · Score: 5, Informative
    "He installed backdoors at 3 companies"

    Objection! Assumes facts not in evidence, your honor!

    Sustained.

  12. Re:How's that for revisionist history? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    He was a contractor, not an Intel employee


    At Intel, the distinction doesn't even meet IRS standards. An Intel contractor answers an add by mailing their resume to an Intel address. They visit the Intel facility for their job interview. They are hired exclusively for the Intel job. They report directly to Intel personnel. Intel personnel report directly to them. They occupy Intel space and use 100% Intel facilities. Their facility badges may not differ from employee badges. They eat Intel food. They travel with their Intel coworkers on business trips, booked by Intel's agents. In many cases, the coworkers with whom they work most closely don't even realize they are not an actual Intel employee.

    They differ from employees in their benefits package and the name on their paychecks.
  13. Re:Legally Never Happened by merlyn · · Score: 4, Informative

    I never lost my right to vote. Only four states do that, not Oregon.

    I can probably still get out of jury duty, since I now have a bias about criminal convictions. {grin}

    I can't possess firearms yet. I have to apply to the BATF separately. I plan on doing that, but it's not yet in progress.

  14. Re:How's that for revisionist history? by merlyn · · Score: 4, Informative

    The password was "pre$ident". Yes, president, with the s changed to a dollar sign. Which "crack" found.