Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

BBC Profiles Extradited Cracker Gary McKinnon

Posted by timothy on from the well-he-is-pale dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The BBC has published a very good profile of Gary McKinnon. It discusses his motives and methods as well as raising the question as to whether he is a malicious 'hacker' or whether he was simply obsessed with finding info about UFOs and should be praised for finding security faults in what should be extremely secure systems. This should provided stimulus for some interesting discussion on Slashdot especially between us Brits and our American friends following the confirmation of his extradition to the USA."

19 of 315 comments (clear)

  1. Should he be praised by Scr3wFace · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There is a very big difference between finding security faults, and exploiting them!

    1. Re:Should he be praised by aproposofwhat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There is also a huge difference between the intent and the application of the extradition treaty between the UK and the US - AFAIK the US still hasn't ratified that treaty, so it's fine for US courts to extradite British citizens, but not vice-versa.

      The intent of the extradition treaty was to deal with serious organised crime and terrorism cases.

      McKinnon comes under neither heading, nor did the NatWest employees extradited for shenanigans over Enron.

      Britain should drop this treaty immediately, and refuse any extradition request other than for terrorist crimes.

      Please, America, take Abu Hamza and his friends, but a guy that has Aspergers, believes in UFOs?

      He's our eccentric, so if he's due a trial we'll do it here.

      --
      One swallow does not a fellatrix make
    2. Re:Should he be praised by FinchWorld · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Britain should drop this treaty immediately, and refuse any extradition request other than for terrorist crimes.

      Even at that, they'd just mention he "hacked" military computers and that is terrorism. Nearly everything is these days.

      --
      "I may be full of crap about this game, and I may be wrong, and that's fine." -Jack Thompson
    3. Re:Should he be praised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Especially terrorists should not be extradited to the US, because the US has a record of grave human rights violations against suspected terrorists and has been convicted of torturing prisoners.

    4. Re:Should he be praised by phantomflanflinger · · Score: 5, Funny

      Dat McKinnon dude should be damn grateful he a cracker, cuz if he were a brother his ass'd be straight to Gitmo bay.

      --
      shin phantomflanflinger
    5. Re:Should he be praised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The treaty is contained in this act.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extradition_Act_2003

      The UK has handed over terorists, hackers and fraudsters, yet the US is yet to do the same, Even with known PIRA terrorists.

    6. Re:Should he be praised by chrb · · Score: 5, Interesting
      It's very likely there'll be some fall out regarding the recent House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee Human Rights Annual Report. To quote:

      "We conclude that, given the clear differences in definition, the UK can no longer rely on US assurances that it does not use torture, and we recommend that the Government does not rely on such assurances in the future."

      This means that for terrorism crimes, it's very likely that extradition requests to the U.S. will have to be denied, since the U.S. carries out activities that the U.K. considers torture. And a "no-torture" guarantee is worthless, since the U.S. doesn't consider the acts as torture in the first place. At a minimum, expect this issue to be brought up in legal challenges to extradition.

    7. Re:Should he be praised by Tim+C · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not exactly; as I understand it, they're saying that if he pleads guilty as part of a plea bargain they'll go easier on him. If he contests it, they'll throw the book at him.

      I've never understood that aspect of the US criminal justice system; it smacks somewhat of deliberate intimidation - "make it easy on yourself, confess - or else...".

      --
      It's official. Most of you are morons.
  2. BBC Confirms It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The UK, as a seperate entity from the US, no longer exists.

    If US laws can be enforced on British soil, but not vice-versa, then the UK is a defacto part of the US. But here's the clinching shit in your mouth: with no representation. What's the point of a government, if the laws they pass mean nothing?

    1. Re:BBC Confirms It by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Well, that's obviously way off base because I'm sure the extradition treaty goes both ways

      You would think so, wouldn't you? Apparently American citizens have something called 'rights', which means they cannot be extradited without the evidence against them being put before an American court. So Congress have not ratified the treaty. It only goes one way: we bend over, and get no reach-around.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    2. Re:BBC Confirms It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      because I'm sure the extradition treaty goes both ways

      This gets discussed every time this story comes up: no it doesn't go both ways. The UK has asked for the extradition of people from the US on charges of murder and have been refused. When it's the other way around, but is just some nutter that guessed the Pentagon's admin passwords were password or some stupidity, the Brit is passed straight over. Also the actual treaty itself is one-sided: the US doesn't have to provide proof to have someone extradited, but the UK does. The treaty is not constitutional in either country.

      I'd whole heartedly welcome the UK as our 51st state. You want in? :)

      Am assuming this is a rhetorical question. Anyway, I don't have anything the average American, it's just the UK and US governments actions make my blood boil, as a Slashdot reader I can see I'm not alone. :)

  3. A disgrace by iworm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Gary McKinnon was foolish. Yet he now faces up to 70 years in jail.

    What angers me even more than the absurd penalties threatened by the US courts? The supine, wimpering acquiesence of the UK governmnt who will extradite one of its own citizens without evidence being required, yet demands no such reciprocal agreement with the US.

    Mr McKinnon should burn his British passport and go away from the UK to some country which still cares for its citizens.

    1. Re:A disgrace by langenaam · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hear, hear. I find it a disgrace that countries like UK and my own country (Netherlands) extradite their own citizens to a country with cowboy-law. The US will not extradite their own citizens; they have even promised to invade countries that hold american citizens (International Court of Justice).

    2. Re:A disgrace by 0a100b · · Score: 5, Informative

      The US have not just promised to invade The Hague, they have turned it into a law: http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/08/aspa080302.htm. I wonder what NATO would do if the US ever invaded the Netherlands.

  4. The BBC confirms it : by MRe_nl · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nobody intimidates the US government..

    Our TWO main powers are extradition, rendition and prohibition.

    --
    "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
  5. Too large to download? by omuls+are+tasty · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From TFA:

    As for his quest to find evidence of a UFO cover-up, Mr McKinnon has said that he found some circumstantial evidence online to back his claims, including what he said are photos with what he speculated were alien spacecraft airbrushed out of the picture. He said the photos in question were too large to download to his own computer.

    So he somehow managed to SEE the photos (without any alien spacecraft on them, BTW), but wasn't able to download them? Am I the only one to whom this doesn't make sense?

    1. Re:Too large to download? by gsslay · · Score: 5, Funny

      It makes complete sense.

      It's called perspective. He could see the pictures when they were far away because that makes them much smaller. But if they were downloaded onto his own computer they would be much closer, and therefore too big for it.

      I use this same principle to cache the entire internet on a USB key that I keep on the moon.

  6. Re:Crackers, Hackers, and Slackers by Tim+C · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about we give it up already and just forego the use of the term hacker meaning good computer nerd?

    I've been arguing that for years, especially as in my experience in the UK, a hack most certainly is not a clever piece of code; the image presented is of someone making a mess of it, much like hacking through the undergrowth with a machete.

    Besides which, you should attempt to target your language at the intended audience, and on a site like BBC News that most certainly is not the 5% of the population who know about the other use of the word.

    --
    It's official. Most of you are morons.
  7. Blame Blair! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Unfortunately, our former PM, the worlds worst negotiator, Tony Blair went and signed a bilateral extradition treaty with the US (the one which removes the burden of providing any evidence before extraditing) When the US refused to sign their copy of the treaty he just let it ride.

    Thanks Tony, bang up job.