Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Dutch Court Rules WiFi Hacking Not a Criminal Offense

Posted by timothy on from the firecrackers-drugs-wifi-cracking-oh-my dept.

loekessers writes "Breaking in to an encrypted router and using the WiFi connection is not an criminal offense, a Dutch court ruled. (Original article in Dutch; English translation.) WiFi hackers can not be prosecuted for breaching router security. The judge reasoned that the student didn't gain access to the computer connected to the router, but only used the router's internet connection. Under Dutch law, breaking into a computer is forbidden. A computer in The Netherlands is defined as a machine that is used for three things: the storage, processing and transmission of data. A router can therefore not be described as a computer because it is only used to transfer or process data and not for storing bits and bytes. Hacking a device that is no computer by law is not illegal, and can not be prosecuted, the court concluded. "

5 of 234 comments (clear)

  1. Where is the line? by mordenkhai · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How many "bits and bytes" does a device have to store to be declared a computer? I mean, mine stores a password, those are a few bits, where is the limit? I don't know enough about the case to comment on the details, but it seems an odd thing to base a ruling on to me.

    1. Re:Where is the line? by cappp · · Score: 5, Informative

      The court's ruling itself can be found here. It's a little wonky linguistically and the frames are messy, but scroll down and you'll find some really interesting details. For your question it seems the court considered two factors - was it a computerised device (which the translation makes difficult to establish...seemingly could be read either way) and second, was there an intrusion which exposed personal data. Since the latter didn't occur it doesn't matter if the former is true.

      As for other details, the case involves a guy posting a threat - on 4chan - to commit a school shooting and apparantly hacked the Wifi as a little camo'.

    2. Re:Where is the line? by Idefix97 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've read the original article mentioned in Dutch, and the gist of it is really that it isn't illegal to simply use someone else's network (even when it is encrypted), but it would be illegal to start browsing electronic files in that network.

    3. Re:Where is the line? by kwark · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When you are breaking and entering someones wlan, you are not accessing these parts of the router. You are only gaining access to the transmission part of the device (AccessPoint), it's like finding a way to sneakily plug a cable into someone else his network (without tresspassing on his property). The safety of the other parts is not compromised (your not using the same passphrase for the default user of the device and the wlan, are you) .

      The law used to deter wireless hacking has the word computer in it. Using specific devices is always a big risk in laws with fast evolving technologies. A judge decided to formulate a definition of the word computer. I personally think it was a good call, though I don't want any unautorized access to my wlan myself.

      If you want to argue this should be illegal, a better comparison would be to compare it with stealing electricity.

  2. Re:IF this passed in the US... by cortesoft · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How is this different than stealing your car, taking it for a spin, and then putting it back in your driveway?

    Would you respond "Learn to install a better alarm and not allow your car to be hot-wired so easy"?

    You don't have to install an unbreakable lock to be protected from theft in the eyes of the law.