Slashdot Mirror


Are Programmers Responsible For the Actions of Their Clients?

Bobfrankly1 writes "Robert Stuart and his company Extensions Software are being charged by New York authorities, claiming he is promoting gambling in New York because of the actions of his clients. They are charging him after he rejected a plea agreement that would have him plead guilty to lesser charges, adding backdoors to his software, and using said backdoors to gather details on his clients and their customers." Another article on the case at Salon.

21 of 222 comments (clear)

  1. No. by Threni · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's no need to elaborate, is there? The analogies you conjur up in your mind are sufficient to tell you just how stupid an idea this is.

    1. Re:No. by NFN_NLN · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I found a similar story on another obscure website:

      "An anonymous reader points out the case of Saeed Malekpour, an Iranian-born permanent resident of Canada who worked as a web developer. In 2008, during a visit to Iran, Malekpour was arrested and detained by Iranian authorities on charges that he designed and moderated "adult content websites." In 2009, he was sentenced to death for "acting against the national security, insulting and desecrating the principles of Islam, and agitating the public mind." Malekpour wrote photo-uploading software, and in a letter he sent from prison, he said it was used by porn sites without his knowledge."

      http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/01/22/0354253/web-developer-sentenced-to-death-in-iran

    2. Re:No. by idobi · · Score: 4, Funny

      Let's sue Microsoft for Excel for enabling embezzlement

    3. Re:No. by Shoten · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's no need to elaborate, is there? The analogies you conjur up in your mind are sufficient to tell you just how stupid an idea this is.

      Actually, yes...if you know in advance that what you're doing is actually facilitating a criminal act. It's called "being an accessory," or even falls under conspiracy, given the level of involvement needed to write software specifically to do certain things. Here's the difference:

      1: Being a gunsmith, making a gun, and putting it up for sale in accordance with all laws. Some guy you don't know buys it and then uses it to commit murder; the first time you learn of his intent to do so is when you find out that he did it. Okay, you aren't accountable.

      2: Being a gunsmith, and being approached by someone to make him a firearm with no serial number that wouldn't be traceable because it'd have no records. He pays you in cash, and tells you he intends to commit murder with it when you give it to him. Yeah, you're responsible in that case.

      Gambling in New York isn't legal. Writing software to be used in New York for gambling is therefore committing a crime. Slashdot just gave this a stupid title, is all..the crux of the question is not whether "programmers are responsible for the actions of their clients," but whether programmers who knowingly and willfully contribute to the commission of a crime can be prosecuted. And they can.

      --

      For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
    4. Re:No. by anagama · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why not address the larger issue of why the government has to be everyone's mom? People will gamble. Some people enjoy it. Some people get hurt. The identical thing can be said for anything: mountain biking, ice cream, jogging, or french fries.

      How's the saying go? Canada got the French. Australia got the cons. And we got the Puritans.

      fucking puritans.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    5. Re:No. by russotto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Gambling in New York isn't legal. Writing software to be used in New York for gambling is therefore committing a crime.

      This does not follow. It's not particularly unusual to build something "for export only" -- to use a car analogy, cars which aren't street legal in the US but are street legal in other countries. And if you prefer booze, the Jack Daniels distillery is located in a county where it is unlawful to sell alcohol.

    6. Re:No. by anagama · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No -- cheating would be telling everyone the odds are even when they are not. Anyone who plays at a casino game is totally aware that the house has an edge. Those people aren't being cheated -- they're gambling. Now it would be different if the casino advertised something along the lines of "players have a 5% edge over the house" but the truth was the opposite. Casinos don't do that though so nobody is being deceived (and if one did, then yes, they'd be cheaters and liars).

      I get that you don't like that setup, but your personal feelings don't change the character of the act of gambling when the odds don't favor you. It's still gambling, just not the smartest type. Secondly, how would the house stay in business and pay staff if the games were completely even? Statistically speaking, that business would be a bad bet, and under your thinking, it would be the customers that were cheaters and liars because the customers would have a much higher expectation of profit than the casino that had to pay staff, electricity, maintenance and capital costs -- and yet would only break even on bets over time. Plainly that's a recipe for losing money, so a totally 50/50 game in that sense would be totally unfair.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
  2. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Are plumbers responsible for the actions of their clients?
    No. This is just as bullshit.

  3. Perhaps by CmdrEdem · · Score: 4, Insightful

    IMHO it all depends if the programmer knows that the client will use said feature/software for illicit activity. If the programmer doesn't know them he`s not to blame. Otherwise he is a partner and should be prosecuted as so, specially if the feature in question has the only possible purpose of illegal action.

    --
    This combination doesn`t exist: ETIs that know about humanity and want to see us dead. Otherwise we wouldn't exist.
  4. Re:No by LordLucless · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just their motions

    --
    Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
  5. Real reactionary by DarthBling · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This particular excerpt just helps to show how out of control things have gotten:

    The case began in February 2011, when Stuart says he and his wife got the Kim Dotcom treatment after about 30 local Arizona law enforcement agents wearing SWAT gear and camouflage dress — some of them with bushes attached to their shoulders to blend into the woods around his house — descended on his home and threatened to send him and his wife to prison for 35 years if he didn’t cooperate.

    The search warrant used in the raid said Stuart and his wife were engaged in money laundering, operating an illegal enterprise and engaging in the promotion of gambling. Stuart has tried to obtain a copy of the affidavit used to get the search warrant, but it’s currently sealed.


    Why yes of course, 30 Arizona SWAT agents to take down a husband and wife accused of online crimes in New York. Sounds about right. At the very least, SWAT got the right address and didn't shoot anybody's dog.

    1. Re:Real reactionary by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The plea bargain is the most disturbing element for me. Apparently anyone can be charged with anything, and then forced to do whatever in exchange for a plea bargain for lesser punishment. The US is a very dangerous place to be right now.

  6. Round 'Em Up by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seems that the DAs office in NYC should be busy issuing Arrest Warrants for manufacturers of Guns, Knives, Automobiles, Hammers, Crowbars and Household Cleaning Products.

    Ahh fuck it -- just arrest anyone who has ever made anything.
    We can't be too sure.

    I'm sure Duct Tape has been used in many abductions and murders.
    And arrest everyone at Google too -- how many murder suspects have been found to have used their site to help them commit their crimes?

  7. Wrong headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The real issue here is: Should software makers backdoor their programs for cops?

    Stuart showed Wired a plea agreement signed by former Manhattan Assistant District Attorney James Meadows, which stated that he would plead guilty to second- and fourth-degree money laundering charges and assist the DA's investigations by, among other things, "aiding in the design of software used to obtain records, usernames, passwords, and other information stored on websites using" his company's software.

    Illegal. Any evidence acquired by that software would not be usable in court.

    1. Re:Wrong headline by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      from the last paragraph of the first page of the article:

      “They made it clear that they would do nothing. I was expected to do everything, to modify the system to allow myself to get in to get the information they wanted,” he says. “Their whole intention was for me to retrieve information from those databases that were located in foreign countries. They were going to use me to get to the clients. But I’m not a hacker, I’m a software developer.”

      They want him to do it and give them the information, not create a backdoor for them to use. That way it's not illegal.

      Unbelievable. The correct response is for the countries in which the gambling sites in question, who are having their lawful business interefered with, reside to start taking retaliatory action - trade embargoes, expelled ambassadors, moratorium on extradition, closing airbases, etc.

      --
      FGD 135
  8. Re:No by Synerg1y · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Are gun makers responsible for how their guns are used? :)

  9. Jurors, do your duty. by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Asinine shit like this is why we need to maintain our right to trial by jury. If you're ever called to serve on a jury, please remember that when you do so, you are directly exercising the people's sovereign power to determine a just verdict of the case before you. A jury has the right to return a not guilty verdict if they so choose, even though the prosecutor and the judge will lie to you and tell you otherwise. Remember, you OUTRANK the entire government when you're a jury.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  10. Not the same logic by DragonWriter · · Score: 3, Informative

    So by your logic, anyone who writes FTP clients/servers, or Web Browsers, or ANYTHING that could be used for Illegal activity, then they should be held accountable?

    Your strawman doesn't represent GP's logic because GP said that the programmer should be held responsible if he "knows that the client will use said feature/software for illicit activity." That's different than knowing that the software could be used for illegal activity, even for something so widely used that that knowledge also implies knowledge to a statistical certainty that some user, somewhere will eventually end up using for criminal activity.

    And, frankly, it is pretty much the standard that, decades ago, when I worked in retail (at Radio Shack) we were trained to apply: if a customer told us something that made us believe they were going to use the product they were seeking to purchase for criminal activity, we shouldn't sell it to them, otherwise the we (the company and potentially the sales person) could be held culpable.

    There's the case where a purchaser goes on to use a product illegally and the seller is innocent, and then there is a case where a criminal purpose known to both the seller and purchaser is the whole point of the sale. Obviously, the seller, when charged, has a vested interest in portraying the latter case as if it was the former; there's a reason we have trials with evidence rather than just deciding criminal cases based on public statements by either the prosecutor or the defendant.

  11. The actual charge by DragonWriter · · Score: 4, Informative

    Good question, did he or did he not know what it will be used for?Or should I put, are there any evidence that he did know?

    The actual charge (rather than Stuart's characterization of it) is that Stuart and his employees "knowingly advanced and profited from unlawful gambling activity by engaging in bookmaking to the extent that they received and accepted in any one day more than five bets totaling more than five thousand dollars."

    Not that they provided software which the purchaser of the software used (with or without their knowledge) to accept bets, but that Stuart and his employees actually received and accepted bets.

    If Stuart is to be convicted, they will need to prove that charge to a jury.

  12. Send the DA to Jail by FoolishBluntman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think the plea bargain agreement(http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2012/12/Robert-Stuart_Plea-Agreement.pdf) should land Manhattan Assistant District Attorney James Meadows in Federal Jail.
    He is asking the software vendor to commit theft on a large scale.
    I'm not sure of the exact change, something like conspiracy to commit grand theft.

  13. Re:Kill all the authoritarians by tqk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The ballot box comes first and we're still on that stage.

    I'm not sure that's the wisest course. If a bully slaps you, do you slap him back? No, you hit him with a baseball bat! Didn't you guys learn anything from the Cold War?!? You don't negotiate with bullies, FFS!

    Too bad your govt. has turned into a bully. Whattya gonna do about it, huh?

    --
    "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.