Slashdot Mirror
2600 publishes FBI's inflated Mitnick money figures
Mike Schiraldi writes "2600 published some letters they have acquired which were originally sent to the FBI by companies whose systems Kevin Mitnick had compromised. In a nutshell, the FBI asks, "How much damage did he do?" and they say, "Well, it cost us $10,000,000 to develop this application, and he got a copy of the source code, so he did $10,000,000 worth of damage." Now the government is furious, and is trying to hold Mitnick's lawyer in contempt of court! But the information that was leaked is supposedly public information. " Yeah-compare contrast the two letters. OK-maybe government intelligence is a misnomer.
that's what I want to know. if they can, there's gonna be a feeding frenzy.
People died in Gulags, you idiot!
Mitnick stole a trade secret. That's what unreleased source code for a proprietary product is. There are clearly defined laws regarding theft of a trade secret. Once the security surrounding a trade secret is breached, it is very difficult to prove or disprove where the information has gone.
We can ramble on all we want about 'open-source' issues. But the blade cuts both ways. If 'source code' is so valuable that an 'open source' movement is going to "liberate all of mankind" or whatever, then the source code Mitnick stole clearly has significant value. Value far above that of a released copy of the binarys compiled from the source.
It doesn't have anywhere near the national security significance, but it's really the same kind of crime as the theft of the Nuclear Weapons secrets by the Chinese.
Remember that companies exist to make money. If they spent $2,000,000 to develop or purchase a piece of software, then it was ONLY because they thought they could make more $$$ by selling it. If joe-random robin hood snags it and throws it out into the public domain, then these companies will have lost their revenue from anyone who would rather use a pirated copy than purchase a supported copy. In their eyes, and in the eyes of the government, it is no different from taking money from their wallets.
On the other hand, afaik Kevin didn't throw the code into the public domain, and it is arguable whether sales lost to piracy would even approach the numbers cited.
Most of us here agree that crackers aren't hackers and that they may not be the most upstanding, moral people out there. Nevertheless, when you hear about the details of the case, there is simple human sympathy to feel for a guy who has been victimized by the government. Sure, he did some bad things, but he didn't cause hundreds of millions of dollars worth of "damage" to anyone. At least 95% of those "losses" cited are entirely false. It's perfectly clear from those letters that the FBI specifically ASKED for false estimates of losses (i.e. based on TOTAL development costs, as if some jerkoff making a copy of the stuff for his own amusement makes the software worthless to the company). This guy and his ilk are not sophisticated sabateurs or spies, they're not trying to sell plans to devices to the highest bidder to enrich themselves, they're just immature people out to show that they're smarter than everyone else. Mitnick probably deserves some jail time... but does he deserve to have his civil rights violated and years in jail without a trial? If we claim to live in a civilized society, let's start applying our rules to everyone, even antisocial geeks.
You just don't get it. The law does not define right or wrong, it just tries to express it in a kludgy way. The fact is that what Mitnick did was a violation of the law. He does admit that, I'm quite sure. Just as the person going 80 MPH on the turnpike might take their ticket and admit that they were breaking the law. The point is, if you bothered to read up on the details here, that this guys civil rights have been violated right left and center, and the charges against him have been massively trumped up (we agree that he broke into computers illegally, but what is the value of what he stole? Is it HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS?).
In other words:
"We value our trade secrets, just like any other company."
If the source doesn't have immense value, the 'open source' community must just be flapping in the wind.
The theft itself doesn't devalue the software. The company only loose due to the theft if the stolen code is actually used in a way that reduce their revenues, or if they have costs associated to taking reasonable steps to limit the potential damage.
So, how long ago did you participate in your last lynching?
No matter what, that isn't the issue. The issue here is that the FBI and the companies have tried to keep secret that they've estimated the losses incurred way above anything reasonable. The issue is also that if the companies in question really believed to have lost that much, then their officers have broken several laws by not informing the SEC and their shareholders about the loss.
And if they have concealed those numbers in their books it amounts to fraud as well.
I think what is probably confusing the media and judges is using the term "source code".
If you substitude the term "trade secretes" then everyone would understand that no property was lost, just information improperly transfered.
And from a People's Court episode; if you leave the front door to your house wide open, and some kids walk in, while they are treaspassing, you are also partially to blame for making an "attractive nusiance"
"If that guy didn't only copy it, but changed it too, so that it isn't safe, then we'll need to recall the phones. But we don't know yet, so that's is a hypotetical cost".
If someone obviously has had access to the source, then it is a fair assumption to make that they may have had the opportunity to make changes as well. And if those changes make it into the product, then there's a very real cost, and a a cost that's a fair bit higher than just the cost of recall of some phones: if it was found to be true, they'd have the cost of a complete review of the remaining code as well.
That's a pretty confusing question.
"When did you stop beating your wife?"
"Have you stopped ruining other kids' science projects yet?"
"Does it reduce your feelings of inadequacy when you sabatogue the work of others?"
"Was it a bully in the third grade picking on you that turned you into a cyber-brat?"
etc. etc.
all good fun, of course.
Mitnick is a tech crook who got caught. Somehow because he's become a glorified cracker/hacker he's to get special consideration or ignored. He deserves all the punishment he's gotten and then some.
If this were a civil suit, all the details about amounts of money involved would be hammered away at properly by both sides and we'd arrive at a real figure. As it is, this is a criminal case, and the crime is clearly a felony wether or not it involved 1/10 or ten times the amount the prosecutor maintains.
Granted, the actual dollar amount of damages is a key bit of information that can be used to amplify or diminish the gravity of the crime committed, but it was a felony in any event.
The lesson that should come out of this whole discussion is that Trade Secrets are worth a huge amount of money. Far more than many of us realize in our daily work handling source code and hardware prototypes at our jobs. To say otherwise devalues the work that you and I do. And it's really easy for that to be taken as an insult by those of us who feel the work we do is of value.
he definately doesn't have the computing power to compile it now doesn't he..... :)
This is the same over-inflation of the value of seized drugs. The goverment seizes a couple of pounds of weed from a small time entrepenuer; and then figures out how many skinny joints could be rolled from it and then muliplies by the price that only a rich, desperate frat boy would pay and calls that the "street value". Well, in country run alternately by the likes of Ronny Reagan and Billy Clinton; what do you expect?
I'm sure the government did everything in their power to hold him as long as possible. Of that I have no doubt.
But 2600 consistently fails to mention that Mitnick had PRIORS, which probably contributed alot more to his lengthy stay than any damage assessments.
Also, 2600 fails to mention that much of the delay in getting a trial was AT THE REQUEST OF MITNICK'S LAWYER. Who's to blame here? Both the government and Mitnick's lawyer. The government threw such a huge wad of evidence at him that he would've been a fool not to waive his right to a speedy trial. Mitnick and his lawyer simply needed more time to read through the mountain of data.
Do I think the government has been making an example of Mitnick? Yeah they have. But people need to remember that he put himself into this position in the first place.
- Speed
Like, a person X walked into a badly secured office and took something, so they shut down the office for a week to install locks. I don't think X is responsible for ALL the lost revenue this causes.
Also, I don't understand how making a copy of some source code makes it totally worthless to the original owner (since they're claiming they 'lost' all the development costs to the code).
(As of this writing 4 years, 2 months, 24 days, 33 minutes xx seconds.)
I hate to burst everybody's pseudo intellecutual bubble about our system but that's the way it has always worked. We break treaties with indigenous populations all the time. Peltier is still in jail, Randal Adams was in prison for about a decade, and Al Capone was jailed on a technicality.
My message to all of you is to grow up. Mitnick agreed to have the trial delayed and it is all perfectly legal otherwise the ACLU would be all over the government's ass. Just because Mitnick didn't have a complete understanding to what he agreed to is no reason to have an outpouring of sympathy from a cyber brat. He placed himself in this position, and now he has to live with the consequences.
Sorry that you children cannot handle the reality of the situation. I've had friends who sold drugs and have had shotguns put to their heads that were held by cops, who stole there cash and their drugs to redistribute them.
I would hate to live in a country that YOU ran. The US govt is already to tyranical and Kevin's rights have been totally shit on.
I hope someday you have the opportunity to have the government run rampant over your rights.
Yes, all must be judged equally. That means that this big hoopola about Kevin Mitnick is overblown. He's had his 15 minutes of attention. There are many others with rights to defend also. Next, please.....
I'm talking about the Kevin Mitnick the crybaby, and the creeps who support him. Nobody else. The fact that 2600 is a bunch of lamers is just a side issue. Surely Slashdot has better matters to focus on.
One can't blame Mitnick for security loopholes existing; that's the company's fault, not his. Perhaps the company should be grateful he uncovered them before someone else used them more maliciously.
- The company ought to be assumed not to have any revision-control or backups for the code, so that they couldn't see if anyone (not just a cracker) had made any unauthorized changes, and/or
- The company should be able to assume that any security holes in their product would remain unexploitable unless someone had access to the product's source code.
The first case amounts to extremely bad software-development and business practices, and the second amounts to practicing "security by obscurity" (a scheme long since proven to be downright negligent). Either way, you are just apologizing for incompetent corporate drones who ought to have cleaned up their act for sound technical and business reasons even if Mitnick had never been born.And for pointing this out, you want to crucify Mitnick. While I agree the guy's not all there and deserves a spanking, being held behind bars without bail for FOUR YEARS is a gross violation of his most basic human and Constitutional rights. I sure as hell want him to have the full protection of the law and the Constitution, because if the gummint can do that to him without repercussions, they can turn around and do it to me. I hope you get just a wee bit of the kind of treatment being dealt out to Mitnick; you will become a convert in short order, as in "Liberal: A conservative who has been arrested."
The point is, if you bothered to read up on the details here, that this guys civil rights have been violated right left and center
No they have not. Mitnick agreed to have his case delayed, too bad that he didn't have it IN WRITING for how long it would be delayed. HE waived his rights. He also put himself in this situation in the first place. He doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Welcome to legal reality, he has no recourse. On top of all that: He was stupid to put himself in that position in the first place.
The govt should have not one single sheet of paper that is 'secret', it is the govt for the people so we ALL should have access to every single shred of docs for free. We do not live in a secret police state.??? or do we...
The day the nuclear war kills/wipes out most of the crap from the earth and lets the good boys survive will be a good day.
Yeah...
stolen code has ZERO value.
If Mr X steals source from Mr Y, then 1 week later, Mr Y still has that source too!!, Mr Y has lost nothing!!! pERIOD, now MR X cannot sell that source to the free market because it probly comes under patents etc.. and another legit company would not buy it since it is ILLEGAL, therefore its blackmarket value is also virtually ZERO.
The only thing you can claim is damages relating to downtime in staff or legal paper work done by company lawyers.
What a joke. Software development has value, a CD worth of sources files probly has little value , since by it self its useless, if it requires specific hardware and/or knowledge to know how to read it or understand its principles. Value is such a subjective figure, any way, why was those companies 'values' so round in figure? $75m?
jeez, why not $71,230,100.53 cents ???
Wheres the real run down itinary.?
The government steals from me every week
its called my TAX.
My question is, who has the movie rights to his story/crime/life and who is gona play his character? Keano? Tom Cruise?
Yep, if my 20 year old car that did cost $4000 in 1978, and now is worth $300 is burned by a moron, do I claim and charge him with $4000 or $300 ?
Even tho the car is probly beneficial to me in earning my weekly wages? hmmm tsk tsk
I'm not too familiar with this case, but I figured "breach of Constitutional rights, ACLU."
However, I cannot find anything about the ACLU taking interest in this case? Is there anyone out there who knows if I'm just blind or if the ACLU's staying out of it for some reason or what?
It realy doesn't matter if he redistributed it or not. If Mitnick says he didn't redistribute and no damage can be proven, then what difference does it make ??
Do YOU have a copy ??? How do we know that for sure ?? Does it realy matter ??
Please forgive me for not being up to date on the Mitnick case, but I wonder what happened to the source code he stole. Did he ever release it to anyone?
Sorry, but that is not how intellectual property theft works. When someone steels the knowledge of how something is developed (be it source code, the formula for coke, or the formula for a new drug) the valuation that is applied is the cost of development. The only other valuation available is the future revenue that the product would generate, but because that is speculative it is inadmissable in court.
AFAIK, Kevin did not post the information he gathered, the actual loss was minimal and mostly PR based (companies don't want ppl to know that they have been compromised). The colataral damage from his snooping was minimal.
If on the other hand, someone steels the formula for a new drug and posts it to usenet/slashdot/irc/whatever, then the company's valuation is damaged and must be reported to SEC and shareholders. Patten law might be the only thing to save them, but the corporate intelligence that company X is this close/far to a treatment could be devastating.
Intellectual property law is very complex. Don't assume that the tidbits of information that we have gives the full picture of the situation.
If the theft causes reduced revenue, then the loss would again affect the balance.
Any other kind of loss here would probably be related to time to market issues, or the cost of a review process to ensure that no changes had been made to the code etc. In those cases too, the cost would show up on the balance as a lot higher than without the cost.
In any case, any "loss" resulting from the theft of the source will either be entirely ficticious, or show up on the balance sheet.
So either these companies have lied to the FBI, or they have neglected to inform their shareholders about an issue with substantial impact on their revenues or results for the following quarter or quarters. In that case, I bet the SEC would love to talk to them...
There is no way in hell someone could get off break-and-enter charges by claiming "I was just curious to see what that guy living at 4 Holyrood Avenue in Oakville had in his house". If you break into any of my computers and I find out, I *WILL* charge you with whatever laws are applicable. My computers are **PRIVATE PROPERTY**. They aren't there for your amusement or your education.
Just because you claim the sob story of not being able to afford Unix (which is BS too, where do you get the money to pay for the HARDWARE to run that proprietary Unix? Or do you steal that too?) does not give you the right to steal property from others or to break into their computers.
And by the way, Oakville Ontario is not a "small town". It's got a significant population of generally very well off people. In fact the address you list in your resume appears to be a lakefront property in a VERY well to do neighborhood... probably worth a million or two. Something tells me you don't own this house yourself. The term "script kiddie" comes to mind...
Yes, Mitnick has been treated badly by government and corporate assholes, but to make the claim that breaking into people's private computers is "OK" because you are poor or because you didn't do any damage is complete and utter bull. The notion that I am only mad because you outsmarted me is also complete BS for the very same reason. People shouldn't have to be experts at security in order to keep what they do on their computers safe from anti-social self-important geeks like you. Similarily people shouldn't have to be black belts in karate to keep thugs from mugging them in the street.
For a community (the "open source" community) that always guards vigorously against misuse of the word 'hacker' to pay so much attention to the plight of a 'cracker' like Kevin Mitnick is startling.
The man is a cracker. If you look at 2600 magazine sometime, you will find that it's simply a stew of scripts and sub-literate schematic diagrams. Mitnick isn't a technical wizard by any stretch of the imagination. People like him have this technique called "human engineering" that they use- it's also known as "lie to people in any way necessary to get them to tell you their password." Think about what people like him represent next time you're nervous about paying for an online transaction with your credit card.
The whole romantic notion of the 'electronic bandit' is badly in need of updating. I've looked at some of the virus newsletters and the supposed 'virus source code' they contain. Mostly I have found debug scripts (basically similar to UUencoding- hex dumps of the object code for virii). It's very unimpressive and makes it apparent that most virus distributors are simply the electronic equivalent of a snotty nosed 5 year old kid spreading a cold virus at kindergarten.
The "true believers" in Mitnick will read this and just fume, or ignore it. The rest of you, think about it a bit and reflect on wether you want anything to do with the likes of Mitnick.
[devil's advocate mode: on]
Both of the examples you gave were for physical things that were stolen. Money and a MP3 player. While the felony robbery for $20 would carry a high sentence (primarily for the "assualt with a deadly weapon" aspect) not much in material damages was done. Emotional distress may apply here, having a gun in your face would not be fun. The MP3 player you were going to market is a bit closer to what is claimed. However, to be really accurate make it the MP3 player DESIGN. The schematics and source code. And let's say they broke into your computer and downloaded your CAD and C files.
Now we're close.
OK. He had stolen property. That I will agree with. However, as you sated, the penality for that should relate to the damage caused by stealing that property. This really isn't "stealing" in the traditional sense. It is copying. The rightfull owner still has full use of the property in question (unless he deleted the files after downloading). So, the only damage caused is that there is now a copy of your source/designs/etc. out there running arround. Oh, and maybe the fact that a password has been comprimised. Change the passwords and add 5 minutes worth of time for each employee at thier respective hourly rate to the damages bill.
Now. How is one person having a copy of your code damaging you? Can you prove monetary damage from that copy EXISTING? Remember, as the prosecution you must prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that there was damage, and how much damage. Of course, given some of the stuff I've heard about how this guy has been treated by the government I wouldn't be surprised to see them ignore the law. There have been murders treated better in our criminal justice system.
Now we must consider the distribution of the code in question. Was it distributed? To whom? Were they just friends of the accused? Competitors of the victim? Posted on the internet? Let's assume that the value of the code is basicly what it would go for in the stores as a binary. It's worth is the price of the compiled product on the store shelf. A bit simplistic, but for the sake of discussion... So anyone he gave a copy to has priated the program and as the distributor he is responsible. I doubt that figure is in the hundreds of millions. If it was a competitor, then there may be more to consider.
[devil's advocate mode: off]
I don't agree with what he did, but the figures quoted are rediculous if all he did was make a copy, which is what I've heard. I'm not following the case, so I may well be wrong. If all he did was copy some data, breaking and entering would be a better charge. And the bail should have been reasonable and available to him. I've heard he keeps firing lawyers and simply couldn't make bail, but that it was very high. If he's still in prison because he didn't/couldn't make a reasonable bail, he has no right to complain. If he keeps firing lawyers so the court has to keep moving his trial date back, he has no right to complain that he didn't get a speedy trial. As long as the court had set a reasonable date for the trial before the firing of the lawyer.
This is all based on my basic understanding of the case and I've tried to present differing viewpoints for the reader to consider. As usuall, check the facts, I might be very wrong.
Kevin Mitnick made personal copies of a whole lot of closed source code without permission.
Was this right, legal or ethical? of course not, but this does not mean that the damages are equal to the cost of the development, unless of course he had destroyed all the working copies of the source code or had sold it to an unscrupulous competitor who somehow managed to clone the software and release it without anybody realizing that it's identical.
Personally I think the companies should have to pick one side or another. Either they took a major loss, which should be accountable to the SEC and be able to be listed in their financials, or they didn't.
You can't be half pregnant.
Yup, he deserves to have the law land on him.
What he doesn't deserve is to have the government
make an "example" of him; nobody deserves to be
treated differently under our justice system just
because they happen to be one of the first to
commit (or be caught for) a specific violation.
Mitnick deserves to go to jail and pay a pretty
big fine after recieving a speedy trial and being
found guilty under the same system that would try
his neighbor if they got caught stealing car
stereos. That's not what's happening here.
Our justice system isn't as blind as we like to
pretend it is.
----
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
If someone steals your car today, you have a loss of the value of the car. If the police catch the guy the next week, and you get your car back, you now have a gain of the value of the car, and your actual damages should just be the costs of the inconvenience. Your bottom-line doesn't involve the value of the car at all. But the thief should be charged depending on the actual value of the car.
In the case of the companies, their bottom line may not have been affected much, but Mitnick still stole objects valued at many millions of dollars. He should not be liable for the value -- he should be liable for the loss.
The slashdot description wasn't written by anyone at slashdot. Notice the quotes; they are just repeating the story that someone has sent in. Don't blame slashdot for spin they haven't even created.
Heh. If the Windows 2000 source code was actually stolen, it'd be invaluable to Bill. He'd have a decent excuse for the delays in NT5 other than "We can't program worth sh*t"...
:)
Just like Apple and Copland, this will set Microsoft back some, and they'd love to have something decent to blame besides themselves.
In Mitnick's case, the government is still looking for a scapegoat. All of this already happened in The Hacker Crackdown of 1990, stupid public documents were overvalued then. Today, people don't understand what "stolen" means.
Mitnick has always been an annoying dude, but never a 'dangerous hacker'... I just wish he'd grown out of it earlier for his sake, or at least learned not to get caught.
All the really famous 'hackers' are famous because they got caught, which is pitiful. The only real hackers amongst them were probably RTM (since The Internet Worm was basically an accident) and maybe some of the real virus writers like The Dark Avenger, but they never got really famous.
However, I still have much sympathy for Mitnick. No matter how stupid he acted, he still hasn't acted stupider than our government has in handling this. They were so paranoid about giving him *anything* electronic, thinking that he was MacGuyver or something. He should be recompensed for the stupidity he had to endure.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
The actual value of the source code is not in question. The question is did the company actually loose the entire value of the software as a result of Mitnick, and if so, why didn't they feel the need to share that information with their stockholders.
The more likely scenario is that the companies ACTUALLY regarded Mitnick's actions as effective theft of a single source license (which costs considerably less than the development cost) and thus were not required to report it to their stockholders. The problem is, they cannot then re-valuate the loss for the purpose of Mitnick's trial. That would amount to fraud.
An equivilant situation would be I allow a business associate to use time on my computer as a professional courtesy and value it as a $50 rental (for accounting purposes), but then write off the entire cost of the computer on my taxes. Guess who would be in for an audit?
Sure, and the companies would be within their rights to claim that, and the greater loss it implies, but then they are obligated to report the loss to their stockholders. They reported no such loss. Either way, there's a problem.
OK, so we know that companies report losses/gains in financial reports under GAAP rules, but do those rules apply as a standard in our (US) criminal or civil litigation system?
Everyone is all over the board with the Mitnik thing, and I'm not sure I've gotten enough reliable information to make a personal judgement on it, but I hope the parties involved all realize this kind of accounting as relatively useless for establishing damages. As far as 2600 using it as a reason for his being held without bail seems kind of silly though. *shrug*
Pax -- Ob
Of course not! So why should anyone else!
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
This government-sponsored scapegoating is ridiculous. Fine, all you self-righteous people think cracking systems is the worst thing any hacker can do. Well, for myself, and a great deal of my friends, it was crucial. Living in a small town, you're not exactly handed copies of UNIX to learn from, and you won't see a network, that's for sure. Cracking is a learning tool. Few of us ever did any damage. So get off it. As for the 'damages', considering that the stolen source code wasn't exactly STOLEN, seeing as the companies still had their copy, it was more like a photocopy, which is hardly 10,000,000 dollars worth of theft. You guys can discount cracking, and condemn in a holier-than-thou fashion, but we're not criminals, we're just curious parties. And lest we forget, Mitnick's greatest crime, and the one they'll never forgive him for, is the fact that he outsmarted people. Read the Manifesto (1986)
----------------- "I have a bone to pick, and a few to break." - Refused -------------------
I guess if I steal a Ford Escort from the production lines of one of thier factories, I'd owe them a few hundred million for the development costs. This is absurd. If he had sold the source to a commpetitor, they might be able to claim damages, but all he did was created a copy. Most of these companies grant licences for the source code, which while expensive, it's definitely NOT a loss of the dev. cost.
Lawyers don't know squat about software. They just know how to twist the right analogies to impress judges.
Crackers or Mitnick? Did Mitnick create sub-literate schematic diagrams? Does Mitnick contribute poorly written scripts to 2600? Does Mitnick have anything to do with 2600 at all? Turning "guilt by association" into "guilt by no association" is kind of stretching it if you ask me.
Kevin Mitnick the crybaby? He hasn't said much more than "Hi" in recent memory. I hate 2600 too, but once again: KEVIN MITNICK IS NOT 2600. KEVIN MITNICK HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH 2600.
You have to distinguish between actual damages and potential damages. That's why there's a big difference between driving irresponsibly and getting a traffic citation, and driving irresponsibly, causing a major accident, and killing several innocent victims. One is a misdemeanor, and the other gets you hard time in the slammer.
Fuck the lawyers. Well, maybe not.
BTW, I have that Dilbert cartoon, framed and hanging on the wall of my cell^H^H^Hubicle.
"The only good windmill is a tilted windmill."
There is no middle ground here. Companies are being asked by the government "how much damage did Mitnick do?", they reply "The development costs were $xx Million."
I don't think it is the company's fault that the government can't tell the difference between development costs and damages.
2600 does have a point. The damages held against Mitnick should at least be reflected by losses presented at shareholder's meetings. I don't know this for a fact, but from what is presented, it seems as though Mitnick's damages only exist in the minds of management. The accountants don't seem to even know that $xx Million somehow dissapeared.
If Mitnick sold the information to a competing company, or posted the soruce code publicly... clearly comprimising the company's ability to turn a profit from its intellectual property, then I could understand the dollar figures.
I don't believe he ever did anything of the sort though.
If those figures -- loss of uninsured and poorly guarded intellectual property -- were made public, I know I would take my money out of the company.
It seems as though these are all potential losses. By the time Mitnick is out of prison, the IP will only be worth a tiny fraction of these numbers.
This too applies to Nokia. If they did not report the losses, they should not be reporting the 'property' as lost or stolen.
Seriously, pretty close to nothing. Do you really think somebody who would have bought a copy of Windoze would not because they can now get a "free copy compiled from the source". They can get a free copy now (just copy it off another Windoze machine), and much better and more reliable than some source compilation that may not exactly match MS's distribution, and certainly does not contain any bug fixes made since the code was stolen.
And the code can be looked at by people writing WINE, but that is illegal, the code was stolen. Nobody legit would dare go near it, in fact it is possible to see the source code now (many universities and companies have it under NDL) and using that for products is illegal as well, so there is not loss right now.
My conclusion is that stolen source code is worth almost exactly zero.
Like if someone steels your car and then returns it intact. Losses zero, value of stolen stuff potentially huge.
Bah.. too many stupid comments for one thread.
--
Pirkka
There's a problem with your hypothetical MP3 player example. The hypothetical thief stole the player, yes. But he then SOLD it.
As far as I recollect, Kevin Mitnick never sold ANYTHING to ANYBODY. So how can product standards be compromised?
The companies knew that someone out there had copies of the code and important documents. The hole has been sealed nigh-on FOUR YEARS now. Ask Mitnick himself. He never sold any of it.
Ask the government! All Mitnick really did was horde information to get his own jollies.
Since industrial espionage (stealing the code with intent to use it or redistribute it for gain of any sort) did NOT take place, Mitnick should be charged in the same manner as if he'd stolen one of these phones off the shelf at a store, or stolen a copy of Solaris off a shelf somewhere.
Until I see Mitnick Unix 2.whatever that's 100% Solaris 2.whatever compatible, I will hold this opinion.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
One problem. The US doesn't sell nukes to the Chinese!
You also are taking the argument off on an irrelvant tangent.
Source code is valuable to the writer because:
Source code is also valuable to the user for the first two reasons as well.
If Mitnick had actually sold/distributed the information. Then there might be some way to justify PART of the development cost being compromised.
But since they STILL had copies of their own source code, what actual damage did they accrue? They're still able to utilize the code, bugtrack, and refine it.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
But here I think you may have missed a valuable point: we must defend to the death the rights of our citizens. Period. We have to stand up for every dirtbag, every sKript kiddie, and every wannabe who thinks he can 'hack the planet'. We cannot allow unpopular people to be persecuted or have their rights taken away, no matter what we feel about being associated with them. We will lose our freedoms bit by bit and piece by piece to a large faceless all-powerful government if we dare not.
When all computer experts are viewed with suspicion, when false evidence is arrayed against us, and ludicrous false trials are held to condemn us, who will stand up for our rights? I'm not saying that these things are necessarily happening to Kevin Mitnick, or that they aren't, but as Americans, we must, absolutely must defend his rights as vigorously as we would defend, o say, Linus Torvalds.
You cannot arbitrarily decide who deserves justice and who does not. We all have a right to fair judgement under the law, and must all be judged equally.
Check my Go-related blog for beginners: DGD
Hmm, so their phones aren't secure if the source code is revealed. Sounds like their own fault to me. Sounds like the people writing the security software don't know what they're doing, right? ("Security through obscurity" is well-known to be ineffective protection-- search on that phrase for more info.)
If this is how Fujitsu's products work, I'll start advising security-conscious people not to buy Fujitsu.
James
But if he stole it, he can't do anything legal with it anyway. It seems the same as breaking the license terms to me, except that you would go about prosecution differently...
Now this is priceless:
> Additionally, attached is a worksheet showing what it would (will) cost
> FNTS to recall the PCX phones in the marketplace if the source code has
> been compromised or is not safe.
> GRAND TOTAL $5,517,389.61
(Melanie W. Scofield, Corporate Counsel Fujitsu)
In other words, "since our code sucks so bad that anyone who sees it will
instantly see blatant exploitable security holes, and since this is of course
not *our* responsibility but that of the irresponsible person who looked at
the code, we would like that person to pay us to recall all phones we have sold
so far."
You Write: "I'm sure most of the field agents are dedicated, hard working individuals". Thats not my take. From personal experience where FBI was contacted in am attempt to find a missing person, the Agents has below par IQ and couldn't find their behind with both hands.
Help fight continental drift.
From the Nokia Letter:
A rough estimate of the development costs of stolen software and tools, including testing is US$ 7.5 Million.
....[and] a further US $120 Million in lost revenue due to new developments being delayed in reaching the market.
From the Novell Letter:
the cost associated with the development of the source code is well in excess of $75,000,000.
From the Fujitsu Letter:
Software development expenses... $1,100,000.00
Research & development expenses.. 1,000,000.00
Total... $2,100,000.00
You are not going to convince me that because some software tools and development models were copied, that it is going to cost Nokia 7.5 Million dollars. And you are DEFINITELY not going to make me believe that Nokia lost $120 Million in lost revenue because of "new developments being delayed." PISH. Nokia makes a ton of cash, as does Novell and Fujitsu.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
Somebody correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that the US constitution ensures that _every_ criminal trial can be made a jury trial if the defendant so desires... I forget which ammendment.
Now if he is cutting a deal, then there will be no jury, but he would only be doing that because he believes it will turn out better then a jury trial would end up.
Mathematically impossible requirements are technically not against policy.
In the slashdot description for this story, it stated the "damage" estimates were in the millions. It is setting up a straw man argument here.
If you actually go read the response letters, it seems pretty clear that government requested figures for the "value" of the stolen material, as well as the damages done. The large dollar values were for the "value" of the source code stolen, not the "damages" as indicated by the slashdot blurb. Is slashdot trying to arbitrarily stir people up, or to report the news?
Mitnick was in possesion of stolen property. Period. The normal metric fo determining value is what price the product would get on the free market. If the product is not available on the free market (proprietary code), then the costs for development is as good a metric as any to try to determine value.
If we don't think access to source code is important and valuable, then why do we get so rightously indignant about proprietary software under Linux? If having the source code means little or nothing, then why is OpenSource software so important?
Kevin Mitnick was in possession of stolen property, and I believe he had no illusions about the legality of his actions.
The court has asked the owners of the stolen property for their best guess at it's value. They have provided it. This is why we have jury trials folks, it will be the jury's job to decide to sentence relative to actual damages, or relative to the value of the stolen property. Whats wrong with that?
If somebody holds up a liquor store at gunpoint and gets $20 bucks, then later gets caught, the individual is properly charged with a felony, not a $20 misdemeanor.
If somebody breaks into your car and steals a linux MP3 player that you spent a year developing and plan to market, then sells it to his buddy for $15, do you want them charged with a $15 crime? Do you want them only charged with a $200 crime because that's all the hardware parts were worth?
These companies just answered a question that was asked them, and the question was a reasonable one to be asked for an upcoming criminal trial.
Mathematically impossible requirements are technically not against policy.
I bet they weren't asked "how much damage did Mitnick do?". I'll bet they were asked "How much did it cost to develop the software which Mitnick stole copies of?"
Look at the letters - "A rough estimate of the development costs of stolen software and tools...", "..the cost associated with the development of the source code...", "Software development expenses.. Research & development expenses.."
They're just answering the question they were asked, and that question was designed to throw up answers of millions of dollars.
I don't think there's any doubt that the prosecution in the Mitnick case went all out to make an example of him. There is sooo much dodgy stuff about the case, from John Markoff portraying him as some hugely significant darkside evil hacker, through his alleged hacks on Shimomura's systems (and they remain alleged - he was never charged with any attacks on Shimomura), through the way in which Markoff and Shimomura made a bucketload of money from Takedown, to the way he was held without bail for so long and refused access to the evidence against him...
Yeah, sure, Mitnick broke the law, he broke into computers that he wasn't allowed access to, and he took source code, but there is no way he intended to profit from it in any way. He never tried to sell the source code on to anyone - he just wanted it so that he could look for bugs to exploit.
I think even Mitnick would agree that, if you do the crime, you do the time, but the only crimes he's guilty of are hacking. They're just out to make an example of him by putting him away for as long as possible. They did something TPTB didn't like, so they've decided that they're going to make sure that they send a message to everyone else - hey, it's okay to assault people, steal cars, carry out money laundering, forgery or counterfeiting, commit burglay or even manslaughter, but if you hack, we'll put you away for longer than the average sentence for any of these crimes - and that's BEFORE you get to trial!
America's meant to be the Land of the Free and you guys are always rabbitting on about how the Consitution, the First Amendment and all your freedom, but I'll tell you this - when your Government tramples all over someone like they've done with Kevin Mitnick and you all stand idly by and say "But he's a nasty hacker! We don't care if he gets imprisoned without trial, on trumped-up charges for over four years!?", it makes me realise that you've only got as much freedom as the Government over there wants you to have.
Talk about sheep. You guys take the biscuit. I'm disgusted, and I'm glad I don't live in your country. The only difference between Mitnick and political prisoners in the former Soviet Union, is that someone's able to speak out or Mitnick. It's just a pity they're reduced to being forced to query why these losses weren't reported to the shareholders, SEC, etc. If you Americans valued your constitutional rights as much as you claim to, you'd be beating down the doors of your local Senators, demanding to know why this guy's rights are being violated.
The Dodger
So, you're saying that Windows source code is worth something?!
:)
I beg to differ, old chap - I don't think it's worth warm spit! If I got my hands on it, I wouldn't even attempt to sell it to anyone - I'd feel too guilty about ripping them off. I'd just post it online.
The Big D.
Where someone can be imprisoned, without bail or trial for over four years, and without being allowed access to the evidence against him.
I'd always know that the American legal system was a little strange, but at the same time, I'd always kind of admired the US Constitution, with it's 1st and 5th Amendments, and it's insistence upon a speedy trial and freedom of information, et cetera.
Now I realise that it's all just a sham - the Government can do what they like. They can trample all over a man's rights, treat a man who's crime was nothing more than hacking into computers and stealing source code (he didn't even try to sell it!) worse than they treat rapists, drug dealers and the rest of the scum they release on bail and give suspecnded sentences to.
And what do you all do? You say "So what! He's a criminal. He can hang for all we care." Wonder how long it'll be before someone who loses control of their car whilst speeding and crashes into something, causing more than $5k of damage is imprisoned without trial for over four years, under charges of speeding.
Sooner or later, you guys are going to wake up and discover that you Constitution is no more than a piece of paper. They'll keep taking more and more of your rights until you have to get a licence to fart.
Dodger
Well, I I was to steal a £30,000 car then I would be charged with stealing a £30,000 car, not with stealing a car that cost £18,000,000,000 to develop. Mitnick did not deprive his 'victims' of there goods, so there losses should be limited to the notional value of the disclosure - given that solaris is not exactly bleeding edge tech and that they will sell you the source for $100 I would see the value of the damage to be $100.
Or are they now claiming that all the development they put into the products is now worthless ? I don't think so.
*--BigMan--- Time flies like an arrow.. but personally I prefer a nice glass of wine!
After talking to the FBI about an infamous break-in I was a victim of, the first question out of their mouths was, "What is the value of the stolen property?" It turns out that how you answer this question decides how they prioritize (whether they get to it) the investigation. I think the FBI knows that it's not easy to value software, which is why they ask it, even though they know the answer is hard to enumerate. They just want to filter out cases to reduce their alreaday overwhelming workload. You've just been hacked. It was an incredibly humiliating and frustrating experience, and I didn't even pride myself on my security skills. I just wanted the bastard caught. Pure vengeance. That's all. Didn't want him to get away with it. I can just imagine what it's like for Novell or Sun to be hacked. You have plenty of motivation to bring out the big numbers. They're going to improve the odds that the FBI gets off their ass. Even if it's not going to make them any money, these companies are probably crying for blood. Malicious hacking is wrong. If you want to be a hacker and you want to do something for the hacker community, then do the hack, find an elegant, charming, but DISCRETE way to bring the security hole to the attention of the sysadmin, and move on to the next challenge. I think these kinds of "Chaotic Good Hackers" are a benefit to society, but they are depressingly few and far between. =-ddt-> PS. Please don't give me any crap about the semantics of "hack" and "crack". I grew up with "hack" having the same double-meaning it has for most peeps, but "crack" specifically meant defeating software piracy systems.
Remember that to a company developing software, the most costly expense is usually time, for the simple reason that greedy computer geeks like us occasionally expect paychecks. The thing that makes most of these figures ridiculous is that in most cases, the time wasn't wasted: the source code wasn't gone, just copied, and there's little to suggest that any of these "victims" lost a sale because someone else snagged it using the stolen code. But to have your network shut down for a week... I don't know the details of Nokia's claim here, but that's bad juju.
Put this into perspective. If you your free time developing, say, a webserver, and someone like Microsoft steals it from you, takes some features out of it and puts them into IIS and then makes millions off it, wont you want your cut?
/. are students and have not had crackers steal or attack the systems that put food on their respective tables. It will happen. Let's see who turns the other cheek in the name of hacker ideals then.
I'm not sure if Mitnick should be in jail, as I've read some pretty differing accounts on the case from both sides, but I dont think anyone is doubting that he stole stuff. Stealing is illegal, whether it's Civil Disobedience or not. You must be prepared to pay the price for your crimes.
I dont want to argue hacking/cracking ideals or throw around accusations agaisnt the FBI or 2600 or whomever, I'd just like to know how many people here would be singing a different tune if they were on the other side of the fence. Most of
-Rich
They wouldn't have lost all of that money if they were Open Source....
Arrogance is Confidence which lacks integrity. -- me
Did Mitnick release the stolen source code? If he did, then the companies would definnnitely have taken a loss that needed reporting. If he didn't, then the loss was only ever potential, not actual, and doesn't need reporting. IANAL, though. The FBI asked for certain numbers, the companies gave it to them. If the FBI agent took this to mean actual, as opposed to potential, losses, that's her fault. It doesn't seem she took it that way.
What about losses do to downtime, searching for security loopholes, etc.... At least one company mentions this, and the value of it is very high.
Mitnick took the code. As he took it illegally, it came with no license, and he was free to do anything he wanted with it, including selling it. The companies have the right to determine how much their source code, with a licensing agreement equivalent in what it allows as Mitnick's was, will cost. They determined what it cost them, what it would cost another company to develop had they been hired to develop it royalty free for another company (ie. the development costs). This is how much Mitnick would have had to pay to get this legally, yet he didn't do it. In the real world, Mitnick would have had to pay alot more (profit margin), but these companies graciously limited the value to costs alone. If Mitnick never spread the merchandise (source) around, and was soon apprehended, the actual loss to the company would be nothing.
But it's theft of a source license with absolutely no license terms. A lot more liberal than the rights a normal source license gives you.
Just because Mitnick says that he didn't give (or sell) the code to anyone else doesn't mean its the truth.
Hell I'm the King of Siam, do you believe me???
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GIT d? s: a-- C++++ UL++++ P++ L+++ E- W++ N o-- K- w--- O- M+ V PS+ P
You're right. He is a criminal. He did break the law. He stole confidential information.
However, that doesn't mean he deserves what he is getting. The biggest problem I have with the Mitnick case is that no one deserves to be held this long without having a trial. (As of this writing 4 years, 2 months, 24 days, 33 minutes xx seconds.)
Now if that doesn't make you feel the least bit outraged or nervous about the us government then I think you might have some mental problems.
I am not condoning what he's done. I wouldn't say that he was even wrongfully accused, but come on. 4 years? If you accidentally hit a pedestrian while driving home from work one day, and were charged with manslaughter would you want to spend 4 years in jail, just to tell the judge that the stupid ass jumped out in front of your car?
Bleah.
-King_Ruin
Not drinking, chasing women, or doing drugs won't make you live longer--it just seems that way.
If the companies claim their source as part of their intrinsic value(book value) then the losses they are saying happened need to be reported to share holders. Since nothing has been reported to share holders then either they don't consider their software a "valuable" part of their company or the SEC hasn't seen the letter yet.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" -- Albert Einstein
Uhm, I think the previous poster was refering to some frustration a lot of us out here are feeling. People keep saying that Kevin M. is some kind of totally inoccent guy who was doing no harm and now has the full brunt of the US government procecuting him. But He's not. He broke into the systems illegally. No question. And he got caught. Spending time imprisoned without due process is a bit disturbing, but that doesn't mean he doesn't deserve to be in jail...
Look at what he did. You can't say he didn't know breaking in to the Sun computers and copying the source to Solaris was illegal (not that ignorance is an excuse anyway), because he did. He made a consious effort to break the law, he got caught and now he is paying for it. Complain to high heaven that detention without trial is wrong, but "Free Kevin"?!? I don't think so.
He broke the law, he got caught and he even admits it. The government's method of procecution may be wrong but who they are going after isn't. A lot of the people at 2600 and other places conveniently over look that. Thats what makes us up set. I'd love to see some coverage of this story thats not completely biases one way or the other...
Never by hatred has hatred been appeased, only by kindness - the Buddha
Kevin Mitnick's and his lawyer are the only folks involved in this FUBAR-SNAFU that are "NOT" in contempt of justice and the US Constitution (this, justice stuff, could put you in contempt of a US Court)! In US Courts two wrongs can make it right, but only when justice is abridged or denied. We are known as a Nation of Laws, I hope one day, "and Justice" will be added and provided equal status in the US Courts.
Neo-Fascist are the only bums I know in history that would be happy to bury a person "alive" in prison for years, and provide an economic and/or NatSec excuse and expect approval, by US, of US civil rights (to a speedy, impartial, peer jury trial) violations of Kevin or anyone.
As I've always said:
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
Keep in mind that the companies were requested to provide detailed information about the 'total value of the software that Mitnick made copies of', not 'how much money did your company lose as a result of Mitnick copying your software'
The costs of the software involved may be true, and the reason that no SEC filings were made is because the company was not claiming a loss... they were just responding to a straightforward question from the feds.
HOW MUCH DID THAT SOFTWARE THAT MITNICK COPIED COST YOU TO CREATE.
Sun was only intending on selling one copy of Solaris. *Prods your head, looking for brain activity* - how many copies have they sold? How much revenue? Now do you see why a figure of that amount is valid?
Open Source. Closed Minds. We are Slashdot.
At one end of the spectrum, you have people like the 2600.com guys who probably gloss over some things that Mitnick may have done and probably also paint the US Gov in a worse light than perhaps is fair.
On the other hand you have US Gov lawyers and their ilk painting Mitnick out to be the digital Anti-Christ.
It's probably pretty safe to say that the truth lies somewhere in the grey area in between, but due to both biases and ignorant reporting in journalism, most people don't really know what's going on.
Are there any unbiased people who know much of anything about this?
You're a suburbanite.
hmmmm, a $120 million for lost revenues because they had to shut down their network for a few weeks?
just as well nokia don't make calculators!
i just hope nokia are as liberal with those monetary figures when they're the subject of massive lawsuits as consumers finally figure at they're lugging around a lump of carcenogenic gadgetry and that brain tumour they just got diagnosed with on the right side of their head ain't no coincidence.
--
Rare Window - free your photos
I share the same sentiment that he needs to be punished for his actions IF, he did them. But, we need to remember a few things...
0. THIS IS THE USA, WE HAVE LAWS DEALING WITH THIS. The US got up in arms over the method of punishment in the Singapore. I don't see why because it is a soverign country with its own laws. Our laws do however provide for a few things...
1. He has not been proven guilty in a court of law.
2. He has been imprisioned for over 4 years without a trial. Normal holding time is ~1 year for all criminals before trial. Something about the US Constitution and the right to a speedy and fair trial.
3. There has not been a gag order placed on this trial and therefore, (you lawyers in training help me out on this...) the trial transcripts are public record.
4. The actions of the prosecutors have been reprehensible up till now. Denying access to files that can he needs to prepare a defense. Then slamming over a million pages of materials in his cell with a few weeks left before trial.
Regarding the amount of damages, the companies have to report all gains and losses to the IRS, SEC, and the shareholders in that company. If, they reported this as a loss, they must legally report that loss to the court. If they report any other amount, then it is fraud, and the IRS sends an army of Auditors up to the top floor of your corporate suite with anal probes and adding machines. I forget what the SEC does but I think I remember a case where their right to trade shares was revoked. The Shareholders can sue the company for falsifying records and fraud. Whole lotta shit flying around for a few decimal places.
RB
I believe that everyone has forgotten one of the big reasons 2600 has taken up the banner for Mitnick. Yes, he stole source code and credit card numbers; that's illegal, and there are punishments under law for that. The companies involved seem to be inflating numbers to make the case look "good". No one disputes that Mitnick has stolen anything or is guilty of something.
The issue that troubles 2600 and Mitnick supporters is the fact that he's been held in prison for over four years without a trial. Habeas corpus, a legal right, has been tossed out the window. Yes, there were periods where Mitnick's lawyers requested a delay in the trial date so they could gather evidence. It certainly doesn't help the defendant when they're prevented from viewing the gigabytes upon gigabytes evidence against them until two weeks before the supposed trial date. And it's even worse when the judge tells the defense team bail will not be granted before the bail hearing even begins. A man's constitutional rights have been trampled on; even rapists and murderers get fair trials before this. Mitnick could likely get time served by now, yet he'll get the book thrown at him.
His guilt on some charges isn't in question; he plead guilty to a few a long time ago. That the gov't held off for a couple more YEARS until he plead guilty to the rest is suspicious; that he never received a fair trial in a reasonable period of time is an infringement of his rights. I guess "innocent until proven guilty" means nothing when large companies are involved; Mitnick never even had a chance to prove his side in a court of law. What a joke.
I can't wait for the SEC, or even the IRS to get involved; I'd love to see what they say about these supposed "losses".
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
It's about time that 2600 did something. For all Emanulelle's talk of kevin in the press, and on the air, this is one of the first envelope pushing acts done by 2600. I am at least glad to see the old spirit of 2600 is not entirley dead.
Next you'll be claiming that the FBI deliberately sat on the NTSB's early conclusions that the TWA 800 flight was destroyed by mechanical problems, not terrorists. Besides, we needed to tighten security at airports anyway and my presentation of my passport (and references to the internal passports required for travel within the old Soviet Union) instead of my driver's license is sheer hyperbole.
Or that the FBI turned Waco from a major ATF screwup into a national disgrace.
Or that J Edgar Hoover abused his position to collect blackmail material for political purposes while ignoring organized crime.
I'm sure most of the field agents are dedicated, hard working individuals. But I'm getting damn tired of the way that the senior levels of the FBI seem to think that the ends justify the means.
Hopefully the judge will hear the arguments and toss the lawyers into jail for a week for contempt and refer the matter to the federal bar for disbarment hearings. The government lawyers, since it's precisely this type of abuse of power that the First Amendment (press and speech) was intended to prevent.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
i agree, after all what was his intention in stealing somebody else's source code? If he wasnt going to do anything with it, then why did he stealt it? if he was going to do something then those companies reported losses could be correct. My point is that he broke into other people's computers, he stole intellectual property in the form of source code, and he got caught. It seems that too many people are saying he is innocent these days, but it looks like he is pretty guilty. i kinda agree that he may not be getting a fair shot since he got caught, but then again it is a pretty stupid thing to get caught for in the first place, unless he was going to sell the source code to Russians for millions of dollars so he could retire tomorrow. i think he got what he deserved, just because a company has poor security doesnt mean that any poor fool can come in and terrorize it with any justification. i got a final to take so i have to cut this short.
> ERROR: IEXPLORE caused an invalid page fault in module MSCONV97.DLL at 0137:01212d19. Stack dumped:
They only need to have 5k in total damages
each to qualify for a feloney. All the extra
bucks are just to impress the judge and maybe
bankrupt the guy in some future civil trial.
I dont feel sorry for this CRACKER. He took his
chances.. made a bunch of mistakes and got busted.
NoOne is so smart that they cant get caught. There
is always someone smater. In fact he wasnt even
a really good cracker. He actually was more like
an advanced script kiddie.
Malice95
Just a thought: everybody seems to be pretty convinced that the figures the companies quote are disproportionate. But how would you value the worth of software?
:) even more than it cost to develop. The point is that commercial success in software design depends heavily on source code secrecy.
I expect it should involve something like the expected sales revenues. In that case, most figures seem to be roughly in the ballpark. If Windows 2000 source code was stolen today, how much would it be worth? Hopefully (for Bill
I agree of course that stockholders should have been told. And I wouldn't have a clue about whether the fact that Mitnick did not publish the code makes any legal difference.
"You're one of those condescending UNIX computer users!" - "Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer." (Di
and burn Kevin and beat Kevin and...
One of the things Kevin is accused of is the posession of credit card numbers, from a wide open Netcom file, obtained in exactly the same way as the LA Times recently obtained credit card numbers from e-merchants.
I do not see the DoJ (nor any of you Kevin bashers) crawling all over the Times for doing one of the things Kevin is being condemned for doing. I do read a lot about how the merchants were wrong for being careless. Where are the pyres for Sun, Netcom, etc.?
Is the LA Times, or it's employees going to be charged with a crime or forced to pay for new firewall systems and system modifications for the merchant's that did not bother to use their software properly? Sure doesn't sound like it.
So much for equal protection, enforcement, or whatever that BS was from US Government class.
When YOU are vagely accused, then prohibited from reviewing the evidence, as well as the charges, against YOU (no matter how stupid your actions, no matter if it was really YOU in the first place), don't come crying to us.
Fortunately, for YOU, we will still support YOUR rights, no matter how little YOU view the rights of others.
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
Then go to one of the demonstrations on June 4th and speak to people in person.
Details: http://www.2600.com
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
The Washing, DC 2600 meeting will be broadcasting the June 4th Supreme Court demonstration live in streaming video.
June 4, 1999 2:00 - 5:00 PM, http://www.SteveNet.net/2600/
Other demonstrations world wide http://www.2600.com
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
Yeah, he broke a few laws. I'd say he's served more than enough time for his crimes just waiting for a trial. People convicted of manslaughter get far less time.