I can’t get over at how stupid the case is of the American government against Gary McKinnon. This British citizen is accused of hacking into secure US Air and Army forces computers, and causing millions of dollars in damage after crashing networks, all the while hacking from his girlfriend’s home.
He’s even accused of leaving a note threatening to continue disrupting to the very top levels by leaving this following note, “I am SOLO. I will continue to disrupt at the highest levels”. Despite that McKinnon has no allegiances with Muslim terrorists, if extradited to the US, he will be tried as one. If found guilty, this may amount to a maximum of 60 years of imprisonment.
Ok, am I the only one to see various problems here? First of all, this sort of stuff is done from cyber-cafés, not someone’s home –let alone from someone’s home that is close (and therefore traceable) to you. I mean, if he really meant to terrorize, would he have done it from his girlfriend’s house? No, probably not. Second of all, bringing down networks is not what someone that is secretively looking for covered UFO evidence–as wild as this is– does. Lastly, many of the computers he “hacked” into didn’t even have passwords, so call me pedantic, but how can you accuse someone of breaking into and bypassing security when there was not anything respectable even resembling it?
This whole thing sounds like the American government getting all fussy over what was essentially their own fault and something that the they’ve been accused of a thousand times over, a lack of serious security. Around here, I can’t accuse anyone of trespassing if I don’t have my property fenced and all entrances locked, so how is it the US can accuse someone of breaking into closed networks when they weren’t properly locked down?
Here’s a little bit of free advice, “Forget the muscle flexing and get over it, already!”.
Update: This brit hacker lost his case and is being deported to be sentenced in the States. He has admitted to spending hours hacking away and under the influence, which brings a different light onto breaking into these networks. To make sense of it all (via educated guesses), I think these networks were probably closed off well enough on the outside while computers inside had lax security. Which would explain why he spent hours hacking away at things, while at the same time he says [some] of it was easy to pass.
About bringing down the networks, I guess he had to do something really stupid, but I really doubt it as the networks would have to be paper fragile –although he admits to being under the influence. Even so, the potential sentence seems harsh (and unjust), 60 years? Why not let him stand trial in the UK where he’d get humane sentencing? It’s not as if this is comparable to 9/11, is it? But I believe that’s the association; I don’t think this brit hacker (or any hacker for that matter) would have been so persecuted and threatened with such a draconian sentencing prior to 9/11. The US has to save face by demonstrating that it will deal harshly with those that might “threaten” national security.
Just my opinion.
This is licensed under the Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons License. All brands mentioned are properties of their respective owners. By reading this article, the reader forgoes any accountability of the writer. The reading of this article implies acceptance of the above stipulations. The author requires attribution –by full name and URL– and notification of republications.