It is interesting to know

Computer abuse case studies

	Name	Position Company	Misdeed	Damage	Sentence
Case 1	J.Q. Sabatia	accounts payable clerk North Bay Health Care Group	unauthorized access to North Bay’s accounting software and issue 127 payable checks	$ 875,035 loss	5 years in prison, $ 250,000 fine
Case 2	Scott Dennis	computer system administrator U.S. District Court of Alaska	denial-of-service attack on Judsys, a private mail list server owned by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York	computer maintaining Judsys was shut down, taken out of operations and reconfigured	6 month incarceration, 3 month in jail, 1 year of supervised release, 240 hours of community service
Case 3	Roger Duronio	computer system administration UBS PaineWebber	using logic bomb, which resulted in securities fraud	$ 3 million loss	20 years in prison, $ 1,250,000 fine
Case 4	David L. Smith	programmer	unleashing the “Melissa” computer virus	$ 400 million loss (North American businesses)	20 months in prison, 3 years of supervised release, $ 5,000 fine

Comments:

logic bomb - логическая бомба (ошибка в программе, вызывающая её отказ при определённых обстоятельствах)

securities fraud - мошенничество с ценными бумагами

What do you think?...

1. What crime is the most heinous?

2. What is more painful for a targeted company: financial losses or damage to computer networks?

3. Was the punishment for mentioned above crimes equitable?

4. In 1986 the United States Congress passed a law, intended to reduce “hacking” of computer systems. It is called the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. It was amended in 1994, 1996 and in 2001 by the USA PATRIOT Act. Here are some extracts from the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

Criminal Offenses under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

1. Knowingly accessing a computer without authorization to obtain national security data.

2. Intentionally accessing a computer without authorization to obtain

a) Information contained in a financial record of a financial institution, or contained in a file of a consumer reporting agency on a consumer.

b) Information from any department or agency of the United States.

c) Information from any protected computer if the conduct involves an interstate or foreign communication.

3. Intentionally accessing without authorization a government computer and affecting the use of the government’s operation of the computer.

4. Knowingly accessing a computer with the intent to defraud and there by obtaining anything of value.

5. Knowingly causing the transmission of program, information, code, or command that causes damage or intentionally accessing a computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damage that results in:

a) Loss to one or more persons during any one-year period aggregating at least $5,000 in value.

b) The modification or impairment, or potential modification or impairment, of the medical examination, diagnosis, treatment, or care of one or more individuals.

c) Physical injury to any person.

d) A threat to public health or safety

e) Damage affecting a government computer system.

6. Knowingly and with the intent to defraud, trafficking in a password or similar information through which a computer may be accessed without authorization.

What else offenses should be included in the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act? Do we have a similar law in our country? Are cyber criminals severe punished in our country?

Just for fun J

Computer Gender

Men concluded that computers should be referred to in the feminine gender because: 1. No one but the Creator understands their internal logic. 2. The native language they use to communicate with other computers is incomprehensible to everyone else. 3. Even your smallest mistakes are stored in long-term memory for retrieval. 4. As soon as you make a commitment to one, you find yourself spending half your paycheck on accessories for it.

Women claim that computers should be referred to in the masculine gender because: 1. In order to get their attention, you have to turn them on. 2. They have a lot of data, but are still clueless. 3. They are supposed to help you solve problems, but half the time they are the problem. 4. As soon as you commit to one, you realize that, if you had waited a little longer you could have had a better model.