IP: A Norwegian colleague replies to Norway has lost it

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

Sorry if I spun it wrong . At some point  it would be nice to actually read a translation of the Court. I keep getting 
different interpretations depending on who I talk with djf


Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 08:19:31 +0100

From: Ola-Kristian.HOFF () LUX DG13 cec be
To: Richard.SWETENHAM () LUX DG13 cec be


Since you're interested in the crimes of the high north, let me see if I can 
set
things straight by contributing a more balanced point of view:

- Two wrongs don't make one right
- I think there are misunderstandings here, and my guess 
  would be that they originate from the account given by the news-
  agencies.

Nobody ever broke in to anything.  All they did was 
1) trying anonymous and guest logins, and 
2) mapping the ports with PORTSCAN.  

I'm sure this sounds frightfully scary in the layman's ears, but this can at
best be compared with ringing a doorbell and calling someone to ask whether
their home is open to the general public.

In both cases the got the answer "bugger off" from a computer equipped with a
reasonably low IQ.  After which the security experts gave up.  I'm sure the
expert security firm must have been astonished to find out that cracking isn't
as easy as it is cracked up to be. 

Again, it may come as a shock to the innocent bystander, but I'm sorry to say
such actions (ringing doorbells and such) don't qualify as crimes in Norway.
The fact that somebody at some point may have had juvenile fantasies about
becoming the Arsène Lupin of the nineties, isn't really enough to convict
either.  

In conclusion: Asking an old lady "may I please rob you" isn't a crime if you
take no for an answer, neither is sending an e-mail to Fort Knox asking when
they're open for burglary.

The story would have been much more interesting if they had been allowed in 
(and
especially if the anonymous account had super-user status).  Then both parties
should have been sentenced.  The victim for stupidity (criminal negligence) and
the accused for taking advantage of somebody's gullibility.  

Now, at this point I should probably read the decision to find out what the
gentlemen of the Supreme Court actually say.  But for now I think that you may
rest assured:  Norway is not the lawless wild north of the Vikings where a
little breaking and entering is perfectly acceptable.  Incompetence, however,
still is.

Ola-Kristian

> Somebody disagrees with you ...


>                 - - - Forwarded Message - - -
>
>                                  Internet: owner-ip-sub-1 () majordomo pobox com
>
>                                                               Authorised by: 
>
>                                                Internet: farber () cis upenn edu
>                                                    Freeform name: Dave Farber
>
> Delivered:     Thu 14 Jan 99 18:53
> Message ID:    4.1.19990114124126.061e2060(a)linc.cis.upenn.edu
>
> To:            Internet: ip-sub-1 () majordomo pobox com
>
> Reply to:      Internet: farber () cis upenn edu
>
> Subject:       IP: Norway has lost it
>
> I guess in Norway if I broke into your home (using a picklock -- no damage)
> and wandered about, I should not have broken any law. I doubt that is true
> and yet it is the same. How do I know if any damage was done especially the
> pick up on information . They have lost it. 
>
>
> Dave
>
> IF AT FIRST YOU DON'T SUCCEED, BREAKING-IN'S NO CRIME IN NORWAY 
> The Supreme Court in Norway has ruled that it's not a crime to try to break 
> into someone else's computer system, because people should expect others to 
> try to invade their systems, and take measures to protect themselves. There 
> is a crime, ruled the court, only if the system is actually breached. The 
> case developed out of an attempt by a computer security company to break 
> into the University of Oslo's computers through the Internet, to contribute 
> to a feature story by the Norwegian state broadcasting network. Apparently 
> the security company mapped holes in the university's computer security, but 
> did not break in, tamper with, or steal any information. (USA Today 13 Jan
> 99)
>
>
>              - - - End of Forwarded Message - - -