Yahoo is probably not one of the best places to get legal info from.Originally Posted by Shavx
As for a better approach to Texas computer laws.
Check this link Standard disclaimer about the fact that the site nor is my advice to be considered final authority. But if you click on the link there titled:
Computer Crimes Chapter ( a pdf) one of the first things that you will see is
"Access" means to approach, instruct, communicate
with, store data in, retrieve or intercept data from, alter data or
computer software in, or otherwise make use of any resource of a
computer, computer network, computer program, or computer system.
This right there is the "catch all" that would define what the OP is asking about as illegal.
To be successful here you should read all of the following.
ForumRules
ForumFAQ
If you are new to Back|Track
Back|Track Wiki
Failure to do so will probably get your threads deleted or worse.
...and before we go into the tangent of people claiming that they didn't do anything wrong if they don't intrude upon someone's PC.
In the eyes of the law, a Router, Accesspoint, Printer, and many other devices are considered 'computers' since in their most basic forms, they are indeed a computer.
A third party security audit is the IT equivalent of a colonoscopy. It's long, intrusive, very uncomfortable, and when it's done, you'll have seen things you really didn't want to see, and you'll never forget that you've had one.
Haha hilariousI dont think so either. We do have a separate legal system here in Sweden. I cant recall that we have a jury to convince...here its more to who has the most relevant evidence. IANAL haha, but i think i would describe it that way.
So if i get their passwords to a lot of sites, im not allowed to use them, right?
What if i show a discalimer at every new websession start? (this is just theoretical, i dont think its worth the effort of going trough a trial(?) just to compromise someones location, though it is a very interesting scenario)
What if my network is open?
It is not illegal to monitor your network traffic.
As for striking back as in attacking them not a good idea. There has been a book about it which was a pretty nice read: Syngress, "Aggressive Network Selfdefense".
Tiocfaidh ár lá
Forgot to add that part into the generic disclaimer above.
This is probably the bigger issue, a lot of judges, and lawyers are not as well versed in these sort of things as streaker pointed to.In the eyes of the law, a Router, Accesspoint, Printer, and many other devices are considered 'computers' since in their most basic forms, they are indeed a computer.
To be successful here you should read all of the following.
ForumRules
ForumFAQ
If you are new to Back|Track
Back|Track Wiki
Failure to do so will probably get your threads deleted or worse.
It is generally accepted that you cannot legally (under US Federal and State laws) do a "counter attack." However, several legal issues make this less than clear cut. First is the common agrument in regards to self-defense. This may actually apply, depending on the specific wording of the juridiction. The second argument, that of nuisance, is not as well know to the layman, but may be more applicable.
Strike and Counterstrike: The Law on Automated Intrusions and Striking Back
Curtis E. A. Karnow
BlackHat Windows Security 2003
http://www.blackhat.com/presentation...rnow-notes.pdf
Mr Karnow is a lawyer, and occationally sits as a judge in California.
Thorn
Stop the TSA now! Boycott the airlines.
Just a quick blurb I found on the internet about this subject, it is a pdf download, but it give a pretty good description about wrong and right in counter-hacking. In general, you can pretty much assume, that counter-hacking will be deemed illegal, at least in most situations. However, monitoring on your own network is not.
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/sta...umber=01013841
-D-
Posting Permissions
