+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 48
IT News Thread, BBC Illegally accesses 22,000 computers, claims "wasn't illegal". in Other News; To demonstrate how botnets work, the bbc used 22,000 compromised computers in their own botnet for their "Click" program. They ...
  1. #1


    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    In the server room, with the lead pipe.
    Posts
    4,619
    Thank Post
    275
    Thanked 777 Times in 604 Posts
    Rep Power
    223

    BBC Illegally accesses 22,000 computers, claims "wasn't illegal".

    To demonstrate how botnets work, the bbc used 22,000 compromised computers in their own botnet for their "Click" program. They claim they didn't break the law because they didn't do anything naughty with the botnet.

    BBC Site: BBC NEWS | Programmes | Click | BBC team exposes cyber crime risk
    Graham "CakeMonster" Cluely comments: Did BBC break the law by using a botnet to send spam? | Graham Cluley's blog
    Securiteam blog that brough it to my attention: SecuriTeam Blogs It’s fun being other people

  2. #2


    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northamptonshire
    Posts
    4,686
    Thank Post
    352
    Thanked 794 Times in 714 Posts
    Rep Power
    346
    Short sighted of them to say they didn't do anything wrong because they didn't do anything naughty but tbh, I think it's a powerful idea that they've brought to the surface.

    My concern is how they were able to then contact individual people to advise them of the infection; did the ISPs cough up personal details because it was the BBC, or have the BBC merely advised ISPs through their abuse@ chains?

  3. #3

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,529
    Thank Post
    513
    Thanked 2,406 Times in 1,862 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    822
    This was blatantly illegal. There is no arguing about intent, as they are using the wrong idea of intent. The knowledge that gaining access to other computers is illegal was there, therefore they have mens rea.

    Just because the outcome wasn't one with damages being seen by the victims doesn't mean it is not illegal.

    Look at it this way, they utilised power, processing time, and bandwidth that is the sole possession of the victims. That victim paid for the power to run the computer, paid for the broadband, and may have a cap, so some of their bandwidth will now have been used up, and the processing time will have added wear to their equipment.

    If I went into a store and stole a chocolate bar, ate it and then went back in and said 'see, this is where your security is lacking, it would make it no less of a crime!

  4. #4

    AngryTechnician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,730
    Thank Post
    698
    Thanked 1,210 Times in 761 Posts
    Rep Power
    394
    Computer Misuse Act 1990
    1 Unauthorised access to computer material

    (1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

    1. he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure access to any program or data held in any computer;
    2. the access he intends to secure is unauthorised; and
    3. he knows at the time when he causes the computer to perform the function that that is the case.
    Seems pretty clear to me. Doesn't matter what you do with it, the fact it was unauthorised makes them guilty of an offence. If they had done something naughty with their access, that would in fact be a more serious offence under the part of the law immediately following the part quoted above ("unauthorised access with intent to commit or facilitate commission of further offences").

    Where there would be wiggle room would be whether it is in the public interest to pursue a conviction, but I don't think there is any doubt over whether a offence was committed.
    Last edited by AngryTechnician; 13th March 2009 at 11:06 AM. Reason: Spelling

  5. #5

    tech_guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    That little bit in the middle of Little Old England
    Posts
    8,131
    Thank Post
    1,907
    Thanked 1,342 Times in 741 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Rep Power
    395
    Yeah I read this yesterday and was gobsmacked to say the least.

    The BBC did something very naughty and it will be interesting to see if any criminal proceedings are brought.

  6. #6

    RabbieBurns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,512
    Thank Post
    1,320
    Thanked 469 Times in 306 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    199

  7. #7

    tech_guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    That little bit in the middle of Little Old England
    Posts
    8,131
    Thank Post
    1,907
    Thanked 1,342 Times in 741 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Rep Power
    395
    Good. Let's hope they now get a good kicking.

  8. #8
    zag
    zag is offline
    zag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,738
    Thank Post
    894
    Thanked 414 Times in 348 Posts
    Blog Entries
    12
    Rep Power
    85
    Great to see the BBC investigating issues like this, really brings it to the wider audience.

  9. #9


    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    In the server room, with the lead pipe.
    Posts
    4,619
    Thank Post
    275
    Thanked 777 Times in 604 Posts
    Rep Power
    223
    I personally hope they throw the book at the whole production team and anyone involved.

    There's no compelling reason why the bbc couldn't set up 50 vms, desktops or whatever to demonstrate this using their own legally-owned hardware. Instead they tried to be cute and should be jailed.

    Bunch of idiots.

  10. #10
    chrbb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Midlands
    Posts
    1,506
    Thank Post
    141
    Thanked 66 Times in 61 Posts
    Rep Power
    46
    Was Jonathon Ross involved? If he was it'll be Ok

  11. #11

    maniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    3,037
    Thank Post
    209
    Thanked 425 Times in 306 Posts
    Rep Power
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by kmount View Post
    My concern is how they were able to then contact individual people to advise them of the infection; did the ISPs cough up personal details because it was the BBC, or have the BBC merely advised ISPs through their abuse@ chains?
    From the sophos site . .

    Furthermore, at the end of this next excerpt you'll see that the BBC "warned" the users that their computers were part of a botnet. They did this by changing the desktop wallpaper of affected computers owned by innocent third parties to display a message from BBC Click.
    That's how. Worrying yes, surprising no and I'm not really worried myself, as I take all precautions against this sort of thing. It doesn't really change anything except make people more aware of the issue, which is being done even more effectively now because of these news articles. Looks like mission accomplished to me, even if they may have broken the law to do it.

    Mike.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,160
    Thank Post
    98
    Thanked 318 Times in 260 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by kmount View Post
    Short sighted of them to say they didn't do anything wrong because they didn't do anything naughty but tbh, I think it's a powerful idea that they've brought to the surface.

    My concern is how they were able to then contact individual people to advise them of the infection; did the ISPs cough up personal details because it was the BBC, or have the BBC merely advised ISPs through their abuse@ chains?
    I believe they changed the desktop backgrounds on the computers. Illegal in its own right.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    149
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
    Rep Power
    16
    If the tech team at the BBC are naive enough to believe that gaining unauthorised access to a computer is legal then both they, the legal team that should have advised them and the management that should have ensured that the legal team advised them should be hung out to dry. What message does this send out? Can you imagine: "BBC reporters steal cars from public car parks and car showrooms to highlight poor security in todays car design" , "But its OK to do that as it was all in the name of public interest and the cars were returned to the public car parks a month later." or worse "The cars were returned to the owners who were identified when a government department gave out the contact details of the registered drivers to a BBC researcher"

    Not that I ever did respect their technical know how but really puts a nail in the coffin.

    <Rant=on>
    I don't know whether I'm just getting old and grumpy but I'm finding more and more BBC (and other news) reports are often going for a story rather than news and are presenting the facts in a biassed or inaccurate way that influences society.

    E.g. There was a report on yesterday about someone who had committed a crime. "the man, who has recently suffered from XYZ disease, did crime ABC" Where's the relevance in stating his recent ailment? Is that an excuse? Should we feel sympathy that he had a runny nose?

    Take another example : the recent snow. "It was chaos". No it wasn't, it was a minor inconvenience. People incapable of driving in snow went out ill prepared. Snow chains cost 50. I got places where 4x4s couldn't go in a lowly 2WD hatchback. If you can't afford them stay at home. Or stick to gritted roads. Or get a lift from someone who can drive in snow. There really was no excuse for 90% of the driver who got stuck.

    And the weather...
    Rain is always described as "miserable". The weather has no emotion. They are brainwashing us to associate anything that isn't sunny with unhappiness. If it rains put a coat on not a sad face!
    No wonder there is so much depressiosn in the country!
    <Rant=off>
    Pheww.
    That feels a lot better.
    ChrisJ

  14. #14


    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northamptonshire
    Posts
    4,686
    Thank Post
    352
    Thanked 794 Times in 714 Posts
    Rep Power
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by jamesb View Post
    I believe they changed the desktop backgrounds on the computers. Illegal in its own right.
    LMFAO.

    So.. "Hai, we're from the BBC, you're infected, nip to PC World and get your PC sorted out"..

    Seriously, that's just ridiculous.

  15. #15

    ZeroHour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    5,631
    Thank Post
    890
    Thanked 1,314 Times in 798 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    441
    Quote Originally Posted by chrbb View Post
    Was Jonathon Ross involved? If he was it'll be Ok
    Imagine the background they would have set it he was

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. "Print Limit Pro" or "Print Managent Plus"
    By burgemaster in forum Windows
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 10th June 2009, 09:32 AM
  2. Tony Benn: "People will die because of the BBC"
    By mattx in forum General Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 2nd February 2009, 08:28 AM
  3. "Error 403" & "Moved to here" message
    By tech_guy in forum Windows
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 24th January 2008, 01:07 PM
  4. FREE Computers for the "DESERVING" poor
    By Mr_T in forum General Chat
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 6th February 2007, 03:18 PM
  5. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 28th September 2006, 07:06 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •