« Oink, oink, oink | Main | Lumley steamrollers Woolas - fabulous »

The crime of attempting to defeat the ends of justice by accessing insecure internet connections

Paedophile gang preyed on children of close friends - Times Online

James Rennie, 38, a gay rights campaigner who had managed the Stonewall Youth Project before his appointment as chief executive of LGBT Youth Scotland, an organisation which campaigns for the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered young people. Rennie was an opinion former, a mover and shaker. He was consulted by the Scottish Parliament over youth policy. He met the Queen and went to Downing Street to shake hands with Tony Blair

Convicted of: Sex attacks on children; conspiracy to abuse children; owning, making and distributing images of child-sex abuse; attempting to defeat the ends of justice by accessing insecure internet connections

I hope the whole gang of them enjoy meeting Mr Boiling ChipFat and friends whilst locked up. I just wish they weren't segregated but had their crimes tattooed on their foreheads... but I'm getting so unmodern.

The only questionmark I have is what is this crime "attempting to defeat the ends of justice by accessing insecure internet connections"? What does that mean?

Comments

I think it means trying to use someone else's WiFi connection to perform nefarious activity in the hope that it would not be traced back to them, but to the owner of the WiFi system.

Extraordinary use of language to say that but yes, I'd say that's what it refers to. The next question is when did that become illegal?

Theft of service which has been paid for by someone else has always been illegal.

..as has accessing a computer system that you don't have permission to use. I believe it is this that has been extended to include war driving / bandwith theft. I have never heard it described like this before, however.

I don't think it's about war driving.

The "attempting to defeat the ends of justice" bit is because it is an offence (perhaps only under Scottish law though) to try and cover your tracks, eg by disposing of evidence. The second half is just the means by which it was done.

At a guess, Rennie warned others through the internet or tried to delete things remotely.

Mr Splodge

The extension to include war driving / bandwidth theft makes no sense to me (although I know that it has happened).

The reason it doesn't make sense is because of the way WiFi works. If you try to access a wifi router then your computer sends a request to the router to ask if it can connect. If the router is unprotected then it sends back a message effectively saying "yes" and gives your computer an IP number.

So at no point have you stolen anything - you asked for access and you got it.

If the owner wanted to restrict access, or to deny it, then they can do that by password protecting the router - and breaking that password is, and should be, against the law.

In a non-technical comparative - it is like knocking on someone's door, them answering, you requesting to come in for a drink of water (I've chosen water as it is a utility which, assuming you aren't metered, is paid for in a similar way to broadband - flat rate) and them letting you in. There has been no theft of anything and no costs to the owner of the house.

Post a comment