From: Gene McAloon 

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:25:31 -0500, "Mark Hessey"
 wrote:

>
>"Robert Comer"  wrote in message
>news:4013e9b9$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> > Well, I'm sure the acts are unethical, but whether they're illegal is
>> > another matter.
>>
>> No, it's illegal to hack a computer right now.....
>
>As I read it, there was no hacking going on, at least from the perspective
>of illegal outside access, they shared the server and the directory was
>available to any who called it up. But, that's a minor point anyway, we
>agree:

No one has made that claim except you. It has already been admitted that
the junior staffer (no doubt the usual dumb computer whiz kid) exploited a
weakness in the programming that allowed him to hack into the memos. His
boss, Miranda, had to know that such sensitive information was not
available except by hacking.
He now claims it was not even unethical, let alone unlawful. But then he
would, wouldn't he?

>> >Regardless all parties aware of, or involved in the access
>> > should be penalized.
>>
>> At least we agree on that. 
>>
>> >However, it is also possible that someone using the
>> > information is/was entirely unaware of the nature of the source.
>>
>> Possibly, but not real likely.
>
>Actually, it would be fairly likely. The staffer that actually accessed the
>information wouldn't likely be shouting from the tree tops where he got
>their info, so the further removed from him the less likely the original
>source would be known to subsequent recipients.

You are contradicting yourself. One moment you are claiming that there was
no hacking, that the information was freely available to anyone with access
to the server. Now you are claiming that the hacker wouldn't dare reveal
where and how he got the information. Why conceal where that information
came from  unless the
hacker, his boss Miranda and others knew damn well the info had to have
been gotten by hacking.


>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5