Public Address | Cafe | Speaker: Confidential information: the legal rights and wrongs

Steve-F

Wed, 20 Aug 2014 23:32:30 +1200

@pneumeric
249(2)Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years who, directly or indirectly, accesses any computer system with intent, dishonestly or by deception, and without claim of right,—

If all else fails one can take a page out of the Waihopai Ploughshares book and pursue…

pneumeric

Mon, 18 Aug 2014 16:46:21 +1200

It strikes me that maybe section 249 of the crimes act is possibly relevant to this incident if 252 is not.

249Accessing computer system for dishonest purpose
(1)Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who, directly or indirectly, accesses any computer system and thereby,…

Matthew Poole

Mon, 18 Aug 2014 11:58:46 +1200

real estate professional can be anything but in their behaviour with no real consequence

You're speaking, I presume, of their behaviour other than as it relates to their practice of their profession? Because the consequences for misbehaviour in the carrying on of their profession very definitely extend to losing their…

Bart Janssen

Mon, 18 Aug 2014 09:13:51 +1200

but some professions are bound by their codes of conduct as tightly as any law,

From memory there are actually only two remaining professional societies, as they were originally created. They were given special rights from the Crown to adjudicate their own membership. Providing they met certain standards they would…

Felix Geiringer

Mon, 18 Aug 2014 09:08:26 +1200

Jordan Williams was a lawyer. When did he hand in his practising certificate? Was it before or after he is alleged to have conspired to blackmail someone? The book suggests that Mr Williams did a number of other things that I would have thought ought to be of concern to…

Keir Leslie

Mon, 18 Aug 2014 01:39:26 +1200

In my post above, A (Williams) should be A (Lusk) --- I had my disgusting characters confused.

nzlemming

Sun, 17 Aug 2014 23:08:38 +1200

Here it seems you can try to show a reasonable doubt that the crime would’ve happened. As Slater and co. talk great volumes of borderline criminal shit on a daily basis, but are actually just sad little internet trolls (takes one to know one), that would provide some doubt.

True,…

tussock

Sun, 17 Aug 2014 22:54:40 +1200

I would assume conspiracy laws in NZ are not as stupid as they are in (some small parts of) the USA, with that first step nonsense. I seem to recall a conspiracy to kidnap that was questionable even after finding the prepared room to hold the victim in, despite the…

nzlemming

Sun, 17 Aug 2014 22:44:08 +1200

And re: Cactus Kate – https://www.lawsociety.org.nz/for-the-community/search-register-of-lawyers/lawyer-details?pi=MjQwMTE=

Thanks Felix. I see I was looking in the For Lawyers section, rather than the Community section (The website could do with a UI review. My rates are only mildly larcenous ;-) ) My bad.

From this, I take it that she is then…

Keir Leslie

Sun, 17 Aug 2014 18:54:29 +1200

Here's a fun one. A & B discuss blackmailing C, with the goal of making C act in a certain manner. (A is employed by a rival to C.) They identify the way in which they would carry out this blackmail: they would publish vague and threatening intimations of things to…

Felix Geiringer

Sun, 17 Aug 2014 16:07:29 +1200

And re: Cactus Kate – https://www.lawsociety.org.nz/for-the-community/search-register-of-lawyers/lawyer-details?pi=MjQwMTE=

Felix Geiringer

Sun, 17 Aug 2014 16:03:40 +1200

Something I have not yet seen discussed in relation to Dirty Politics' revelations, but which certainly needs some careful consideration in relation to the alleged actions of Judith Collins and those in the PM's office, is this:
Crimes Act 1961, s 105A – Corrupt use of official information
"Every official…

nzlemming

Sat, 16 Aug 2014 16:25:35 +1200

Not so. A quick check of the NZ Law Society members gives no result for the Odgers name.

On the NZLS registry page for applicants there is this curious entry

ODGERS Aileen Marie, formerly RODGERS Aileen Marie, formerly POW Aileen Marie, formerly MUNRO Aileen Marie

No idea if it's any…

Steve Curtis

Sat, 16 Aug 2014 16:09:05 +1200

So I presume Cathy Ogders is a member of the professional society of Lawyers.

Not so. A quick check of the NZ Law Society members gives no result for the Odgers name.

This is not surprising as she seems to operate mainly out of Hong Kong. But lately has spent…

TracyMac

Sat, 16 Aug 2014 03:33:14 +1200

I agree. The lawyers may not be au fait with the ins and outs of server security controls, but the analogies of leaving doors unlocked are pretty apposite.

We can handwave as much as we like about deep linking and image scraping, but it is patently obvious when those parts…

SteveH

Sat, 16 Aug 2014 00:44:49 +1200

Do we want to criminalise deep linking? Or scraping? Or bypassing a front-end to download an image? Or some other non-standard use of software to access information on a web server?

I don't think there is anything in the law as it is written that supports any of those interpretations:…

SteveH

Sat, 16 Aug 2014 00:32:06 +1200

If Cameron, and you and I have authorisation to access the server that hosts labour.org.nz for the purpose of viewing the Labour Party’s website, then is there any basis on which section 252(2) doesn’t come into play if once we access the server, we do things that it was not…

Steve Barnes

Sat, 16 Aug 2014 00:06:17 +1200

Regardless of the legal rights or wrongs of this there is the fact that these are the people who make those laws and change them when they find them inconvenient.
When they change a law that affects our privacy, ie GCSB and their cohorts having access to our "metadata" a…

Sacha

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 20:01:21 +1200

The fact that Ede and Slater exchanged messages expressing concern at being caught, is fairly strong evidence that they knew that they had accessed the data without authorisation.

Quite.

Russell Brown

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 19:14:02 +1200

Of course it doesn’t stop the people doing those things being absolute twatcocks even if what they do can be defended by a lawyer.

I think this is really the point. It might be successfully argued that it's not actually illegal. But was it ethical or appropriate behaviour for someone…

richdesign

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 18:37:32 +1200

That law would probably be better addressed from the point of view of the user, rather than a tech networking perspective. With everything so virtual and connected, where do you start and end the system. Section 252 was written in 2003 back when computers were still relatively contained to just…

Ian Dalziel

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 18:03:49 +1200

Cat burglary
purr loined...

Andre Alessi

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 17:54:04 +1200

Could we call what Hager and his source did, whistle blowing. And are there legal protections for that yet?

The Protected Disclosures Act specifically applies only to employees.

On a different note, I assume the situation we're in at the moment suggests Slater hasn't identified the perpetrators of the DDoS…

Ian Dalziel

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 15:50:02 +1200

allegedly farrars ...
that’s a misdirection...
a veritable farrago

Nigel McNie

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 15:42:43 +1200

The "under urgency" wouldn't be great, I agree. More a response to the field day that could open up if a judge interprets the existing law in a foolish way.

All I'm hoping for is that the law is clarified or changed such that it gives sensible results in cases…

Rich of Observationz

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 15:35:04 +1200

A court case around this would either result in sanity in interpretation, or a new bill under urgency

It's not that easy, and good law seldom results from measures passed under urgency.

Do we want to criminalise deep linking? Or scraping? Or bypassing a front-end to download an image? Or…

Sacha

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 15:13:35 +1200

allegedly farrars

I believe we've sufficiently established that's a misdirection on his part. see other thread.

Nigel McNie

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 15:12:09 +1200

Not better at all. The content could not be found by clicking. The content could be found by deliberately looking for it by trying various requests (aka: "what happens if we go to labour.org.nz/backups?), but there's no way that content was overtly linked from on their website, and no way…

xurizaemon

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 15:09:16 +1200

Many websites have hidden actions that aren’t visible until some blank area is clicked.

Yeees. "Looks like a normal webpage to me, except …"

(sorry, hackers misattributed my reply)

Ian Dalziel

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 15:04:01 +1200

Access All Areas
So, since ALL computer systems on the internet are connected that means I can legally access any computer system on the internet because I am authorised to access this computer system that I’m on.
It's better than that!
Everything is Energy,
you... information...
all energy,
all one…

Keir Leslie

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 14:47:12 +1200

But Ede was clearly worried people would figure out what he was doing, There’s no naive clickers here, there’s paid professionals snooping and talking about evading security measures. The question of proof in the case of the naive clicker simply isn’t that relevant here.

Alan Armstrong

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 14:29:12 +1200

A better analogy would be a half-open door without any signage. Many websites have hidden actions that aren't visible until some blank area is clicked, and it would be very hard to prove a naive clicker knew they were wandering into forbidden territory.

pohutukawa tree

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 14:08:50 +1200

Is the publication of the contents of the "cup of tea" tapes i.e. discussion between Key and Banks, justified on the same basis?

How could the publication of this material be justified legally?

Brent Jackson

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 14:03:29 +1200

The fact that Ede and Slater exchanged messages expressing concern at being caught, is fairly strong evidence that they knew that they had accessed the data without authorisation. I hope they are prosecuted for it.

Bart Janssen

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 13:54:02 +1200

Wow that's some tortured logic there.

So, since ALL computer systems on the internet are connected that means I can legally access any computer system on the internet because I am authorised to access this computer system that I'm on.

I don't doubt your logical thinking as a lawyer but…

Neil Drinkwater

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 13:41:48 +1200

"Cat walks on keyboard, hitting unlikely combination"

Isn't that how Bruce Wayne's cat found the bat cave? Wonder if Nicky Hagar could break name suppression ruling because someone leaked name to him and he considered it a matter of public concern.

Ian Dalziel

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 13:22:20 +1200

Do you want to play a game...?
Its success might depend, for example, on how easily Slater and Ede got hold of the information...
...how about the cat walks on the keyboard, hitting some unlikely key combination, and 'hidden' page(s) or functions appear?

This is to all intents…

Nigel McNie

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 13:14:04 +1200

A court case around this would either result in sanity in interpretation, or a new bill under urgency. Maybe they'd listen to the experts this time. Bring it on.

David Zanetti

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 13:12:12 +1200

I was part of the InternetNZ working group on their submission to the SOP which inserted the authorisation clauses you mention here.

We were very concerned about section 2's vague meaning, and seemed to be completely contrary to any abiliity to enforce the crime being described. As you've noted, it…

Rich of Observationz

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 13:02:29 +1200

That would also imply that (provided I didn't actually steal any money) that I could hack my way into http://anz.co.nz/personal/ without fear of prosecution, because I've got implied authorisation to access the front page and so on.

(As Felix said, as well)

I'd agree, it's a tricky area – one…

Peter Green

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 12:50:48 +1200

The question then is: does Cameron Slater have authority to access the server that hosts the Labour Party website?

A computer system 248(b) "includes any part of the items described in paragraph (a) and all related input, output, processing, storage, software, or communication facilities, and stored data."

So authorised to…

xurizaemon

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 12:41:41 +1200

Graeme, there’s “access” and then there’s “access”.

Reading advertising in a shop window and someone’s PIN number over their shoulder are not the same thing, and reading blog posts is not the same as downloading archived backups.

Would you feel confident in your lack of legal culpability doing the latter?…

Felix Geiringer

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 12:38:40 +1200

Graeme, I don't think you are right about s 252(2). You have to go back to s 248(b). A computer system is defined to include any part of a computer system. That means you can commit the offence in s 252(1) in relation to part of a computer system. The…

Nicole Moreham

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 12:25:41 +1200

I'd include those factors within the phrase "the competing rights of those who wrote them". You're right that the societal importance of having confidences respected has been specifically acknowledged by the courts (that point comes through strongly in English cases like Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers too) but the…

Graeme Edgeler

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 12:20:23 +1200

Accessing a computer without authorisation is a crime under section 252 of the Crimes Act 1961. It says:
(1)...

I've been going back and forth on this since the release. My current position (of many shifting ones) is that it's subsection (2) that is important in determining whether the offence…

Neil Drinkwater

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 12:20:05 +1200

Maybe labour left the door ajar but the other team seems to have come in like tom cruise in mission impossible while grabbing slaters, (allegedly farrars), info

richdesign

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 12:15:39 +1200

If I go to a public space, say a store or a museum, and someone tips me off that the door to their records room has a faulty lock, and I then take advantage of that to help myself to a bit of a look through their records, it would…

Bart Janssen

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 12:08:03 +1200

So I presume Cathy Ogders is a member of the professional society of Lawyers.

If that's true do you think it is possible that the professional society might question her about an e-mail which appears to show her attempting to incite violence towards Hager?

Nigel McNie

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 12:06:12 +1200

As far as I remember, Labour's information was only available due to a combination of oversight and misconfiguration of their servers (allowing access to data they should have denied, or data that should have been stored elsewhere entirely).

It's extremely likely that not even Labour wanted to be able to…

Neil Drinkwater

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 12:06:07 +1200

8gigs of letters the correspondents expected to remain private. All about politicians and fringe operators. 6 weeks before an election. Of course the public will be interested. Not sure about real public concern. Some people get really concerned really quickly over normal behaviour these days.

Patrick Xavier

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 11:53:52 +1200

... as long as the public interest in the emails outweighs the competing rights of those who wrote them.
That's not quite right. There is public interest also in maintaining confidences. It's that balance which is important — see ANZ v Blum:
A distinction must be drawn between what is…

Public Address

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 11:53:52 +1200

Discussion from blog post.