Kicking Crackers Off the Gridhttp://web.archive.org/web/20000824015646/www.wired.com/news/...1 of 21/13/07 7:35 PM

Kicking Crackers Off the Grid

byArik Hesseldahl

9:05 a.m. Aug. 5, 1998 PDT

If convicted, the two teenagers who earlier this year demonstrated the vulnerability of US military computernetworks will likely accept the usual punishment doled out to crackers: They'll be barred from computersand the Internet.But critics say that such restrictions may not be the best punishment for computer crimes -- and couldpoint to a wider fear of technology on the part of the legal system.US Attorney Michael Yamaguchi's recommendations, made last week, would bar the two Northern Californiateens, "Makaveli," 16, and "TooShort," 15, from unsupervised computer use, owning a modem, and seekingemployment in the computer security field during their probation.Both teenspleaded guiltyto several charges relating to illegally accessing sensitive military and governmentcomputers in February of this year. The pair is expected to be formally sentenced in several months.Mike Roadancer, president of theHackers Defense Foundationand a convicted cracker, called thecomputer-use quarantines usually recommended in such cases a joke."These kinds of restrictions don't even touch the issue of responsible use of technology. They don't serveany purpose other than to make these kids bitter and angry," he said."Personally, I think that if anything, they should be encouraged in the responsible use of technology,"Roadancer said.A San Francisco criminal defense attorney who specializes in computer crime cases agreed."From a political standpoint, what the computer-use restrictions say is that what we're concerned about is athreat from someone with skills plus tools plus knowledge," said Jennifer Granick, who operates a privatepractice."In this day and age we should be embracing skills and tools and knowledge," she said.At first glance, the recommended restrictions seem to resemble those placed on another alleged cracker,Kevin Mitnick, who until recently was barred from using a computer while preparing his defense.Mitnick, who has been in a federal prison for more than three years awaiting trial on 25 counts of computer-related fraud and theft, has recently been allowed the use of a laptop to examine the evidenceagainst him.In an age in which computers are fast becoming a part of daily life, are such restrictions realistic andenforceable? Will they make a difference or serve as a deterrent? And whose interest do such restrictionsserve?Opinions from other computer security specialists and advocates vary.It's a "close question," said Barry Steinhardt, executive director of theElectronic Frontier Foundation, whichhas not taken a formal position on the restrictions placed upon accused or convicted crackers."As an alternative to incarceration, it is clearly less punitive. But on the other hand, I hate to see peoplebeing asked to waive their First Amendment rights."Granick draws a clear distinction between imposing such restrictions as part of a probationary period andafter parole from prison."In the case of probation, the court can impose restrictions on activity intended to serve the interests of public safety, but it's also intended to be a period of rehabilitation for the defendant," said Granick, who