US Govt Pursue UK hacker

[Rodion Romanovich]

I'm sorry, but he has already admitted he went there with the purpose of stealing "suppressed technology" which means he KNEW he was not supposed to be where he was or do what he was doing. Therefore he did not "stumble into a place".

You are making it out as if he accidently found something and never went back and was arrested. No, he spent two years actively trying to steal from a place he knew he shouldn't be.

Maybe you've heard of provocation to crime (or what the proper English term is)? If you're making a crime too easy then whoever commits it can't be considered guilty. Now if you enable someone to log into a network without being asked for a password then you're trying someone's curiosity quite a lot.

And, furthermore, his claim that it "did not require a password to logon" says nothing of his other means used to bypass security to gain access.

Well, the failure of the government to prove the existence of any such further security requirements implies so.

You are taking his word 100% and conveniently dismissing anything the govt says. There is no point in debating because anything they do say is dismissed as "oh they are just saying that" while anything he says is taken as the word of God.

Well, since the government refuses to say which those further security systems would be, let alone prove it, their statements are just regular political BS. "It hurt the 9/11 response", it's like "why do you hate freedom?". You can say that anything hurt the 9/11 response - this salesman had run out of donuts so this diabetic policeman was too hungry to be able to get to the 9/11 site quickly enough but could maybe have helped more if he got there faster. That guy had chosen bad shoes on the morning so he couldn't walk faster, so OMG he's guilty of hurting the 9/11 response. No, all the arguments from the government so far are just BS and no real facts that can be proved. However it can be proved quite easily that the networks the British guy accessed weren't password protected. Therefore his single statement is, unlike those of the government, containing facts rather than just rhetorics. If this guy is really sentenced to anything, then it's a threat to democracy, the Internet and regular people.