What is ransomware and how do I protect my PC from WannaCry?
Our Home Secretary says he's unable to prevent extradition, sections of the law says he can stop it click here
This isn't a case particularily close to my heart. But injustice is.
Do you think we should let the US get hold of him?
I agree with you. If he did the damage that was reported he should stand trial and prove what he said is true. J.B.
Dont you think they owe him some thanks??? if he could get into thier defence computers and show up the weeknesses then others less friendly could. They were made to look like fools and they want to get thier own back.
The problem I have is not so much the hapless Mr McKinnon whom I see as a prime case for extradition, it's the inconsistency shown by the government. On one hand it refuses to return known criminals to their own country on human rights grounds, yet on the other hand seems to fall over it's own feet in it's eagerness to deport its own citizens to the USA. Now I make no moral criticism here, but the USA is a country that has the death penalty and in other cases this very argument has been used to keep undesirables here rather than send them home to face their own legal system. I'd just like to see more consistency.
I don't like the way his family are trying to use his Asperger's as an excuse for his (alleged!) crimes. If he isn't responsible for his own actions, why did his mother (or whoever looks after him) allow him to do this in the first place?
So long, Mr McKinnon!
If both the damage caused,and the witness`s are in the US,then thats where he should be tried,and do keep in mind that when the UK ask the US to extradite an offender back to the UK they will co-operate.
And it is not beyond the realms of possibility that they end up offering a job,it would not be the first time the Americans employed a hacker.
"do keep in mind that when the UK ask the US to extradite an offender back to the UK they will co-operate."
Remind me again, I forgot. Which planet does this happen on?
He showed up the US security to be sadly lacking and done from a cheap home computer. The real question should be 'if so much money is spent on security and when various people ridicule the armchair philosophers/generals, how did an armchair amateur, from home, compromise so many systems'. If he was wading freely through the systems I would imagine that other Governments/organisations were having a whale of a time. This has a lot to do with the old 'egg on the face' scenario. He even left messages that their system was inadequate so he must be the world's most polite hacker or the US network was set up by numpties. I'm afraid that nothing that I have read so far will convince me other than the US is making an example out of someone with no malicious intent and he is being used as a scapegoat for a catastrophic failure from those who are meant to errrrmmmm...protect us. He did commit a crime but stop all this pathetic extradition nonsense, try him here and let him serve his sentence here...SIS could use him on his community service programme. I would be locking up the half-wit IT consultants that pieced together this pathetic network. Also one needs to question the cost of the 'damage' caused by him...how about asking how much he saved the US Government by getting them to get off their lardy backsides and tighten up a system that had more holes than a colander?
'I don't like the way his family are trying to use his Asperger's as an excuse for his (alleged!) crimes'..I have personal experience of 3 people with Aspergers' and it is clearly obvious that you have not got a clue what you are typing. I am heartened to see that the moral indignation, huffing and puffing is directed against the hacker and not the lame security.
The so called `special relationship` with the USA appears to be all one way; we give, they take.
This case is simply about `loss of face` or pure embarrassment that a person could, in his own words, gain easy access to the system.
If the UK had any respect, it would send the likes of Abu Hamza to the USA and keep McKinnon here since they are both considered `terror` subjects of sorts.
After all we claim not to deport or extradite to counties which torture or abuse individuals; demonstrably the USA does both. How can we have any confidence that McKinnon`s rights would be honoured; the USA denies abuse of prisoners at every turn but is found to be `economical` with the truth each time.
`.. why did his mother (or whoever looks after him) allow him to do this in the first place?`
Obviously you know everything your children (if you have any) do all of the time.
Mckinnon is 42 years old and knows more about computing, systems and security than his mother and probably all who have posted here. How easy do you think it is to restrict someone with little else of pleasure/interest in their life to what you want them to do?
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.