Since you asked for it:

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by Kjeldoran
btw, and I know most will deny this, certainly Titans, but the only way Parra had those logs was cause someone hacked Elsu's pc and attained the logs.

(don't ask me to post PROVE, this is what I believe is the truth and I'm sure alot will disagree with this)

rgds Kj

Since you have raised this issue again, I will now try to give as much clarity to this situation as possible, I'd rather not but I am sick and tired of countless allegations like this on my adress as well as that of 'Titans' as an entity.

Yes, it was me who gave Zeus the logins. It was me who told Zeus how to access the computer of the person who had these logins, this ofcourse all being completely legal.
It was however NOT me who first found these logs, it was my fellow intel officer Globe who did so. Something he had to pay dearly for, because to this day he is regarded as a 'filthy hacker' in some circles whereas it was not he who took part in any illegal activities, yet those that now disregard him.

I'll now then explain how the information was acquired:
It came from meddys computer, quite simple and short. It was accessed by a standard function available in any version of windows since 1995. In order for anyone to view the data it would have to be specifically shared by the administrator of that computer.
It's quite easy actually, start --> run --> \\meddy.ip --> Enter.
This then opens a view of all SHARED components on the persons computer, which amusingly enough in this case was the mIRC folder. After downloading this folder (I have it to this date) and examining the contents it was quite obvious that the FAnG attack group ouzo was cheating on a large and organized scale. In fact, it was so organized that meddy himself made a file containing a part the logins he had collected from IRC and was in the root of the IRC folder.

This here is the log of my conversation with zeus regarding the recovered logins:

Session Start: Sun Oct 27 16:29:27 2002
Session Ident: Zeus
[16:29:36] <ParraCida> lo - I send you a mail, did you get it? :)
[16:29:46] -> *p* info zeus
[16:32:28] <ParraCida> it contains a list of about ~40 u/p for pa
[16:32:39] <Zeus> nope
[16:32:46] <ParraCida> mmm I send it a while ago
[16:32:50] <ParraCida> 2 hours maybe
[16:33:16] <Zeus> havent got it
[16:33:20] * ParraCida resends
[16:33:57] <ParraCida> *sent*
[16:36:26] <ParraCida> got it now? else I'll send from a diff mail account
[16:40:19] <Zeus> yes ta
[16:40:23] <Zeus> how you get this?
[16:40:42] <ParraCida> its explained in the mail as well
[16:40:45] <ParraCida> at the bottom
[16:41:23] <ParraCida> --
[16:41:23] <ParraCida> these actions were taken to get this information:
[16:41:23] <ParraCida>  
[16:41:23] <ParraCida> /dns meddy|off
[16:41:23] <ParraCida> Resolved pD950CA88.dip.t-dialin.net to 217.80.202.136
[16:41:23] <ParraCida> Start --> run \\217.80.202.136 
[16:41:23] <ParraCida> This will display an IRC directory
[16:41:23] <ParraCida> In the logs you will see all kinds of u/p and discussions (mostly german cuz he is a german guy :p)
[16:41:23] <ParraCida> All of these have been copied already and checked which resulted in the above list
[16:41:23] <ParraCida> In the root there is also a file called 'josh.txt' which contains most of the u/p also.
[16:41:24] <ParraCida> --
[16:41:47] <ParraCida> he has dialin so I'm not sure if that is his ip right now or if he is online at all
[16:44:22] <ParraCida> oh and before you think I am trying to 'blame' anyone, be advised that this list contains at least one u/p from a person from my own alliance :)
[16:48:14] <ParraCida> is it any good info?
[16:56:31] <Zeus> how many people know about this?
[16:57:00] <ParraCida> a few people know that there are u/p
[16:57:04] <ParraCida> 2 people have actually seen them
[16:57:27] <ParraCida> -
[16:57:27] <ParraCida> [16:56:25] meddy|off is logged in as meddy
[16:57:27] <ParraCida> -
[16:57:27] <ParraCida> meddy|off End of /WHOIS list.
[16:57:27] <ParraCida> -
[16:57:27] <ParraCida> [16:56:34] * Looking up pD950CA88.dip.t-dialin.net
[16:57:27] <ParraCida> -
[16:57:27] <ParraCida> [16:56:34] * Resolved pD950CA88.dip.t-dialin.net to 217.80.202.136
[16:57:28] <ParraCida> -
[16:58:24] <ParraCida> it still works I just tried
[16:58:30] <ParraCida> start --> run \\ip
[17:08:24] <ParraCida> any conclusions yet?
[17:08:39] <Zeus> sorry bit busy....5mins ok?
[17:09:02] <ParraCida> nps, just checking etc :)
[17:36:25] <ParraCida> any conclusions yet?  <--- :P
[17:36:56] <Zeus> acted on
[17:37:04] <Zeus> wehat alliance you in?
[17:37:07] <ParraCida> Titans
[17:37:28] <ParraCida> but this is not one specific alliance cheating
[17:38:36] <Zeus> ok
[17:40:26] <Zeus> thankyou btw:)

Often I have pondered to make his information available, not in the least to give the already failing FAnG command that last push over the edge sending them hurling down in the abyss, but mainly to shut up all the people who were then and now complaining on how they were wronged and how hacking was supposedly involved. To counter the 'theories' we saw from popular FAnG HC's, who can forget the hilarious account of hinch were he explained the IRC database had been hacked and he would file a report to the police or the Rumad-trilogy where he offered 3 different threads in the span of a few days each offering a different conclusion as to how these people were 'wronged and innocent'.

We, Titans Command, however decided that this was not the appropiate course of action to take. Several reasons were the cause of this. First off, the Creators have always respected the privacy of the people involved, we choose to do the same, especially as it was not 'OUR' case to make public. Secondly, rubbing salt in your wounds publically would have been fun, but would seem quite petty. And whereas no-one likes a sore looser, people generaly dislike a gloating winner even more.
Third of all, we had accomplished our goals, the cheaters had been removed and there was no need to go on about it, the only thing we would have accomplished was more flames and angry people and against common beliefs, thats not what the 'Titans Propaganda Squad' is always after.

Why then, come forward with this information now you may ask. Well, there would have been no need too, but after reading Kjel's replies on another thread concerning this and the factual inconsistencies he posted as the only, the whole and nothing but the truth in there have brought me to post this. Also, this all now lies in the 'past', enough time has passed for this to be openly discussed and I 'do' feel that the planetarion community has a right to this information. Yes I know that sounds a bit the 'easy way out', something that you would rather expect coming from Rumad, but I have had during the period where this all was active several pm's of friends of closed people asking me why I was telling blatant lies because they trusted their 'friends' unconditionally. Therefore all the people who have been lied to constatly have the right to know this.

Over all it is a complete list of 31 logins for planetarion accounts.
Most of which part of the Ouzo attack group and FAnG. Where they 'all' FAnG? Most likely not, they were however all associated with FAnG however, included several officers and HC and those that were not FAnG member attacked and defended with the alliance. The one Titan member that we thought was cheating was eventually not kicked, the login he gave was not his but that of someone else on closer inspection of the actual log. This does not make him innocent, but it doesn't make him proven guilty of account sharing either. We did however report what we thought was his login, not quite relevant for the issue, but I'm sure I would have to mention this later on anyway when someone 'proves' my hypocracy.

[Kjeldoran]

fair enough ...

rgds Kj

[The Globe]

how evil

[lokken]

a top class owning of the highest order, for which i will award the rare mark of 9/10.

You still accessed something that wasnt yours to access.
And as i read earlier in some post, titans hc cheated round 6,included hc. why werent they kicked or demoted?

regards
¤¤¤

[The Globe]

Originally posted by ¤¤¤
You still accessed something that wasnt yours to access.

it was a public url.
Is it illegal to access www.google.com?

[whoop]

Originally posted by The Globe
it was a public url.
Is it illegal to access www.google.com?

Well, technically it wasn't a URL, but rather a windows share. "Share" being the key word.

If you don't want people to see your crap, don't share it.

Winows 2k and XP have (unfortunately) some shares on by default that you don't know about.

If there is interest, I will post details on how to remove these shares.

-whoop

PS: Parra: wtf is up with that wide ass post ? n00b

[Ruler]

rofl

[Silk_311x]

Unfortunatly for Windows, there is a protcol called netbios. This protocol allows users on a windows network to access computers by name without the need for DNS. There is also another form of this protcol called NetBT Wich is Netbios over TCP/IP. This protocol is turned on by default on NT 5.X machines. Cutting to the chase, it allows Windows shares to be accessed accros the internet.

NetBT coupled with Administrative shares can pose a small security risk. NetBT coupled with user shares pose a medium risk. NetBT with user shares, and no administrator password is about the stupidest thing you can do.

Basicly if you want to minmize this risk, turn off NetBT, Change your administrator account name and always usea complex password of letters and numbers. Also having a personal firewall does not hurt.

It is my opinion that any computer accessed this way is not a form of hacking at all. If you are stupid enough not to research the OS you use, then you deserve to have bad things happen to you. If anyone has any questions at all how to better secure there windows system, I can usually be found to help. I dont mind helping people who take helping themselves in to there own hands, and I dont mind exploiting my enemies using there stupidity against them. I think it serves OUZO right, for being screwed over. I am glad someone with some ingenuity used a basic windows feature against there enemie. Kudos for that

[Scorpio]

still it all sux.
cheating sux.
accessing other people's comps sux.

[Axis_WLF]

<sheds a tear> im proud of little brother parra

[Scouse]

Originally posted by ¤¤¤
You still accessed something that wasnt yours to access.
And as i read earlier in some post, titans hc cheated round 6,included hc. why werent they kicked or demoted?

regards
¤¤¤

I'd correct you, but I don't to ruin this quite fantastic thread.

Originally posted by Scouse
I'd correct you, but I don't to ruin this quite fantastic thread.

Didnt a titans hc (or two) plus a couple of officers cheat alot round 6?. I recollect reading some logs saying so.
Cant remember anything about them beeing punished for it though, so feel free to comment.

¤¤¤

[Ahriman]

Nice to see it out in the open, I was always quite interested in how the deletions came to pass. Well done Globe.

[Scouse]

Originally posted by ¤¤¤
Didnt a titans hc (or two) plus a couple of officers cheat alot round 6?. I recollect reading some logs saying so.
Cant remember anything about them beeing punished for it though, so feel free to comment.

¤¤¤

God damnit. Shhhhhhhhhhhh. If you care so much make your own thread to which I'll respond properly. This thread is bliss. Do not spoil it.

[Preach]

move it to another specific thread with some facts to back up your allegation and we'll answer that to the fullest of our ability, like Scouse said, dont ruin the moment here.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally posted by Preach
move it to another specific thread with some facts to back up your allegation and we'll answer that to the fullest of our ability, like Scouse said, dont ruin the moment here.

parra's post was great, cleared up some things and even told me things I didn't know about. but now you don't want other pple to react just cause this is a titans post?

I think the gloating which you (preach, scouse and all the tits) are doin atm does more dmg to this post then the other replies.

rgds Kj

[cypher]

pld pawwa and globe

[hAl]

Originally posted by cyphie
pld pawwa and globe

Don't make us laugh as you are widely covered in the logs in the other cheating thread on this board. If it comes to a matchup between massive cheaters Titans is very hard to beat with their officers/commanders taking the lead themselfs.

Allthough to be fair the intell on the FAnG battlegroup was also a quite a coup. I remember one of our member being closed claiming his innocence in it. How they were hacked and all He might have better shut up about it or admitted his guilt cause he wasn't very believable then either. Well, he left us and is now a Madcows or Oly officer (BC) I believe. Kind of funny how Titans expose cheaters and VOM makes them officers. Amusing to say the least.

Btw, I think accessing shares is totally different to requesting info from a webserver or ftp server which are programs to deliberatly spread information to others. So even if a share is not password protected there is no valid reason to access it and allthouhg I'm not a trained legal proffesional I think it might well constitute as a computer crime to access data on a share without permission.

hAl
hAl

[Cicada]

Originally posted by hAl
D

I'm not a trained legal proffesional I think it might well constitute as a computer crime to access data on a share without permission.

it's a good thing you're not then..

[Scouse]

Originally posted by hAl
Kind of funny how Titans expose cheaters and VOM makes them officers. Amusing to say the least.

How on earth is that 'kind of funny'? Olympians is not Titans, quite obviously.

[Ahriman]

Originally posted by hAl
Btw, I think accessing shares is totally different to requesting info from a webserver or ftp server which are programs to deliberatly spread information to others. So even if a share is not password protected there is no valid reason to access it and allthouhg I'm not a trained legal proffesional I think it might well constitute as a computer crime to access data on a share without permission.

I too was both shocked and appauled in equal measure to discover this meaning of 'share' on http://dictionary.com:

1. To divide and parcel out in shares; apportion.
2. To participate in, use, enjoy, or experience jointly or in turns.
3. To relate (a secret or experience, for example) to another or others.
4. To accord a share in (something) to another or others: shared her chocolate bar with a friend.

Shocked and appauled with every fibre of my being! I mean really, what sort of monster could possibly expect that a 'share' on a computer would be exactly the same thing as sharing a bar of chocolate with a friend. It's disgusting that they could twist the meaning so far when used as a technical term

[Ska]

Originally posted by hAl

I think it might well constitute as a computer crime to access data on a share without permission.

You actually made me laugh out loud in my cube. I applaud you.

[Hardin]

Originally posted by hAl


Allthough to be fair the intell on the FAnG battlegroup was also a quite a coup. I remember one of our member being closed claiming his innocence in it. How they were hacked and all He might have better shut up about it or admitted his guilt cause he wasn't very believable then either. Well, he left us and is now a Madcows or Oly officer (BC) I believe. Kind of funny how Titans expose cheaters and VOM makes them officers. Amusing to say the least.


hAl
hAl

As I was a member of Titans and OuZo last round and also a gal m8 of Globe (who is a great GC and nice bloke btw) the whole episode was a little awkward for meh...

I just wanted to say that OuZo was not a 'FaNG' battle group. It probably had a preponderance towards FaNG as some of its leading members were from FaNG but it also had many reps from other allies and it certainly selected a mixed bag of targets.

OuZo's main interest was in gaining roids and it didn't matter where they came from. It is also not fair to tarnish the whole of OuZo with a cheat0rs tag as it is not fair to tag any alliance as cheater because of the involvement of a few people. The vast majority of OuZo players were and are rule abiding!

btw... in case anyone wondered I was not the Titans member queried afaik.

[SpazMonster]

Originally posted by hAl
...

Btw, I think accessing shares is totally different to requesting info from a webserver or ftp server which are programs to deliberatly spread information to others. So even if a share is not password protected there is no valid reason to access it and allthouhg I'm not a trained legal proffesional I think it might well constitute as a computer crime to access data on a share without permission.

hAl
hAl

actually he was given 'permission' to it as soon as the guy clicked the 'ok' button, sharing the folder.

[-QS-]

"Hacking" others ppl comp is pretty weak imo.

Cheating exists within any alliance (also Titans, I know at least 2 farmers in R7).

Ofc, they cheated and were deleted for a correct reason, BUT imo you can`t make something right by doing wrong things...

all in all: R8 is over, Titans u r evul, pld

[Iceaxe]

Originally posted by Hardin
The vast majority of OuZo players were and are rule abiding!

If 31 members were cheating, just how big was OuZo if you can still have a vast majority not cheating?

[Hardin]

Originally posted by Iceaxe
If 31 members were cheating, just how big was OuZo if you can still have a vast majority not cheating?

I am pretty sure that not all those 31 were OuZo (prolly less than half were and I would certainly be surprised if it was over 10) Others can confirm or deny this!

OuZo also worked with other BG's and I think some of the banned peeps were from those or else just friends/gal m8s of some of those involved.

[Gayle29uk]

Originally posted by SpazMonster
actually he was given 'permission' to it as soon as the guy clicked the 'ok' button, sharing the folder.

Legally this whole area is dodgy. Legal views on 'open shares' seem to be divided with the predominance of opinion being that it's the electronic equivalent of leaving a door open; even if you do it you still don't expect random strangers to come waltzing in.

[Saitam]

Originally posted by SpazMonster
actually he was given 'permission' to it as soon as the guy clicked the 'ok' button, sharing the folder.

As much as we want, being stupid is not considered a crime.

[Salomo]

Originally posted by Gayle29uk
Legally this whole area is dodgy. Legal views on 'open shares' seem to be divided with the predominance of opinion being that it's the electronic equivalent of leaving a door open; even if you do it you still don't expect random strangers to come waltzing in.

well said, i had the same example in mind.

Now computers aren't houses (although some people basically live in them), but sharing definetly demands an act of will. One might of course argue the intent had to be objectively assumed through the fact that the files were accessable through a so called sharing function, but i doubt any sane judge would let that argument get through as any sane person had to assume, that these files were not intended for the general public. In adition the intent to share could imho definetly not be assumed in regard to someone intending to use the accessed files to damage their owner.

Originally posted by hAl

Btw, I think accessing shares is totally different to requesting info from a webserver or ftp server which are programs to deliberatly spread information to others. So even if a share is not password protected there is no valid reason to access it and allthouhg I'm not a trained legal proffesional I think it might well constitute as a computer crime to access data on a share without permission.

hAl
hAl

So accessing those files can hardly be called correct behaviour, whether or not it was criminal depends on the specific laws though. In germany as far as i know § 202a StGB specifies that the files spied upon need to have been specially secured against unauthorised access, which makes it look like parras actions probably are not punishable under german criminal law. This however does not mean, that what was done was not hacking, simply that over here it's probably not punishable * . (Which does not mean that it's not criminal in some other country. Laws are different throughout the world.)

If any damage had actually been caused by the hacking (and not by the breaking of the rules by meddy and the other deleted planets) i'd even consider it possible to recover damages, but the way it is that deleting was not really caused by the hacking but rather by those deleted, the hacking was just an ethically and morally highly questionable means of bringing them to justice

just my 3 cents on that...


* - Edited: Actually i have by now come to the conclusion it may indeed be punishable under some other paragraph. Checking that would actually require research on some definitions though, and i cba to research for this

[Salomo]

Originally posted by ParraCida
We, Titans Command, however decided that this was not the appropiate course of action to take. Several reasons were the cause of this. First off, the Creators have always respected the privacy of the people involved, we choose to do the same, especially as it was not 'OUR' case to make public. Secondly, rubbing salt in your wounds publically would have been fun, but would seem quite petty. And whereas no-one likes a sore looser, people generaly dislike a gloating winner even more.
Third of all, we had accomplished our goals, the cheaters had been removed and there was no need to go on about it, the only thing we would have accomplished was more flames and angry people and against common beliefs, thats not what the 'Titans Propaganda Squad' is always after.

so the thought that if you told the world how you got the info you might get less info in the future had no effect at all and perhaps didn't even cross your minds?

[Seth Mace]

originally posted by Silk_311x
If you are stupid enough not to research the OS you use, then you deserve to have bad things happen to you.

Wow! Does this guy really believe the things he says?

[Knight Theamion]

Parra, how did you found out about Cimmeria ?

[hAl]

Originally posted by Ahriman
I too was both shocked and appauled in equal measure to discover this meaning of 'share' on http://dictionary.com:

1. To divide and parcel out in shares; apportion.
2. To participate in, use, enjoy, or experience jointly or in turns.
3. To relate (a secret or experience, for example) to another or others.
4. To accord a share in (something) to another or others: shared her chocolate bar with a friend.

Shocked and appauled with every fibre of my being! I mean really, what sort of monster could possibly expect that a 'share' on a computer would be exactly the same thing as sharing a bar of chocolate with a friend. It's disgusting that they could twist the meaning so far when used as a technical term

Problem is to share something that must be an agreement between two persons. Someone must actually off you the thing he wants to share. The other person has to accept it. Legally I just wondered if openening a shared directory constutes it being on offer/permission for everybody to access the info. It might wel require an active action to give persmission like putting up an url to it or setting up a server to gain access to it.

I just asked someone who knows more about this and he says it can be a computercrime if there person accessing the computer can reasonably assume that he has no permission to access the data. The law does not require any that any security measures are actually broken. After you gain access then there is still a number of acts that will be considered illegal. This includes causing damage (loss of data or even lose of computer time) or the copying and spreading of information you were not intitled too.

Off course this leaves interpretation cause how can you "reasonably" know if you are allowed to access to an open share. Apperantly this is mostly up to circumstance. For instance if you know who's computer you are gaining access to you should really be aware that he has giving acces or else contact him/her. If you access a anonymous comp it might be apperent by the fact it contains personal info/data a person would not normally share. Copying such data and giving it to others will most likely therefore be illegal over here.

I forgot to ask if you can personally sue somebody for damages but that might well be the case as well. Off course this is of little use seeing the cost compared to the losses that could be compensated.

when looking on the web I can only find articles that do specify something about breaking trough a some kind of security although this seems to differ between countries.

hAl

[edit]
I'll add this link to make it clearer for dutch readers at least:
http://www.surfopsafe.nl/?catid=17&pageid=17
it seems to clearly specify that for gaining acces to be illegal would need a security feature broken or by disguishing your identity. Data on a comp however is also protected by several other laws so not sure about that.
In Belgium however gaining access does not mean you need to overcome anysecurity measure: http://pisa.belnet.be/pisa/nl/juridi...ack.htm#550bis[/edit]

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by Knight Theamion
Parra, how did you found out about Cimmeria ?

'Someone' in Titans gave me the link before it became 'public'.
Not entirely sure WHO was it tho, long time ago


BTW, I am quite enjoying the arguements on how accessing a 'shared' folder is 'illegal'. By that logic accessing a website (which is in fact a 'shared folder') without express permission of the owner would be an equal crime.

And as for the comment of not making it public because we would use this source of intel later on. Technically, that SHOULD have been a reason, but after downloading the initial mIRC folder I have NEVER actually even 'tried' it again. I've read a few of the channels and pm's with important people, but apart from that I've not even looked at the other stuff. Had I been less lazy I'd have logged in every evening to check for targets as much as possible, not that I expect anyone to believe me though.

After all, its much easier to believe that accessing explicitly shared files is a crime then just to believe in 'common sense', well.. at least on AD it is

edit: I'm not gonna go into details about how accessing a 'shared' folder might or might not be illegal. Suffice it to say that nobody on this board has any knowledge about it, save of that from so called friends who supposedly do know something about it. Let's just for a second assume, that when explicitly sharing something on your computer you make it public with the knowledge that anyone can view the information. But if you must, please continue in this futile debate, it's always funny to see people of whom is known they'd spontaniously combust before they say something 'un-negative' about Titans cling on to hopeless arguements. Maybe in a few months I'll make a thread about it and we can all laugh about the silly arguements as much as we're laughing now about hinchies hacked IRC database.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally posted by Salomo

If any damage had actually been caused by the hacking (and not by the breaking of the rules by meddy and the other deleted planets) i'd even consider it possible to recover damages, but the way it is that deleting was not really caused by the hacking but rather by those deleted, the hacking was just an ethically and morally highly questionable means of bringing them to justice

just my 3 cents on that...

IF the info was obtained throgh hacking (and I'm saying IF cause parra showed us it wasn't) then that person should be on trail for commiting a crime. Cheating in a game is NOT a crime you can get convicted for, hacking is. So imo a hacking is 5000 times worse then the worst botuser.

rgds Kj

[hAl]

Originally posted by Scouse
How on earth is that 'kind of funny'? Olympians is not Titans, quite obviously.

Since VOM contains a large Titans player base in Olympians it seems rather odd for them to work with players they have had closed for cheating the round earlier. I wonder if they will now also try to gain access to comps of players in their own block who they obviously know to have a history of cheating.

hAl

[hAl]

Originally posted by ParraCida
BTW, I am quite enjoying the arguements on how accessing a 'shared' folder is 'illegal'. By that logic accessing a website (which is in fact a 'shared folder') without express permission of the owner would be an equal crime.

It seems tyo depend on where you acces the computer. In the Netherlands (and Germany ??) it is a computercrime to access a computer when you are breaking through some kind of protection/security or use false key/identities but in Belgium you appertantly such a reuirement is not in place. So if accessed the info on a comps of a dutch player he migt be legal. In Belgium it might be illegal. Belgium law however is much newer (2000) and it might well be that other countries will follow eventually as there is more and more a need for security on the internet.

hAl

[gzambo]

Originally posted by SpazMonster
actually he was given 'permission' to it as soon as the guy clicked the 'ok' button, sharing the folder.

that bascically sums it up

whether its ethical or not is debateable
if its done to your alliance/battlegroup your not going to be happy .

unfortunatley the constant battle for intel/bragging rights does cause ill feeling between the protaganist's but hey remember ppl its only a game

and im going to win it so give up now

[xtothez]

Originally posted by Silk_311x
If you are stupid enough not to research the OS you use, then you deserve to have bad things happen to you.

So every computer user the world over is expected to know about, research and patch every last exploit and security hole on their system otherwise they 'deserve it' when someone accesses their information without permission? Using that logic, the next time I've driving down the road and accidently run you over its your fault because you didnt research the possiblity of a car coming up behind you ay high speed.

Originally posted by Silk_311x
I think it serves OUZO right, for being screwed over. I am glad someone with some ingenuity used a basic windows feature against there enemie. Kudos for that

OuZo wasnt screwed over. The attack group that was deleted was mostly 'X-Raid', run by Meddy for Fang. Interestingly enough OuZo has more command staff in Titans (now in Oly) than it ever did in Fang.

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by hAl
It seems tyo depend on where you acces the computer. In the Netherlands (and Germany ??) it is a computercrime to access a computer when you are breaking through some kind of protection/security or use false key/identities but in Belgium you appertantly such a reuirement is not in place. So if accessed the info on a comps of a dutch player he migt be legal. In Belgium it might be illegal. Belgium law however is much newer (2000) and it might well be that other countries will follow eventually as there is more and more a need for security on the internet.

hAl

See, now I'm taking the bait here

Let's just make this crystal here: If I were to go on a network, and do //ip/c$ I can view and alter someone's C drive. I am not breaking through any barriers but I am accessing non-shared information. In this case you are right, it COULD constitute as a crime.

However, in this case the only information accessed was information that was explicitly made available for the public.
I see your point of accessing information that was not 'meant' to be accessed even though its not secured, the entire point of this case however is that the information obtained could NEVER had been accessed had the person NOT shared his IRC folder. Thus, in Belgium this would not have been a crime either.

I really really won't get into this any more now, I just wanted to explain that whereas your arguement is generally correct, it does not apply to this case. Had meddy put up a website this way, nobody would have said a word, people are confusing the type of information with the type of sharing. I really do hope you see the 'sense' in this.

I hope I made myself clear, I do take this very seriously and I'm thinking others are not and are therefore are throwing about accusations in the hopes that people will believe them.
I made my point, I think its a valid one and I will regard any 'but in this country' and 'my friend says' from this point on as pretty much slanderous, since thats what it is. Unfounded, unproven, untested points that have no precedence what so ever, tbh: it's lame even for AD standards.

[ParraCida]

(ado posting with parracidas account due to mine being unable to post.... )

I would like to state that I am not biased here, yes parracida is a friend and yes I was heavily involved in titans, but this is my attempt at a unbiased thread.

I would also state that due to having recognised qualifications (Bsc + ip security qualifications + modules in computer law) I am considered an expert in this field (this is not me bragging).

Ok onto specifics. What parra did was access a 'share' without any user level or share level security, this is a share that was accessible publically without restriction from any network connected to the person in questions PC. Ignoring any comparisons to 'houses' or 'shops' the law in this case "european law" makes no distinction between private and public networks in this case and the responsability to specify user level access is placed on the user owning the share.

What this IS directly comparible to, is the user account sharing placing the logins onto a webserver and then saying he/she was hacked when the information was accessed.

The information in question was available without security on a advertised system (parra browsed to the IP which THEN displayed the shares avaiable) thus he was in effect invited to look into any of the available shares,

he did not damage any information NOR was there any notices resticting information access, so what he did was in no way illegal.

If he had damaged any information or the computer system in question this would have been 100% different... all he did was access from a publiclly connected system, showing publically accessible non secured shares.. this wouldnt even get to court never mind be ruled against parra.

I hope this clears things up.. the ONLY guilty party here is the person or persons account sharing.

[hAl]

Well, you I agree mostly with what you guys saying but in my last post I was merely pointing out that Belgium law is exceptional as it does not just sees the way you access as important but also if you actually know you have no access to this computer.

So even if you see a wide open comp you are not allowed to access it if you know the owner does not want you to. I cannot imagine that anyone accessing that PC and looking trough logs and files with usernames and passwords can ever imagine that he has permission to access those. So in that case he should clearly have left and certainly not copied any of that info and send/show it to others for instance.

Mayby this is currently very exceptional to Belgium but it might well be the future for more laws. I find this approach very good although it will certainly be more open to interpretation by judges. Not sure if there is much jurisprudence on it yet. Hardly hear of people that have been filed official complaints against for hack in comps for personal use. Would be a nightmare to trace them and you generaly can not get at them anyways as they are often from a different country.

Since I imagine that the PC where these files where located was not Belgium and Parra is not a Belgium citizin it off course does not apply to the specific case from the original post and he has little to fear from this anyways even if was.

[ParraCida]

hAl, get the difference of an 'open' computer and a 'shared' computer.

[hAl]

Originally posted by ParraCida
hAl, get the difference of an 'open' computer and a 'shared' computer.

Parracidda, as I said, the way you acces the comp is not the only thing that is relevant.

hAl

[edit]And I do understand what a share is but I also know that many users who want to share something with a single person do not understand that they 'accidentaly' share with the rest of the world cause they do not grasp the way the internet works. They do not understand that people can access the data if they do not give them the location. That people use sniffers/scanners to check comps or can see their IP addies when they access sites or come on irc is often not clear. Many would consider it enough that they only give the location of a share to just one person enough quarantee that no other will access their comp. Mayby not very wise but certainly understandable.[/edit]

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by hAl
Parracidda, as I said, the way you acces the comp is not the only thing that is relevant.

hAl

No, basically your issue ONLY becomes relevant when accessing non-shared unprotected information. The second it becomes activly shared it doesn't matter any more.
Go call a Belgium lawyer ffs, he'll also tell you btw that European law > Belgium law.

Keep going tho, hopeless causes fit you.

[hAl]

Originally posted by ParraCida
No, basically your issue ONLY becomes relevant when accessing non-shared unprotected information. The second it becomes activly shared it doesn't matter any more.
Go call a Belgium lawyer ffs, he'll also tell you btw that European law > Belgium law.

Keep going tho, hopeless causes fit you.

http://pisa.belnet.be/pisa/nl/juridi...ack.htm#550bis

Read 550bis paragrafh 1 first line.

[DarkAngel]

i hope people dont read my irc logs, they'd get off 2 them.

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by hAl
http://pisa.belnet.be/pisa/nl/juridi...ack.htm#550bis

Read 550bis paragrafh 1 first line.

How ****ing stupid are you really. The freaking second someone SHARES something it makes it 'gerechtigd', technically the person GIVES ACCESS. This only confirms what I've been saying the entire while. Like I said, getting access to an 'open' system while knowing its wrong is something completely different then accessing a 'shared' system.

But sure keep pounding into that brick wall.