Computer Crime Flashcards
(17 cards)
Define ‘access’:
In relation to any computer system, means instruct, communicate with, store data in, receive data from, or otherwise makes use of any of the resources of the computer system
Define ‘authorisation’:
Includes an authorisation conferred on a person by or under an enactment or rule of law or by an order of a court or judicial process
Define ‘computer system’:
Means
- a computer or
- 2 or more interconnected computers or
- any communication links between computers or to remote terminals or another device
- 2 or more interconnected computers combined with any communication links between computers or to remote terminals or any other device
Define “access”:
Covers almost all interactions with a computer system such as using a computer at work and more remote forms of access such as viewing a website or using a virus
What does “access” require?
Access requires that the person instructing or communicating with the computer system has some form of connection with the computer system
What does “computer system” widely include in relation to data?
All related input, output, processing, storage, software, or communication facilities, and stored data.
Section 249 (1) - Accessing computer system for dishonest purpose
Directly or indirectly, accesses any computer system and thereby, dishonestly or by deception and without claim of right -
a) obtains any property, privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit or valuable consideration
b) causes loss to any other person
7 years
Section 249 (2) - Accessing computer system for dishonest purpose
Directly or indirectly accesses any computer system WITH INTENT dishonestly or by deception and without claim of right -
a) to obtain any property, privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit or valuable consideration
b) to cause loss to any other person
What is the distinction between Section 249 (1) & (2) Accessing computer system for dishonest purpose?
Section 249 (1) is directed at the situation where a person has actually accessed a computer system, obtains the offending material or causes loss
Section 249 (2) is directed at someone who actually accesses the computer system with that intent regardless of the result
What were the circumstances in Police v Le Roy regarding ‘benefit not limited to financial pecuniary advantage’?
Man was an employee of Telstra Clear and used his position to access the email account of his ex.
A Protection Order was in place and the court held that accessing the email account gave him a meaningful benefit.
Benefit was not limited to financial or pecuniary advantage.
What did the court note in R v Billingsley?
The person who suffers loss does not have to be aware of the loss at the time of the offence.
Section 250 (1) - Damaging or interfering with a computer system
Intentionally or recklessly destroys, damages or alters any computer system if he knows or ought to know that danger to life is likely to result
10 years
Section 250 (2) - Damaging or interfering with a computer system
Intentionally or recklessly and without authorisation, knowing that is not authorised or being reckless as to whether or not he is authorised:
a) damages, deletes, modifies or interferes or impairs any data or software in computer system
b) causes any data or software in any computer system to be damaged, deleted, modified or interfered with
c) causes any computer system to fail or deny service to any authorised users
Distinction between Section 250 (1) and (2) Damaging or interfering with a computer system
Section 250 (1) criminalises the destruction, damaging or altering of a computer system where they ought to know danger to life exists
Section 250 (2) adds the requirement that the defendant must act without authority with the knowledge they are not authorised
Section 250 (2)(b) includes instances where the defendant has arranged matters that the victims own operation (or third party) of his computer system will cause damage
Section 252 (1) Accessing a computer system without authorisation
Intentionally accesses, directly or indirectly any computer system without authorisation, knowing that he or she is not authorised or being reckless as to whether or not he is authorised to access that computer system
Section 252 (2) Accessing a computer system without authorisation
Subsection does not apply if a person who is authorised to access a computer system accesses that computer system for a purpose other than the one for which he was given access
What does R v Walker highlight regarding offending carried out from remote computers?
Highlights offending carried out from a remote computer.
Teenager developed software which he used to control infected computers through a “bot net” causing significant damage to computers overseas.
He was charged under 249 (2)(a), 250 (2)(c) and 252(1)
