Re: New Mitnick Book
Responding to msg by pcw@access.digex.net (Peter Wayner) on Wed, 3 Jan 7:39 PM Here's Littman on immunity for Shimomura (describing telco tracking Mitnick): Shimomura's brought along his own hacker's scanning rig. It's pretty basic, just an Oki 900 cellular phone and a hardware interface to his tiny HP Palmtop. One of Shimomura's friends -- who happens to be under federal indictment for illegal hacking -- cooked up the interface and helped write the software. Shimomura likes his computer-controlled cellular phone, but its use for tracking is limited. Its main purpose is to lock on a call and eavesdrop. It is illegal to use it to eavesdrop on calls. That's why Shimomura needed immunity from prosecution when he demonstrated his Oki scanner before Congress a couple of years ago. (p. 6) ------ [Still reading ... ]
Shimomura likes his computer-controlled cellular phone, but its use for tracking is limited. Its main purpose is to lock on a call and eavesdrop. It is illegal to use it to eavesdrop on calls. That's why Shimomura needed immunity from prosecution when he demonstrated his Oki scanner before Congress a couple of years ago. (p. 6)
Curious, David Skaggs (R-CO) while arguing against having the Rocky Flats Grand Jury testify before congress on they're findings pointed out that congress can only offer immunity from prosecution for a testimony _about_ crimes they may have committed. In Shimomura's case the crime was committed in front of congress as _part_ of his testimony. One could easily argue, as Skaggs did, that congress oversteped it's bounds by asking a witness to commit a crime. Then again, they're the ones who decide what most of these crimes are in the first place. Sorry to stray off topic. brad
participants (2)
-
Brad Huntting -
John Young