ZDNet UK


Skip to Main Content

ZDNet.co.uk - Winner of Best Business Website 2007
  1. Home
  2. News
  3. Blogs
  4. Reviews
  5. Prices
  6. Resources
  7. Community
  8. My ZDNet

 

ZDNet UK RSS Feeds


IT Jobs

Security threats Toolkit

Email bomber faces retrial

David Meyer ZDNet.co.uk

Published: 11 May 2006 16:10 BST

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly
  • Post Comment

A teenager who was cleared of breaching anti-hacking laws by sending millions of messages to a former employer faces a retrial.

David Lennon, who is now 18 and can therefore be named for the first time, is alleged to have used a mail bombing programme called Avalanche to send approximately five million emails to his former employers, Domestic and General Group plc, in early 2004, crashing the company’s email server.

The case against him, brought under the Computer Misuse Act (CMA) 1990, was dismissed last November by District Judge Kenneth Grant at Wimbledon Magistrates' Court. Judge Grant had said that Section 3 of the Act, which concerns unauthorised modification of data, had not been breached, as emails sent to a server configured to receive emails could not be classified as unauthorised.

But on Thursday, judges at the Royal Courts of Justice sent the case back to the Magistrates Court, saying Judge Grant "was not right to state there was no case to answer". Mr Justice Jack said the judge should consider "what answer Mr Lennon might have expected if he had asked D&G" before starting the mail bombing.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), which had appealed against the original judgement, was pleased by Thursday's ruling. A statement said: "We have sought to clarify a point of law, to update the interpretation of that law to cope with contemporary high-tech crime. As technology develops at an ever increasing pace the law may sometime need to be interpreted in new ways.

"The police and CPS are determined to ensure that those who use the Internet for crime are not beyond the reach of the law, and to make the Internet a safe place for both businesses and domestic users."

The case highlighted flaws in the 16-year-old CMA, enacted in the days before Internet crime became a significant problem. Experts have complained in the past that it does not specifically outlaw denial-of-service attacks.

Security expert Peter Sommer, who has called for the CMA to be updated, was a defence witness in Lennon's trial last year. He said on Thursday that "the defence [had been] asking the court to take a fairly narrow and literal view of the CMA".

"My own view is that they could have made a decision either way. The fact that the Court of Appeal has reversed it is not a colossal surprise," he told ZDNet UK.

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly Print with HP

Did you find this article useful?
263 out of 368 people found this useful


Company/Topic Alerts

Create a new alert from the list below:





Related Jobs

PLC/SCADA Control System Engineer, Long term Contract Scotland

PLC/SCADA Control System Engineer wanted for a long-term contract in Scotland. You must have full life cycle experience: Designing, Implementing & ...

PLC Control Engineer - Torque measurement systems - Great office!

Do you have skill sets in PLC control systems and inverter drives and motors? Have you had exposure to electronics and mathematics to a high ...

IT Support Analyst - Global Travel Required - Global PLC

IT Support Analyst is required to work globally for my Global PLC this includes working from their sites in Europe/America and Asia. You will be ...

Sentry Posts Blog

Mobile Linux Better For Mobile Busines...

Mobile Linux Better For Mobile Business Apps? Author: Eric Everson, MyMobiSafe.com As mobile Linux is carving it’s footprint on the future of mobile application development, the... More

Post a comment

DWP downplays security breach

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has admitted that some of its staff have been forwarding passwords with password protected material. An email that was leaked on the 'Dizzy... More

Post a comment

How many headshots does one chairperso...

We got a strange request last week from the head of PR from Russian security experts Kaspersky. It seems although the company was very happy with the interview we recently carried with... More

Post a comment

Featured Talkback

On the contrary, if vendors were forced to stand behind their products it should increase innovation. It would force more, and better , testing before hitting the sales floor, resulting in fewer updates and less downtime for the consumer. At present the EULA removes responsibility from the vendor, and moves it to the user, which is a step backward. Make the vendor responsibility for their code.

By: ator1940

Read full story:
RSA: Vendor liability may stifle innovation