Two comments on details in the October 23 San Jose Mercury News Article (these are both excerpts from longer postings to fors-discuss) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Jeffrey Subject: Third SJMN article now available Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 12:19:54 -0800 (PST) Rereading it shows some boo-boos. Crack is identified as "commercially available." In fact I understand it's free with source. Second, it says of the gateway, that "a hacker who discovered it could have used it to gain access to Intel computers from the outside. Schwartz knew this." This gives the impression that Gate and Door were just wide open, and that Randal knew this. Third, the story of the discovery of the gateways is oversimplified. Only one program is mentioned. Also, when it tells of Mark's first warning about running gateway programs, it does not mention that Mark and Dirk checked out and approved a revised version of program after that first incident. This gives the false impression that Randal kept running the same program, in specific and wilful violation of Mark's request. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Website update and questions Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 21:01:18 -0800 From: "Randal L. Schwartz" >>>>> "Steve" == Steve Pacenka writes: [the # paragraph is from the SJMN article -- SP] Steve> #Four months after the search, he was indicted for three felony violations of Steve> #Oregon's computer crime law, which says it is illegal to make any unauthorized Steve> #alteration of a computer file. In Schwartz's case, that meant moving the Steve> #password file from an Intel computer to his own account, as well as making Steve> #Intel's computers vulnerable to outside attackers. Steve> Newer fors-discuss readers may be misled by "from an Intel computer to his Steve> own account." To be clearer, based on the official investigative materials Steve> we have at the website, Randal copied the password file from one Intel-owned Steve> computer to another Intel-owned computer. Yes, Steve is correct here. Funny, I missed that on my two times of reading the article.