cyber crimes 1

Repent BeFORE IT’S TOO LATE

THEFT

-Information

e.g. lists, records, private emails

popular words : hacking & cracking

THEFT

-Property

e.g. transfer of money from one account to another

popular words: salami slicing, stamming

THEFT

-Service

e.g. illegal access to paid websites, line stealing

popular words : wardriving

THEFT S.378 PENAL CODE (PC)

Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable

property out of the possession of any person without

that person's consent, moves that property in order

to such taking, is said to commit theft.

Punishment: Imprisonment not more than 7

years / fine / both. For repeated

convictions, fine / imprisonment and

whipping.

• MOVABLE PROPERTY

– s.22. : The words "movable property" are intended to include

corporeal property of every description, except land and things attached to the earth, or permanently fastened to anything which is attached to the earth.

– Information in computers is digital in nature and stored in a

magnetic disk

– Information in computers is intangible

– information in computers is not moveable. Even if it is erased, it can still be recovered.


• Oxford v Moss (1979) Crim.LR.119

• court decided that confidential information is not tangible

property, thus it does not fall within the definition of 'property'

for the purpose of conviction under the Theft Act 1968.

• Facts: the act of stealing of examination papers by a student

before the day of examination. The student made a duplicate

of the papers and returned the originals to the lecturer's room.

Court held that the act cannot be considered as theft because

of the absence of permanenet loss.


Whoever dishonestly misappropriates, or converts to

his own use, or causes any other person to dispose of,

any property, shall be punished with imprisonment for

a term which shall not be less than six months and not

more than five years and with whipping and shall also

be liable to fine.

DISHONEST MISAPPROPRIATION OF

PROPERTY S. 403

‘Property’ in s. 403 is much more general compared to

s. 378.

E.g., copying information or data from another person's

computer without consent cannot be regarded as theft

under s. 378 because information or data is not

moveable, but can be regarded as dishonest

misappropriation of property under s. 403.

DISHONEST MISAPPROPRIATION OF

PROPERTY S. 403

There are several categories of criminal breach of trust listed

from s. 405 to 409.

Dishonest misappropriation of property is an offence under

s. 403, but if it involves a property entrusted to the person,

then it amount to cminal breach of trust.

General definition of criminal breach of trust is stated in

section 405, while section 406 provides the punishment.

Section 407, 408 and 409 are related to criminal breach of

trust committed by specific persons.

‘Property’ in s. 405-409 is much more general compared to

s. 378.

CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST S. 405

Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property,

or with any dominion over property either solely or

jointly with any other person dishonestly

misappropriates, or converts to his own use, that

property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that

property in violation of any direction of law prescribing

the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of

any legal contract, express or implied, which he has

made touching the discharge of such trust, or wilfully

suffers any other person so to do, commits "criminal

breach of trust".

CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST S. 405

CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST BY CLERK

OR SERVANTS. S. 408

Whoever, being a clerk or servant, or employed as a

clerk or servant, and being in any manner entrusted in

such capacity with property, or with any dominion over

property, commits criminal breach of trust in respect of

that property, shall be punished with imprisonment for a

term which shall not be less than one year and not

more than ten years and with whipping, and shall also

be liable to fine.

E.g. Pendakwa Raya lwn Aman Shah Ahmad ‘ -

Unreported, Sessions Court No. 1 Kuala Lumpur

(Arrest Case No. 62-50-90)

Aman Shah (employee of Hock Hua

Bank / HHB) acted in breach of trust

by transfering certain amount of

money in HHB to the Bank Bumiputera

Malaysia Berhard (BBMB) account of

Bistro Advertising Agency owned by

him. He withdrew the money from

BBMB through 36 cheques personally

signed by him.

CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST BY CLERK

OR SERVANTS. S. 408

According to a witness, Aman Shah visited his company not less

than 7 times and had purchased luxury cars like Mazda Savana,

Mercedez Benz 300E, Porche Carrera, Mercedez Benz 300 SL24,

Lamborghini Countach, BMW 3201 and Porsche 928 S4 either

through cash payment or cheques on different occasions.

• CHEATING / FRAUD

– multilevel marketing/ pyramid system, business opportunities,

auctions, credit card offers, loans, job vacancies.

popular word : Spear phishing

“When I would try to get into these systems, the first line of

attack would be what I call a social engineering attack,

which really means trying to manipulate somebody over the

phone through deception. I was so successful in that line of

attack that I rarely had to go towards a technical attack.

The human side of computer security is easily exploited

and constantly overlooked. Companies spend millions of

dollars on firewalls, encryption and secure access devices,

and it's money wasted, because none of these measures

address the weakest link* in the security chain.”

-----------------------------------------------------------------

* users.

Kevin Mitnick's Testimony before the US Senate Governmental Affairs Committee,

2 March 2000:

CHEATING S.415

Whoever by deceiving any person, whether or not

such deception was the sole or main inducement,--

(a) fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so

deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to

consent that any person shall retain any property; or

CHEATING S.415

b) intentionally induces the person so deceived to do

or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit to

do if he were not so deceived and which act or

omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm

to any person in body, mind, reputation, or property,is

said to "cheat".

CHEATING S.415

- if a computer is cheated, can the person who cheats

be charged under this section?

-section 415 provides that cheating can only be

directed to 'person'

- section 11: The word "person" includes any

company or association or body of persons, whether incorporated or not.

- is computer a 'person'?

CHEATING S.415

In Aman Shah case, he was charged for criminal

breach of trust by using computer and convicted under

s. 408.

Although there was an element of cheating, he was not

charged under section 415, because he cheated

nobody but the computer.

CHEATING S.415

- however, for online cheating committed against

person, the person who commits it can be charged

under this section. For example, cheating people

through websites or emails about fake get rich

schemes or free/discounted products

• FORGERY

– modifying online documents to mislead others

FORGERY S.463

Whoever makes any false document or part of a

document with intent to cause damage or injury to the

public or to any person, or to support any claim or title,

or to cause any person to part with property, or to enter

into any express or implied contract, or with intent to

commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits

forgery.

FORGERY S.463

S. 29

(1) The word "document" means any matter

expressed, described or howsoever represented, upon

any substance, material, thing or article, including any

matter embodied in a disc, tape, film, sound track or

other device whatsoever...

FORGERY S.463

People v. Avila P.2d 1330 (Colorado Court of Appeals

1988)

The defendant erased computerised driving records.

Court held that such act amounted to modification of

documents by way of forgery under Colorado forgery

statute.

• MISCHIEF

– cyber vandalism : modifying public websites and denial of

service attack

R v

David

Lennon

Wimbledon

Youth Court

23/08/2006

Teenager alleged to have

bombarded his ex-

employer's mail server

with 5,000,000 emails.

Defendant pleaded guilty

and sentenced to a two

month curfew and

electronic tagging.

• MISCHIEF

– spyware, adware, tracking cookies, identity theft

Do you experience any of the following symptoms?

Your browser homepage has been changed.

Excessive pop-up ads.

New toolbars in your browser.

PC is slow and applications do not start quickly.

Slow internet access speed.

Frequent PC crashes.

New icons on your desktop

New items in your favorites

9 out of 10 Computers are infected with Spyware.

Most likely your Computer is infected with Spyware and

Adware without you knowing.

How can Spyware affect me & my PC?

Steal your passwords

Steal your Identity

SPAM your email account

Crash your computer

Bombard you with advertising

Steal your credit card numbers

Download your private files

Monitor your emails & KeyStrokes

Watch the sites you visit

How did I get infected with Spyware?

By Downloading Music

Sharing photos

Free programs that you install

Email attachments sent to you

Chat rooms where you exchange files

Clicking on Pop-up ads

Browsing Websites

Adult-related web sites

Downloading games

• MISCHIEF

– spreading virus

MISCHIEF S.425

Whoever, with intent to cause, or knowing that he is

likely to cause, wrongful loss or damage to the public or

any person, causes the destruction of any property, or

any such change in any property, or in the situation

thereof, as destroys or diminishes its value or utility, or

affects it injuriously, commits "mischief".

MISCHIEF S.425

Explanation 1--It is not essential to the offence of

mischief that the offender should intend to cause loss or

damage to the owner of the property injured or

destroyed. It is sufficient if he intends to cause, or

knows that he is likely to cause, wrongful loss or

damage to any person by injuring any property, whether

it belongs to that person or not.

MISCHIEF S.425

‘Property’ in section 425 is also much more general than s. 378.

e.g. cyber vandalism, creation and dissimination of virus and

other malicous software

• TRESPASS

– trespass to server

– trespass to personal computer

HACKERS AND

CRACKERS

John Draper a.k.a. Captain Crunch simply

used plastic whistles from Cap'n Crunch to

make free phone calls.

Excerpt from newspapers - A story of hackers

The blowing of the whistles created a

frequency of 2600 megahertz, enough to

confuse the phone system of AT&T.

Mark Abene became a source of

inspiration to many youths, to 'learn

and explore' the hidden secrets of the

phone system in their countries.

Mark Abene a.k.a. Phiber

Optik successfully copied

the patent used to make

phone calls, and managed

to make free calls.

Nowadays, hacking activities

became more complex and

difficult to be traced.

Hackers have discovered new

methods and techniques, far more

advanced than the enforcement

agencies.

USA legislation against hacking and cracking

activities started in 1986 when the Computer Fraud

and Abuse Act was passed.

Two years after, a popular hacker, Robert Morris @

rtm launched his Internet worm. He was a graduate

of Cornell University, and was the first person who

introduced the word 'hacker' when he launched his

internet worm in 1988.

The worm manipulated more than 6,000 computer

network, and Morris became the first person charged

under the Act.

Morris was fined $10,000 and ordered to do social

works.

Morris was the son of the Head Scientist at National

Computer Security Council, one of the department in

National Security Agency (NSA).

In the same year, another hacker, Kevin Mitnick,

broke into the computer network system of

Digital Equipment Company.

Mitnick spent one year in prison. In February 1995, he was arrested

again for the offence of stealing 20,000 set of credit card numbers.

He was convicted in April 1996.

Kevin Mitnick was the first

hacker listed in FBI's Most

Wanted.

Lamo modified online Reuter news

about Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian

programmer charged for violating the

copyright of Adobe Systems Inc.

The fake version stated that Sklyarov

can be sentenced to death if convicted

(the original maximum penalty is only

five years imprisonment). He also

inserted fake comments by the USA

Attorney General, John Ashcroft.

Once beloved

Adrian Lamo

“Free Adrian Lamo!!!”

Now hated

Adrian Lamo

"world's most hated hacker"

Albert Gonzalez

170 million credit & ATM card info theft

in two years

Jonathan James a.k.a “c0mrade”

Hacked NASA & downloaded source code

of the value of $1.7 million

Kevin Poulsen a.k.a “Dark Dante”

hacked telephone and radio system, stole

Federal government system information

Gary McKinnon a.k.a Solo

Largest hacking attack on military computer

systems in US history

CRIMINAL TRESPASS S.441

Whoever enters into or upon property in the possession

of another with intent to commit an offence or to

intimidate, insult or annoy any person in possession of

such property; or having lawfully entered into or upon

such property, unlawfully remains there with intent

thereby to intimidate, insult or annoy any such person, or

with intent to commit an offence, is said to commit

"criminal trespass".

‘Property’ in section 441 is also much more general than s. 378.

This provision is in line with the offences under Computer

Crimes Act.

CRIMINAL TRESPASS S.441

• Passed by Parliament in Mac

1997

• Enforced in 1 June 2000

• Objective:

– To control direct or online

computer crimes.

COMPUTER CRIMES ACT 1997 ( )

COMPUTER CRIMES ACT 1997

• Section 2

computer" means an electronic, magnetic, optical, electrochemical, or other data processing device, or a group of such interconnected or related devices, performing logical, arithmetic, storage and display functions, and includes any data storage facility or communications facility directly related to or operating in conjunction with such device or group of such interconnected or related devices, but does not include an automated typewriter or typesetter, or a portable hand held calculator or other similar device which is non-programmable or which does not contain any data storage facility;

COMPUTER CRIMES ACT 1997

OFFENCES 1. Unauthorized access to

computer material s.3

2. Unauthorized access with intent

to commit or facilitate

commission of further offence

s.4

3. Unauthorized modification of the

contents of any computer s.5

4. Wrongful communication s.6

5. Abetments, attempts and

preparation s.7.

6. Presumption s.8.

7. Obstruction of search s.11

C:/WINDOWS/TEMP/Rar$DI01.774/flash.htm

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO COMPUTER

MATERIAL

Section 3

(1) A person shall be guilty of an offence if--

(a) he causes a computer to perform any function with

intent to secure access to any program or data held in

any computer;

(b) the access he intends to secure is unauthorized; and

(c) he knows at the time when he causes the computer

to perform the function that is the case.

Section 2 (1)

"function" includes logic, control, arithmetic, deletion,

storage and retrieval and communication or

telecommunication to, from or within a computer


MATERIAL

S 2 (2) :

For the purposes of this Act, a person secures access to any program or

data held in a computer if, by causing a computer to perform any

function, he--

(a) alters or erases the program or data;

(b) copies or moves it to any storage medium other than that in which it

is held or to a different location in the storage medium in which it is held;

(c) uses it; or

(d) causes it to be output from the computer in which it is held whether

by having it displayed or in any other manner, and references to access

to a program or data and to an intent to secure such access shall be

construed accordingly.


MATERIAL

S 2 (3)

For the purposes of paragraph (2)(c), a person uses a

program if the function he causes the computer to

perform--

(a) causes the program to be executed; or

(b) is itself a function of the program.


MATERIAL

S 2 (4)

For the purposes of paragraph (2)(d), the form in which

any program or data is output and in particular whether

or not it represents a form in which, in the case of a

program, it is capable of being executed or, in the case of

data, it is capable of being processed by a computer is

immaterial.


MATERIAL

S 2 (5)

For the purposes of this Act, access of any kind by any

person to any program or data held in a computer is

unauthorized if--

(a) he is not himself entitled to control access of the

kind in question to the program or data; and

(b) he does not have the consent or exceeds any right

or consent to access by him of the kind in question to

the program or data from any person who is so entitled.


MATERIAL

S 2 (6)

A reference in this Act to any program or data held in a

computer includes a reference to any program or data

held in any removable storage medium which is for the

time being in the computer.


MATERIAL

S 3 (2)

The intent a person has to have to commit an offence

under this section need not be directed at--

(a) any particular program or data;

(b) a program or data of any particular kind; or

(c) a program or data held in any particular computer.


MATERIAL

S 3 (3)

A person guilty of an offence under this section shall on

conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding fifty thousand

ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five

years or to both.


MATERIAL

Garyl Tan Jia Luo (2007) • Arrested for tapping into his neighbour's wireless Internet

connection.

• Pleaded guilty to the charge under Computer Misuse Act of

Singapore (first person convicted for the offence under the Act)

• Sentenced to 18 months' probation, 80 hours of community

service and banned from using the Internet for 18 months.

Attorney-General’s Reference (No. 1 of 1991) [1992] 3 WLR

432

An ex-employee visited his ex-employer, a keys vendor, to

purchase certain goods. When he was left alone by the shop

assistant, he ordered the computer to give discount to the

purchased goods.

He was charged under section 1 Computer Misuse Act 1990 (

United Kingdom) ( equivalent to section 3 Computer Crimes

Act - Malaysia), and convicted.


MATERIAL

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS WITH INTENT TO COMMIT OR

FACILITATE COMMISSION OF FURTHER OFFENCE

S. 4 (1)

A person shall be guilty of an offence under this section if

he commits an offence referred to in section 3 with

intent--

(a) to commit an offence involving fraud or dishonesty or

which causes injury as defined in the Penal Code [Act

574]; or

(b) to facilitate the commission of such an offence

whether by himself or by any other person.

S. 4 (2)

For the purposes of this section, it is immaterial whether

the offence to which this section applies is to be

committed at the same time when the unauthorized

access is secured or on any future occasion.



S. 4 (3)


conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding one hundred

and fifty thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not

exceeding ten years or to both.



R v. Thompson [1984] 1 WLR 962 p.c.i.

Thompson was a computer programmer at a bank in Kuwait. He

discovered several non-active accounts, and ordered the

computer to transfer the money in those accounts to his own

account in the same bank. To reduce the risk of being detected,

the transfer of money would only be executed by the computer

after he resigned and returned to England. Upon arrival in

England, he opened a new account in another bank, and then

wrote a letter to the Kuwait bank, asking them to close his account

(which was already filled with money transfered form the non-

active accounts) and transfer the money to his new bank

account.



In this case, there were difficulties in proving theft or cheating

because the money was not yet fully transfered to his

possession to warrant a conviction for theft, and he did not

cheat any person but a computer to warrant a conviction for

cheating. However, the conviction under section 4 stood, since

illegal access had been comitted, coupled with malicous

intention to commit or facilitate a commission of a further crime.



UNAUTHORIZED MODIFICATION OF THE CONTENTS

OF ANY COMPUTER

S 5 (1)

A person shall be guilty of an offence if he does any act

which he knows will cause unauthorized modification of

the contents of any computer.

S 2 (7)

For the purposes of this Act, a modification of the contents of any

computer takes place if, by the operation of any function of the

computer concerned or any other computer--

(a) any program or data held in the computer concerned is

altered or erased;

(b) any program or data is introduced or added to its contents;

or

(c) any event occurs which impairs the normal operation of

any computer,and any act that contributes towards causing

such a modification shall be regarded as causing it.


OF ANY COMPUTER

S 2 (8)

Any modification referred to in subsection (7) is unauthorized if--

(a) the person whose act causes it is not himself entitled to

determine whether the modification should be made; and

(b) he does not have consent to the modification from any

person who is so entitled.


OF ANY COMPUTER

S 5 (2)

For the purposes of this section, it is immaterial that the act

in question is not directed at--

(a) any particular program or data;

(b) a program or data of any kind; or

(c) a program or data held in any particular computer.


OF ANY COMPUTER

S 5 (3)

For the purposes of this section, it is immaterial whether an

unauthorized modification is, or is intended to be,

permanent or merely temporary.


OF ANY COMPUTER

S 5 (4)


conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding one hundred

thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not

exceeding seven years or to both; or be liable to a fine not

exceeding one hundred and fifty thousand ringgit or to

imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or to both,

if the act is done with the intention of causing injury as

defined in the Penal Code.


OF ANY COMPUTER

R v. Whitaker, Scunthorpe Magistrate Court, 1993

(unreported).

A nurse broke into the hospital computer system and

changed the medicine presciprtion for a patient. She was

convicted under 3 Computer Misuse Act 1990 (United

Kingdom) (equivalent to section 5 Computer Crimes Act -

Malaysia) and sentenced with 12 months imprisonment.


OF ANY COMPUTER

Christopher Pile

A virus writer was convicted under 3 Computer Misuse Act

1990 (United Kingdom) (equivalent to section 5 Computer

Crimes Act - Malaysia), although he did not have the

knowledge of the infected computers and never directed his

virus on particular computers.


OF ANY COMPUTER

WRONGFUL COMMUNICATION

S. 6 (1)

A person shall be guilty of an offence if he communicates

directly or indirectly a number, code, password or other

means of access to a computer to any person other than

a person to whom he is duly authorized to communicate.

WRONGFUL COMMUNICATION

S. 6 (2)


conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding twenty-five


exceeding three years or to both.

ABETMENTS AND ATTEMPTS PUNISHABLE AS

OFFENCES

S. 7 (1)

A person who abets the commission of or who attempts to

commit any offence under this Act shall be guilty of that

offence and shall on conviction be liable to the punishment

provided for the offence.

The Computer Crimes Act does not provide any definition for

abetment and attempt.

Thus, the definition that can be refered to is section 107 Penal

Code, where a person is considered to have abetted a crime if

he took part in the crime.

The Penal Code does not provide any definition for attempt (it is

merely stated in s. 511) , but reference can be made to previous

cases e.g. Thiangiah & SL lwn Pendakwa Raya [1997] MLJ 79

(HC). ‘Attempt to commit a crime is an act with the intention to

commit the crime, and forms part of the actual commission of the

crime if the act has not been interrupted in the process.’

ABETMENTS AND ATTEMPTS PUNISHABLE AS

OFFENCES

PREPARATION

S. 7 (2)

A person who does any act preparatory to or in furtherance

of the commission of any offence under this Act shall be

guilty of that offence and shall on conviction be liable to the

punishment provided or the offence:

Provided that any term of imprisonment imposed shall not

exceed one-half of the maximum term provided for the

offence.

OBSTRUCTION OF SEARCH

S. 11 (1)

A person shall be guilty of an offence if he--

(a) assaults, obstructs, hinders or delays any police officer

in effecting entrance to any premises under this Act or in

the execution of any duty imposed or power conferred by

this Act; or

(b) fails to comply with any lawful demands of a police

officer acting in the execution of his duty under this Act.

OBSTRUCTION OF SEARCH

S. 11 (2)


conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding twenty-five


exceeding three years or to both.

PRESUMPTION

S. 8

A person who has in his custody or control any program,

data or other information which is held in any computer or

retrieved from any computer which he is not authorized to

have in his custody or control shall be deemed to have

obtained unauthorized access to such program, data or

information unless the contrary is proved.

(this can be categorized as strict liability)

TERRITORIAL SCOPE OF OFFENCES UNDER THIS ACT

S.9 (1)

The provisions of this Act shall, in relation to any person,

whatever his nationality or citizenship, have effect outside

as well as within Malaysia, and where an offence under

this Act is committed by any person in any place outside

Malaysia, he may be dealt with in respect of such offence

as if it was committed at any place within Malaysia.

For the purposes of subsection (1), this Act shall apply if,

for the offence in question, the computer, program or data

was in Malaysia or capable of being connected to or sent

to or used by or with a computer in Malaysia at the

material time.


S.9 (2)

Any proceeding against any person under this section

which would be a bar to subsequent proceedings against

such person for the same offence if such offence was

committed in Malaysia shall be a bar to further

proceedings against him under any written law relating to

the extradition of persons, in respect of the same offence

outside Malaysia.


S.9 (3)

S. 10 (1)

Whenever it appears to any Magistrate upon information

and after such inquiry as he thinks necessary that there is

reasonable cause to believe that in any premises there is

evidence of the commission of an offence under this Act,

he may, by warrant directed to any police officer of or

above the rank of Inspector, empower the officer to enter

the premises, by force if necessary, and there to search

for, seize and detain any such evidence and he shall be

entitled to--

POWERS OF SEARCH, SEIZURE AND ARREST

S. 10 (1)

(a) have access to any program or data held in any

computer, or have access to, inspect or check the

operation of, any computer and any associated apparatus

or material which he has reasonable cause to suspect is or

has been in use in connection with any offence under this

Act;


S. 10 (1)

(b) require--

(i) the person by whom or on whose behalf the police

officer has reasonable cause to suspect the computer is or

has been so used; or

(ii) any person having charge of or otherwise concerned

with the operation of, the computer, apparatus or

material,to provide him with such reasonable assistance as

he may require for the purposes of paragraph (a); and


S. 10 (1)

(c) require any information contained in a computer and

accessible from the premises to be produced in a form in

which it can be taken away and in which it is visible and

legible.


S. 10 (2)

Whenever it appears to any police officer of or above the

rank of Inspector that there is reasonable cause to believe

that in any premises there is concealed or deposited any

evidence of the commission of an offense under this Act,

and the police officer has reasonable grounds for believing

that by reason of the delay in obtaining a search warrant

the object of the search is likely to be frustrated, he may

exercise in and in respect of the premises all the powers

mentioned in subsection (1) in as full and ample a

measure as if he were empowered to do so by warrant

issued under that subsection.


S. 10 (3)

Any police officer may arrest without a warrant any person

whom he reasonably believes to have committed or to be

committing an offence against this Act, and every offence

against this Act shall be deemed to be seizable offence for

the purposes of the law for the time being in force relating

to criminal procedure.


cyber crimes 1

Documents