The story goes that a US Intelligence Analyst is facing hacking charges for using a password sent to him to log into a system that was being used nation-wide as part of a terrorism investigation.
The analyst claims he is being made a scapegoat because someone screwed up -- the password wasn't meant to be sent to him or thousands of other analysts. He also states the matter was investigated internally and had been resolved as an "innocent mistake".
The Government claims that he used the password to access a system that wasn't part of his job, and that he ignored a security warning in the message containing the password. The Government also claims that by accessing the system, and confidential information, he "endangered the terrorism investigation".
While I think a person in his position should have had the sense to read the message carefully and notice the security warning before using the password, I think the hacking charges are a load of crap. Every Government is quick to throw around "hacking" charges these days, most probably because they're so vague and many people still don't understand them.
“In my opinion, go after the person who provided me with that information,” he says. “I was just a consumer. I wasn’t the person who put that username and password out there for tens out thousands of analysts to see.”
But, while hacking charges are thrown around, I don't think ^ is entirely correct, either: sure, the person who sent out the password should be reprimanded, but the analyst should have known better or at least exercised better judgement.