Successful hack or not?

[BuzzStPoint]

The U.S. government wants to try Gary McKinnon on charges he successfully hacked into computers belonging to NASA, the Army, and others

Click here for full story

I'm not sure why they say "successfully hacked"
IMO it wasn't successfull at all.. While he did make it in and changed a few computers. He got busted.....

 

[root]

it was sucessfull in as far as he breached the security... and made changes, and was able to keep doing it for well over a year.

probably a lot more sucessfull than most other people who have tried!! even if he did get busted...

 

[XPUser1]

From a legal standpoint when they describe it as "successfully hacked," they made the case strong. The burden to prove it wasn't successfully hacked falls on the accused.

 

[root]

this explains a bit more about what he did..

http://www.theregister.com/2005/06/08/brit_hack_suspect_arrest/

 

[99nasha]

Looking for evidence of UFO's! HA HA! What a dumbass

 

[setishock]

But...

It does show systems that are supposed to be secure are in truth not. If someone can even make it to the front door in a system given enough time they will find a crack in the security and exploit it. No system is secure. Systems have to be made so they detect intrusion and make the operators aware of it.
Nothing is foolproof. They just keep comming up with new and improved fools.

 

[99nasha]

Though i know its ilegal I love to know how he does it...

 

[dustinbumpy]

LOL... it must be pretty easy to hack into the US government. I'm sure all the Al-Queda members could have hacked into there. The U.S. says they have very high security, I don't think so.

 

[99nasha]

Hey, when you manage it, Let me know. Ive always wanted to know assinated JFK

 

[Knight]

LOL... it must be pretty easy to hack into the US government. I'm sure all the Al-Queda members could have hacked into there. The U.S. says they have very high security, I don't think so.

It's easy to downplay the security that a network has until you actually try it...