http://news.com.com/2061-10789_3-6153487.html
A substitute school teacher has a maximum sentence of 40 years for "actively" clicking on pornography links.
Everybody has had the experience of dozens of pornography pop-ups appearing on their screen, whether by spyware or clicking on a disguised link. And you all know that once it stops, you can't really stop it in time.
The IT guy hadn't updated the filter or the anti-spyware device, and he says "we analyzed the activity log and noted that there were spyware/adware programs installed on the hard drive". A security expert has said "The forensic evidence and expert testimony showed clearly that after a visit to Crayola.com, someone went to a site about hair styles which loaded a javascript that spawned pop-ups." Yet the judge and jury insisted that she "had to" have clicked on something to start it.
This case was horribly stupid to begin with, and the fact that she was convicted is tragic. I feel that we need judges with technical experience to sit on technical cases, because obviously neither he nor the jury knows anything about spyware.
A substitute school teacher has a maximum sentence of 40 years for "actively" clicking on pornography links.
Everybody has had the experience of dozens of pornography pop-ups appearing on their screen, whether by spyware or clicking on a disguised link. And you all know that once it stops, you can't really stop it in time.
The IT guy hadn't updated the filter or the anti-spyware device, and he says "we analyzed the activity log and noted that there were spyware/adware programs installed on the hard drive". A security expert has said "The forensic evidence and expert testimony showed clearly that after a visit to Crayola.com, someone went to a site about hair styles which loaded a javascript that spawned pop-ups." Yet the judge and jury insisted that she "had to" have clicked on something to start it.
This case was horribly stupid to begin with, and the fact that she was convicted is tragic. I feel that we need judges with technical experience to sit on technical cases, because obviously neither he nor the jury knows anything about spyware.