[dundee] Your licence fees at work - BBC acquire 22, 000 node Botnet!

[Rick Moynihan]

Well I thought I'd just light the taper, stand back and watch the
flames without passing too much comment with this one.  (Yeah right!)

I've seen elsewhere on the net people arguing both sides; though I
personally find it a little hard to see how the BBC's behaviour is
anything other than reprehensible!

They could have walked into just about any script-kiddies bedroom,
blacked out their face and conducted an interview, with little ethical
dilemma, but instead they chose to inject cash into the botnet
blackmarket - compromise machines, and then instruct them to perform a
task without the consent of the owner!

Add to this the scant disregard paid to the compromised machines
purpose, and who knows what damage they may have done!  What if one of
those machines was being used to assist in keyhole surgery, Windows
for Warships anyone?  Far fetched?  Who knows?!  Either way the BBC
should be held responsible for their actions here!

If you or I were caught doing this we would rightly be punished by the
law.  However it seems the BBC are above the law and will get away
scot free!  Not that it'd make it much better, but they didn't even
appear to acknowledge the illegality of this in the program.  What
kind of message does this send to the public whom the BBC want to
educate?

Anyway, I generally have a lot of respect for the BBC... but I'm very
disappointed this time.  I also find it upsetting that the
sensationalist British public are more keen to drag the Beeb over the
coals for cruel jokes by Ross/Brand than they are for when the BBC
blatantly breaks the law and deals with criminals.


R.

2009/3/16 Arron Finnon <afinnon at googlemail.com>:
> The whole thing is frankly tasteless and unethical.  They breech 2
> parts on the Computer Misuse Act, however they are falling back on the
> Public Interest clause within the OFCOM regulator. However Rick's
> point about paying crooks is what will catch the beeb out, it quite
> clearly states when dealing with criminals;
>
> No payment, promise of payment, or payment in kind, may be made to
> convicted or confessed criminals whether directly or indirectly for a
> programme contribution by the criminal (or any other person) relating
> to his/her crime/s. The only exception is where it is in the public
> interest.
>
> However its going to be a grey area, and a number of security
> companies turned down the beeb for this one, because many believed
> that there wasn't a public interest, the other minor gripe i have
> about this, is that if they fall back on public interest many of those
> machines used and altered by the beeb where not in the UK, and due to
> iplayer DRM they probably not going to get to see the episode.  I did
> mention this over at facebook but  must have forgot to send it this
> way.  Anyone that wants to see it can visit the beeb iplayer at
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00jctj1/Click_14_03_2009/
>
> _______________________________________________
> dundee GNU/Linux Users Group mailing list
> dundee at lists.lug.org.uk  http://dundee.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dundee
> Chat on IRC, #tlug on dundee.lug.org.uk
>