The two student journalists who exposed insecurities in the
University computer network are facing a police investigation
into their activities in obtaining the story.
Proctors of the University have told the Deputy Editor and
Sports Editor of The Oxford Student, Patrick Foster and Roger
Waite, that a police investigation has been initiated at their
request, although the journalists have yet to be contacted
themselves by Thames Valley Police. In the article, published on
Thursday 27 May, Foster and Waite (the named authors of the
piece) admit that the methods used to highlight the lack of
security “fall foul of both the law and OUCS
guidelines”.
The Computer Misuse Act 1990, which prevents the use of
computers to access personal information such as passwords, and
private conversations, carries a custodial sentence of up to six
months.
Senior sources at The OxStu have informed Cherwell that the
Proctors became aware of the article even before it went to
press. “A lot of college IT officers were contacted,”
they said, “and one of those must have passed on the details
of the article. Once the Proctors had contacted us, we passed
full details of the article to them straight away.” Within a
matter of hours of receiving this information Foster had his
Webmail account withdrawn and it is believed the contents are
being investigated. Waite’s was removed on Tuesday.
This is a matter of some concern for the students, who both
have exams at the end of term. Foster has also been denied
Ethernet connection to his room at Keble College.
The University and their respective colleges are yet to take
any action beyond this, although Foster, already on full academic
probation, has expressed public fear that he may face a
“three-term rustication”.
It is unclear how much detail OUSU, the publishers of The
OxStu, knew of the matter before they went to press. But our
source was adamant that “other than the journalists
concerned, neither OUSU, its employees or Editor Mary Morgan knew
anything about it until the day of publication.”
Waite and Foster, in a statement issued to Cherwell, stood
“100 per cent” behind the story. “We are both
aware that we consciously breached the law, University statutes
and college regulations through our actions. However we feel we
were justified in doing so to bring to the attention of the
University and its students the very real dangers posed by
network insecurities.
“We are co-operating fully with the inquiries of the
Proctors and our respective colleges. We have nothing to hide,
and are both looking forward to meeting the Senior Proctor to
make our respective cases.”
ARCHIVE: 5th week TT 2004
Journalists investigated
