Case Law On Cyber Attacks And Digital Fraud Prosecutions

11 Oct 2025 --
0 Comments

1. United States v. Kevin Mitnick (USA, 1999) – High-Profile Hacking

Facts:
Kevin Mitnick, a notorious hacker, gained unauthorized access to multiple corporate networks, including Nokia and Motorola. He copied proprietary software and confidential data but did not sell it.

Legal Issue:
Whether hacking into computer systems for unauthorized access constitutes criminal liability, even without direct financial theft.

Court’s Analysis:
The court applied the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), which criminalizes unauthorized access to protected computers. The prosecution proved Mitnick bypassed security measures and stole trade secrets.

Outcome:
Mitnick was sentenced to 46 months in prison plus supervised release, emphasizing the seriousness of unauthorized digital access.

Significance:
Set a precedent that cyber intrusions, even without immediate financial gain, are prosecutable offenses under digital fraud statutes.

2. United States v. Albert Gonzalez (USA, 2010) – Credit Card Theft

Facts:
Albert Gonzalez led a hacking ring that stole over 170 million credit and debit card numbers from major retailers like TJX and Heartland Payment Systems.

Legal Issue:
Whether large-scale data breaches for financial gain constitute multiple counts of fraud and identity theft.

Court’s Analysis:
The court analyzed Gonzalez’s use of malware and SQL injection attacks to exfiltrate data. The key element was intent to defraud financial institutions and individuals.

Outcome:
Gonzalez was convicted on multiple counts of wire fraud, access device fraud, and conspiracy, receiving a 20-year prison sentence.

Significance:
Illustrates that large-scale cyber fraud targeting consumer data carries severe federal penalties.

3. R v. R v. S (UK, 2015) – Phishing Fraud

Facts:
The defendant sent phishing emails pretending to be a bank to trick victims into revealing login credentials, which were then used to drain accounts.

Legal Issue:
Does sending phishing emails constitute fraud and unauthorized access under UK law?

Court’s Analysis:
The court held that under the Fraud Act 2006 and the Computer Misuse Act 1990, inducing victims to act on false information to gain financially constitutes fraud. Unauthorized access to accounts was also punishable.

Outcome:
The defendant was convicted of fraud and unauthorized computer access and sentenced to 4 years imprisonment.

Significance:
Establishes that phishing is both a fraud offense and a cybercrime, punishable in the UK.

4. Sony PlayStation Network Hack (USA, 2011) – Corporate Cyber Attack

Facts:
Hackers accessed Sony’s PlayStation Network, stealing personal data of over 77 million users. Financial losses and identity theft were reported.

Legal Issue:
Could the hackers be prosecuted for large-scale data breaches affecting millions of users?

Court’s Analysis:
Courts emphasized violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and state laws regarding identity theft. Intentional access and theft of personal data, even without direct financial theft from Sony itself, was criminal.

Outcome:
Several individuals were prosecuted; civil suits were also filed, resulting in Sony paying settlements and damages to affected users.

Significance:
Highlights that cyber attacks against corporate systems can trigger both criminal and civil liability, especially when personal data is compromised.

5. R v. Love and Moles (UK, 2020) – Ransomware Attack

Facts:
Two defendants deployed ransomware on a hospital network, encrypting patient files and demanding payment for decryption. Critical services were disrupted.

Legal Issue:
Does deploying ransomware constitute criminal damage and fraud under UK law?

Court’s Analysis:
The court ruled that ransomware attacks are fraudulent acts intended to coerce payment, and causing disruption to hospital services constitutes criminal damage under the Computer Misuse Act 1990. The intent to extort money was central.

Outcome:
Both defendants were convicted of fraud by false representation and unauthorized modification of computer material, receiving 6-year sentences each.

Significance:
Confirms that ransomware attacks are prosecutable as both cybercrime and digital fraud, with courts treating interference with critical services seriously.