[tptacek]

His lawyer was probably very right. He's conceding on this thread a fact pattern that will, by the jury instructions, mechanically result in a conviction. He'd spent many tens of thousands of dollars to achieve the same guilty verdict, with the sweetener of a short custodial sentence.

I'm not entirely sure what the punishment Scott received actually was, but he served no time, so it sounds like his sentencing level was below the noise floor.

[alt2319]

I believe he got almost exactly what I got: six months "imprisonment" (served as home detention), five years probation, restitution ($9,000-ish for him), 100 hours of community service, and a few assorted court and administrative fees. Probably also had to pay fees for an ankle monitor system while on home detention, but not sure.

Unless it's changed, I think under the normal federal sentencing guidelines, that amount of "damage" doesn't even qualify for any prison time at all, but the specific offense overrides that to impose a minimum of six months. That's because of a little outcry in the 1990s over hackers not serving any time and the (maybe valid) perception that they actually benefited from the notoriety of a conviction.