Question regards to Computer Misuse Act and understanding to know if violated in work

simonmasters

Hi All

I want to give a brief history without it being identifying.

So in past at work, whilst out one night, a colleague mentioned he wanted another employee gone as didnt like them, took it as general work politics.

any event, being in a work place that has many levels and many levels to different departments a colleague was fired for overtime, they accidentally signed the wrong date for their overtime.

Its become clear to me and have evidence which I want to goto union rep with as feel unethical and dont want to be apart of this as i have semi knowledge.

Basically the colleague who wanted the person gone started using the computer at work to research the past history of this person and circulated their horrible past, which assassinated their character, which imo lead to others watching this person and dobbing them in for small things until they had genuine grounds to fire them.

I feel its disgusting and unethical but its not as simple as going to my manager as they are kinda dating the person who did this act.

Ive collated info and evidence which want to present to union rep, but want better understanding how i present this.

The person who did this act used work computer, no hacking was involved, used public info on websites and social media. 

Does this constitute being part of 

3ZA - Unauthorised acts causing, or creating risk of, serious damage

 they were not authorised to do this act especially not from a DPO, i feel its created damage and put the company at risk

under this section it mentions the following all of which i think have been commited

(1)A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a)the person does any unauthorised act in relation to a computer;

(b)at the time of doing the act the person knows that it is unauthorised;

(c)the act causes, or creates a significant risk of, serious damage of a material kind; and

(d)the person intends by doing the act to cause serious damage of a material kind or is reckless as to whether such damage is caused.

as well as 

3A - Making, supplying or obtaining articles for use in offence under [F14section 1, 3 or 3ZA]

(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he makes, adapts, supplies or offers to supply any article intending it to be used to commit, or to assist in the commission of, an offence under [F15section 1, 3 or 3ZA].

---

from my understanding 3ZA and and 3A are newer additions to computer misuse act, which was originally to do with hacking especially, am i right in thinking 3za and 3a are not specifically aimed at hacking, but the misuse of just a computer as presented in what i was saying.

It feels like this as all been harassment towards the other individual, and hasn't been lawful at any point, but dunno if follows gdpr principles either. but happening during this pandemic and creating a financial loss to someone who has a family i find disgusting and really feel i need to present to my union rep

thanks in advance

J_B

T L D R

DoaM

J_B said:

T L D R

That's unfair - I've seen far worse posts (walls of text); at least this one is spaced out with paragraphs. (Although it is too spaced out).

To the OP ... I'm not sure this is a Techie Stuff question, sorry, so I don't know how much help you might get in here. What I can say is that you seem to have gone to a lot of effort for being only a "concerned former colleague", so I assume there's some form of "vested interest" here. I can also say that I don't think any of what you describe falls under the Computer Misuse Act, but it may well be a breach of company policy (by the person(s) doing the "assassination").

A_Lert

The Computer Misuse Act was never intended to criminalise employees for doing personal stuff on computers at work that they are allowed to use. You're on a road to nowhere with that.

EssexExile

The work/employment board is probably a better place, or go to your union rep. They, or more likely someone they know higher up, will have more knowledge of this sort of thing.

cooldude255220

Section 3ZA continues:

(2)  Damage is of a “material kind” for the purposes of this section if it is—

      (a)  damage to human welfare in any place;

      (b)  damage to the environment of any place;

      (c)  damage to the economy of any country; or

      (d)  damage to the national security of any country.

(3)  For the purposes of subsection (2)(a) an act causes damage to human welfare only if it causes—

      (a)  loss to human life;

      (b)  human illness or injury;

      (c)  disruption of a supply of money, food, water, energy or fuel;

      (d)  disruption of a system of communication;

      (e)  disruption of facilities for transport; or

      (f)  disruption of services relating to health.

Clearly your example does not fall within that section.
Section 3A refers to articles (i.e. programs, viruses, keylogging software etc). Again, not relevant here.
I'm also not sure whether an offence under section 1 of the act would be complete either.

simonmasters

DoaM said:

J_B said:

T L D R

That's unfair - I've seen far worse posts (walls of text); at least this one is spaced out with paragraphs. (Although it is too spaced out).

To the OP ... I'm not sure this is a Techie Stuff question, sorry, so I don't know how much help you might get in here. What I can say is that you seem to have gone to a lot of effort for being only a "concerned former colleague", so I assume there's some form of "vested interest" here. I can also say that I don't think any of what you describe falls under the Computer Misuse Act, but it may well be a breach of company policy (by the person(s) doing the "assassination").

No vested interest, as all are my friends, but i dont want to be caught up in it all, so if the vested interest is looking out for myself then yes

simonmasters

cooldude255220 said:

Section 3ZA continues:

(2)  Damage is of a “material kind” for the purposes of this section if it is—

      (a)  damage to human welfare in any place;

      (b)  damage to the environment of any place;

      (c)  damage to the economy of any country; or

      (d)  damage to the national security of any country.

(3)  For the purposes of subsection (2)(a) an act causes damage to human welfare only if it causes—

      (a)  loss to human life;

      (b)  human illness or injury;

      (c)  disruption of a supply of money, food, water, energy or fuel;

      (d)  disruption of a system of communication;

      (e)  disruption of facilities for transport; or

      (f)  disruption of services relating to health.

Clearly your example does not fall within that section.
Section 3A refers to articles (i.e. programs, viruses, keylogging software etc). Again, not relevant here.
I'm also not sure whether an offence under section 1 of the act would be complete either.

“ article ” includes any program or data held in electronic form

JJ_Egan

Your Union rep is the best advice

cooldude255220

“ article ” includes any program or data held in electronic form

But he hasn't made, adapted, supplied or offered to supply any article intending it to be used to commit, or to assist in the commission of, an offence under section 1, 3 or 3ZA.

Cornucopia

I don't think that the circumstances described fulfil the basic spirit of the offence (where the very broad term "Computer Misuse" is somewhat unhelpful).