Repent

BeFORE ITS TOO LATE

 THEFT
-Information
e.g. lists, records, private emails
popular words : hacking & cracking

 THEFT
-Property
e.g. transfer of money from one account to another
popular words: salami slicing, stamming

 THEFT
-Service
e.g. illegal access to paid websites, line stealing
popular words : wardriving

THEFT S.378 PENAL CODE (PC)

Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable

property out of the possession of any person without
that person's consent, moves that property in order
to such taking, is said to commit theft.

Punishment: Imprisonment not more than 7

years / fine / both. For repeated
convictions, fine / imprisonment and
whipping.

THEFT S.378 PENAL CODE (PC)

MOVABLE PROPERTY
s.22. : The words "movable property" are intended to include
corporeal property of every description, except land and
things attached to the earth, or permanently fastened to
anything which is attached to the earth.
Information in computers is digital in nature and stored in a
magnetic disk
Information in computers is intangible
information in computers is not moveable. Even if it is erased,
it can still be recovered.

THEFT S.378 PENAL CODE (PC)

Oxford v Moss (1979) Crim.LR.119
court decided that confidential information is not tangible
property, thus it does not fall within the definition of 'property'
for the purpose of conviction under the Theft Act 1968.
Facts: the act of stealing of examination papers by a student
before the day of examination. The student made a duplicate
of the papers and returned the originals to the lecturer's room.
Court held that the act cannot be considered as theft because
of the absence of permanenet loss.

DISHONEST MISAPPROPRIATION OF
PROPERTY S. 403
Whoever dishonestly misappropriates, or converts to
his own use, or causes any other person to dispose of,
any property, shall be punished with imprisonment for
a term which shall not be less than six months and not
more than five years and with whipping and shall also
be liable to fine.

DISHONEST MISAPPROPRIATION OF
PROPERTY S. 403
Property in s. 403 is much more general compared to
s. 378.
E.g., copying information or data from another person's
computer without consent cannot be regarded as theft
under s. 378 because information or data is not
moveable, but can be regarded as dishonest
misappropriation of property under s. 403.

CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST S. 405

There are several categories of criminal breach of trust listed
from s. 405 to 409.
Dishonest misappropriation of property is an offence under
s. 403, but if it involves a property entrusted to the person,
then it amount to cminal breach of trust.
General definition of criminal breach of trust is stated in
section 405, while section 406 provides the punishment.
Section 407, 408 and 409 are related to criminal breach of
trust committed by specific persons.
Property in s. 405-409 is much more general compared to
s. 378.

CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST S. 405

Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property,
or with any dominion over property either solely or
jointly
with
any
other
person
dishonestly
misappropriates, or converts to his own use, that
property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that
property in violation of any direction of law prescribing
the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of
any legal contract, express or implied, which he has
made touching the discharge of such trust, or wilfully
suffers any other person so to do, commits "criminal
breach of trust".

CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST BY CLERK

OR SERVANTS. S. 408
Whoever, being a clerk or servant, or employed as a
clerk or servant, and being in any manner entrusted in
such capacity with property, or with any dominion over
property, commits criminal breach of trust in respect of
that property, shall be punished with imprisonment for a
term which shall not be less than one year and not
more than ten years and with whipping, and shall also
be liable to fine.
E.g. Pendakwa Raya lwn Aman Shah Ahmad Unreported, Sessions Court No. 1 Kuala Lumpur
(Arrest Case No. 62-50-90)

CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST BY CLERK

OR SERVANTS. S. 408
Aman Shah (employee of Hock Hua
Bank / HHB) acted in breach of trust
by transfering certain amount of
money in HHB to the Bank Bumiputera
Malaysia Berhard (BBMB) account of
Bistro Advertising Agency owned by
him. He withdrew the money from
BBMB through 36 cheques personally
signed by him.
According to a witness, Aman Shah visited his company not less
than 7 times and had purchased luxury cars like Mazda Savana,
Mercedez Benz 300E, Porche Carrera, Mercedez Benz 300 SL24,
Lamborghini Countach, BMW 3201 and Porsche 928 S4 either
through cash payment or cheques on different occasions.

 CHEATING / FRAUD
multilevel marketing/ pyramid system, business opportunities,
auctions, credit card offers, loans, job vacancies.
popular word : Spear phishing

Kevin Mitnick's Testimony before the US Senate Governmental Affairs Committee,

2 March 2000:
When I would try to get into these systems, the first line of
attack would be what I call a social engineering attack,
which really means trying to manipulate somebody over the
phone through deception. I was so successful in that line of
attack that I rarely had to go towards a technical attack.
The human side of computer security is easily exploited
and constantly overlooked. Companies spend millions of
dollars on firewalls, encryption and secure access devices,
and it's money wasted, because none of these measures
address the weakest link* in the security chain.
----------------------------------------------------------------* users.

CHEATING S.415
Whoever by deceiving any person, whether or not
such deception was the sole or main inducement,-(a) fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so
deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to
consent that any person shall retain any property; or

CHEATING S.415
b) intentionally induces the person so deceived to do
or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit to
do if he were not so deceived and which act or
omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm
to any person in body, mind, reputation, or property,is
said to "cheat".

CHEATING S.415
- if a computer is cheated, can the person who cheats
be charged under this section?
-section 415 provides that cheating can only be
directed to 'person'
- section 11: The word "person" includes any
company or association or body of persons,
whether incorporated or not.

- is computer a 'person'?

CHEATING S.415
In Aman Shah case, he was charged for criminal
breach of trust by using computer and convicted under
s. 408.
Although there was an element of cheating, he was not
charged under section 415, because he cheated
nobody but the computer.

CHEATING S.415
- however, for online cheating committed against
person, the person who commits it can be charged
under this section. For example, cheating people
through websites or emails about fake get rich
schemes or free/discounted products

 FORGERY
modifying online documents to mislead others

FORGERY S.463
Whoever makes any false document or part of a
document with intent to cause damage or injury to the
public or to any person, or to support any claim or title,
or to cause any person to part with property, or to enter
into any express or implied contract, or with intent to
commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits
forgery.

FORGERY S.463
S. 29

(1) The word "document" means any matter

expressed, described or howsoever represented, upon
any substance, material, thing or article, including any
matter embodied in a disc, tape, film, sound track or
other device whatsoever...

FORGERY S.463
People v. Avila P.2d 1330 (Colorado Court of Appeals
1988)

The defendant erased computerised driving records.

Court held that such act amounted to modification of
documents by way of forgery under Colorado forgery
statute.

 MISCHIEF
cyber vandalism : modifying public websites and denial of
service attack

Rv
Wimbledon
David Youth Court
Lennon 23/08/2006

Teenager alleged to have

bombarded his exemployer's mail server
with 5,000,000 emails.
Defendant pleaded guilty
and sentenced to a two
month curfew and
electronic tagging.

 MISCHIEF
spyware, adware, tracking cookies, identity theft

Do you experience any of the following symptoms?

Your browser homepage has been changed.

Excessive pop-up ads.
New toolbars in your browser.
PC is slow and applications do not start quickly.
Slow internet access speed.
Frequent PC crashes.
New icons on your desktop
New items in your favorites
9 out of 10 Computers are infected with Spyware.
Most likely your Computer is infected with Spyware and
Adware without you knowing.

How can Spyware affect me & my PC?

How did I get infected with Spyware?

Steal your passwords

Steal your Identity
SPAM your email account
Crash your computer
Bombard you with advertising
Steal your credit card numbers
Download your private files
Monitor your emails & KeyStrokes

By Downloading Music
Sharing photos
Free programs that you install
Email attachments sent to you
Chat rooms where you exchange files
Clicking on Pop-up ads
Browsing Websites
Adult-related web sites
Downloading games

Watch the sites you visit

 MISCHIEF
spreading virus

MISCHIEF S.425
Whoever, with intent to cause, or knowing that he is
likely to cause, wrongful loss or damage to the public or
any person, causes the destruction of any property, or
any such change in any property, or in the situation
thereof, as destroys or diminishes its value or utility, or
affects it injuriously, commits "mischief".

MISCHIEF S.425
Explanation 1--It is not essential to the offence of
mischief that the offender should intend to cause loss or
damage to the owner of the property injured or
destroyed. It is sufficient if he intends to cause, or
knows that he is likely to cause, wrongful loss or
damage to any person by injuring any property, whether
it belongs to that person or not.

MISCHIEF S.425
Property in section 425 is also much more general than s. 378.
e.g. cyber vandalism, creation and dissimination of virus and
other malicous software

 TRESPASS
trespass to server
trespass to personal computer

HACKERS AND
CRACKERS

Excerpt from newspapers - A story of hackers

John Draper a.k.a. Captain Crunch simply
used plastic whistles from Cap'n Crunch to
make free phone calls.

The blowing of the whistles created a

frequency of 2600 megahertz, enough to
confuse the phone system of AT&T.

Mark Abene a.k.a. Phiber

Optik successfully copied
the patent used to make
phone calls, and managed
to make free calls.

Mark Abene became a source of

inspiration to many youths, to 'learn
and explore' the hidden secrets of the
phone system in their countries.

Nowadays,
hacking
activities
became more complex and
difficult to be traced.
Hackers have discovered new
methods and techniques, far more
advanced than the enforcement
agencies.

USA legislation against hacking and cracking

activities started in 1986 when the Computer Fraud
and Abuse Act was passed.
Two years after, a popular hacker, Robert Morris @
rtm launched his Internet worm. He was a graduate
of Cornell University, and was the first person who
introduced the word 'hacker' when he launched his
internet worm in 1988.

The worm manipulated more than 6,000 computer

network, and Morris became the first person charged
under the Act.
Morris was fined $10,000 and ordered to do social
works.
Morris was the son of the Head Scientist at National
Computer Security Council, one of the department in
National Security Agency (NSA).

In the same year, another hacker, Kevin Mitnick,

broke into the computer network system of
Digital Equipment Company.

Mitnick spent one year in prison. In February 1995, he was arrested

again for the offence of stealing 20,000 set of credit card numbers.
He was convicted in April 1996.

Kevin Mitnick was the first

hacker listed in FBI's Most
Wanted.

Lamo modified online Reuter news

about Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian
programmer charged for violating the
copyright of Adobe Systems Inc.
The fake version stated that Sklyarov
can be sentenced to death if convicted
(the original maximum penalty is only
five years imprisonment). He also
inserted fake comments by the USA
Attorney General, John Ashcroft.

Once beloved

Adrian Lamo
Free Adrian Lamo!!!

Now hated

Adrian Lamo
"world's most hated hacker"

Gary McKinnon a.k.a Solo

Largest hacking attack on military computer
systems in US history

Kevin Poulsen a.k.a Dark Dante

hacked telephone and radio system, stole
Federal government system information

Albert Gonzalez
170 million credit & ATM card info theft
in two years

Jonathan James a.k.a c0mrade

Hacked NASA & downloaded source code
of the value of $1.7 million

CRIMINAL TRESPASS S.441

Whoever enters into or upon property in the possession
of another with intent to commit an offence or to
intimidate, insult or annoy any person in possession of
such property; or having lawfully entered into or upon
such property, unlawfully remains there with intent
thereby to intimidate, insult or annoy any such person, or
with intent to commit an offence, is said to commit
"criminal trespass".

CRIMINAL TRESPASS S.441

Property in section 441 is also much more general than s. 378.

This provision is in line with the offences under Computer

Crimes Act.

COMPUTER CRIMES ACT 1997 ( )

Passed by Parliament in Mac
1997
Enforced in 1 June 2000
Objective:
To control direct or online
computer crimes.

COMPUTER CRIMES ACT 1997

Section 2
computer" means an electronic, magnetic, optical,
electrochemical, or other data processing device, or a
group of such interconnected or related devices,
performing logical, arithmetic, storage and display
functions, and includes any data storage facility or
communications facility directly related to or operating in
conjunction with such device or group of such
interconnected or related devices, but does not include an
automated typewriter or typesetter, or a portable hand held
calculator or other similar device which is nonprogrammable or which does not contain any data storage
facility;

COMPUTER CRIMES ACT 1997

OFFENCES
1. Unauthorized
access
to
computer material s.3
2. Unauthorized access with intent
to
commit
or
facilitate
commission of further offence
s.4
3. Unauthorized modification of the
contents of any computer s.5
4. Wrongful communication s.6
5. Abetments,
attempts
and
preparation s.7.
6. Presumption s.8.
7. Obstruction of search s.11

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO COMPUTER

MATERIAL
Section 3
(1) A person shall be guilty of an offence if-(a) he causes a computer to perform any function with
intent to secure access to any program or data held in
any computer;
(b) the access he intends to secure is unauthorized; and
(c) he knows at the time when he causes the computer
to perform the function that is the case.

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO COMPUTER

MATERIAL
Section 2 (1)
"function" includes logic, control, arithmetic, deletion,
storage
and
retrieval
and
communication
or
telecommunication to, from or within a computer

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO COMPUTER

MATERIAL
S 2 (2) :
For the purposes of this Act, a person secures access to any program or
data held in a computer if, by causing a computer to perform any
function, he-(a) alters or erases the program or data;
(b) copies or moves it to any storage medium other than that in which it
is held or to a different location in the storage medium in which it is held;
(c) uses it; or
(d) causes it to be output from the computer in which it is held whether
by having it displayed or in any other manner, and references to access
to a program or data and to an intent to secure such access shall be
construed accordingly.

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO COMPUTER

MATERIAL
S 2 (3)

For the purposes of paragraph (2)(c), a person uses a

program if the function he causes the computer to
perform-(a)

causes

the

program

to

be

(b)

is itself a function of the program.

executed;

or

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO COMPUTER

MATERIAL
S 2 (4)

For the purposes of paragraph (2)(d), the form in which

any program or data is output and in particular whether
or not it represents a form in which, in the case of a
program, it is capable of being executed or, in the case of
data, it is capable of being processed by a computer is
immaterial.

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO COMPUTER

MATERIAL
S 2 (5)

For the purposes of this Act, access of any kind by any

person to any program or data held in a computer is
unauthorized if-(a) he is not himself entitled to control access of the
kind in question to the program or data; and
(b) he does not have the consent or exceeds any right
or consent to access by him of the kind in question to
the program or data from any person who is so entitled.

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO COMPUTER

MATERIAL
S 2 (6)

A reference in this Act to any program or data held in a

computer includes a reference to any program or data
held in any removable storage medium which is for the
time being in the computer.

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO COMPUTER

MATERIAL
S 3 (2)

The intent a person has to have to commit an offence

under this section need not be directed at-(a) any particular program or data;
(b) a program or data of any particular kind; or
(c) a program or data held in any particular computer.

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO COMPUTER

MATERIAL
S 3 (3)

A person guilty of an offence under this section shall on

conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding fifty thousand
ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five
years or to both.

Garyl Tan Jia Luo (2007)

Arrested for tapping into his neighbour's wireless Internet

connection.
Pleaded guilty to the charge under Computer Misuse Act of
Singapore (first person convicted for the offence under the Act)
Sentenced to 18 months' probation, 80 hours of community
service and banned from using the Internet for 18 months.

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO COMPUTER

MATERIAL
Attorney-Generals Reference (No. 1 of 1991) [1992] 3 WLR
432
An ex-employee visited his ex-employer, a keys vendor, to
purchase certain goods. When he was left alone by the shop
assistant, he ordered the computer to give discount to the
purchased goods.

He was charged under section 1 Computer Misuse Act 1990 (

United Kingdom) ( equivalent to section 3 Computer Crimes
Act - Malaysia), and convicted.

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS WITH INTENT TO COMMIT OR

FACILITATE COMMISSION OF FURTHER OFFENCE
S. 4 (1)
A person shall be guilty of an offence under this section if
he commits an offence referred to in section 3 with
intent-(a) to commit an offence involving fraud or dishonesty or
which causes injury as defined in the Penal Code [Act
574]; or
(b) to facilitate the commission of such an offence
whether by himself or by any other person.

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS WITH INTENT TO COMMIT OR

FACILITATE COMMISSION OF FURTHER OFFENCE
S. 4 (2)
For the purposes of this section, it is immaterial whether
the offence to which this section applies is to be
committed at the same time when the unauthorized
access is secured or on any future occasion.

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS WITH INTENT TO COMMIT OR

FACILITATE COMMISSION OF FURTHER OFFENCE
S. 4 (3)
A person guilty of an offence under this section shall on
conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding one hundred
and fifty thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding ten years or to both.

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS WITH INTENT TO COMMIT OR

FACILITATE COMMISSION OF FURTHER OFFENCE
R v. Thompson [1984] 1 WLR 962 p.c.i.

Thompson was a computer programmer at a bank in Kuwait. He

discovered several non-active accounts, and ordered the
computer to transfer the money in those accounts to his own
account in the same bank. To reduce the risk of being detected,
the transfer of money would only be executed by the computer
after he resigned and returned to England. Upon arrival in
England, he opened a new account in another bank, and then
wrote a letter to the Kuwait bank, asking them to close his account
(which was already filled with money transfered form the nonactive accounts) and transfer the money to his new bank
account.

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS WITH INTENT TO COMMIT OR

FACILITATE COMMISSION OF FURTHER OFFENCE
In this case, there were difficulties in proving theft or cheating
because the money was not yet fully transfered to his
possession to warrant a conviction for theft, and he did not
cheat any person but a computer to warrant a conviction for
cheating. However, the conviction under section 4 stood, since
illegal access had been comitted, coupled with malicous
intention to commit or facilitate a commission of a further crime.

UNAUTHORIZED MODIFICATION OF THE CONTENTS

OF ANY COMPUTER
S 5 (1)
A person shall be guilty of an offence if he does any act
which he knows will cause unauthorized modification of
the contents of any computer.

UNAUTHORIZED MODIFICATION OF THE CONTENTS

OF ANY COMPUTER
S 2 (7)
For the purposes of this Act, a modification of the contents of any
computer takes place if, by the operation of any function of the
computer concerned or any other computer-(a) any program or data held in the computer concerned is
altered or erased;
(b) any program or data is introduced or added to its contents;
or
(c) any event occurs which impairs the normal operation of
any computer,and any act that contributes towards causing
such a modification shall be regarded as causing it.

UNAUTHORIZED MODIFICATION OF THE CONTENTS

OF ANY COMPUTER
S 2 (8)
Any modification referred to in subsection (7) is unauthorized if-(a) the person whose act causes it is not himself entitled to
determine whether the modification should be made; and
(b) he does not have consent to the modification from any
person who is so entitled.

UNAUTHORIZED MODIFICATION OF THE CONTENTS

OF ANY COMPUTER
S 5 (2)
For the purposes of this section, it is immaterial that the act
in question is not directed at-(a) any particular program or data;
(b) a program or data of any kind; or
(c) a program or data held in any particular computer.

UNAUTHORIZED MODIFICATION OF THE CONTENTS

OF ANY COMPUTER
S 5 (3)
For the purposes of this section, it is immaterial whether an
unauthorized modification is, or is intended to be,
permanent or merely temporary.

UNAUTHORIZED MODIFICATION OF THE CONTENTS

OF ANY COMPUTER
S 5 (4)
A person guilty of an offence under this section shall on
conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding one hundred
thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding seven years or to both; or be liable to a fine not
exceeding one hundred and fifty thousand ringgit or to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or to both,
if the act is done with the intention of causing injury as
defined in the Penal Code.

UNAUTHORIZED MODIFICATION OF THE CONTENTS

OF ANY COMPUTER
R v. Whitaker, Scunthorpe Magistrate Court, 1993
(unreported).
A nurse broke into the hospital computer system and
changed the medicine presciprtion for a patient. She was
convicted under 3 Computer Misuse Act 1990 (United
Kingdom) (equivalent to section 5 Computer Crimes Act Malaysia) and sentenced with 12 months imprisonment.

UNAUTHORIZED MODIFICATION OF THE CONTENTS

OF ANY COMPUTER
Christopher Pile
A virus writer was convicted under 3 Computer Misuse Act
1990 (United Kingdom) (equivalent to section 5 Computer
Crimes Act - Malaysia), although he did not have the
knowledge of the infected computers and never directed his
virus on particular computers.

WRONGFUL COMMUNICATION

S. 6 (1)
A person shall be guilty of an offence if he communicates
directly or indirectly a number, code, password or other
means of access to a computer to any person other than
a person to whom he is duly authorized to communicate.

WRONGFUL COMMUNICATION

S. 6 (2)
A person guilty of an offence under this section shall on
conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding twenty-five
thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding three years or to both.

ABETMENTS AND ATTEMPTS PUNISHABLE AS

OFFENCES
S. 7 (1)
A person who abets the commission of or who attempts to
commit any offence under this Act shall be guilty of that
offence and shall on conviction be liable to the punishment
provided for the offence.

ABETMENTS AND ATTEMPTS PUNISHABLE AS

OFFENCES
The Computer Crimes Act does not provide any definition for
abetment and attempt.
Thus, the definition that can be refered to is section 107 Penal
Code, where a person is considered to have abetted a crime if
he took part in the crime.
The Penal Code does not provide any definition for attempt (it is
merely stated in s. 511) , but reference can be made to previous
cases e.g. Thiangiah & SL lwn Pendakwa Raya [1997] MLJ 79
(HC). Attempt to commit a crime is an act with the intention to
commit the crime, and forms part of the actual commission of the
crime if the act has not been interrupted in the process.

PREPARATION
S. 7 (2)
A person who does any act preparatory to or in furtherance
of the commission of any offence under this Act shall be
guilty of that offence and shall on conviction be liable to the
punishment provided or the offence:
Provided that any term of imprisonment imposed shall not
exceed one-half of the maximum term provided for the
offence.

OBSTRUCTION OF SEARCH
S. 11 (1)

A person shall be guilty of an offence if he-(a) assaults, obstructs, hinders or delays any police officer
in effecting entrance to any premises under this Act or in
the execution of any duty imposed or power conferred by
this Act; or
(b) fails to comply with any lawful demands of a police
officer acting in the execution of his duty under this Act.

OBSTRUCTION OF SEARCH
S. 11 (2)

A person guilty of an offence under this section shall on

conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding twenty-five
thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding three years or to both.

PRESUMPTION

S. 8
A person who has in his custody or control any program,
data or other information which is held in any computer or
retrieved from any computer which he is not authorized to
have in his custody or control shall be deemed to have
obtained unauthorized access to such program, data or
information unless the contrary is proved.
(this can be categorized as strict liability)

TERRITORIAL SCOPE OF OFFENCES UNDER THIS ACT

S.9 (1)
The provisions of this Act shall, in relation to any person,
whatever his nationality or citizenship, have effect outside
as well as within Malaysia, and where an offence under
this Act is committed by any person in any place outside
Malaysia, he may be dealt with in respect of such offence
as if it was committed at any place within Malaysia.

TERRITORIAL SCOPE OF OFFENCES UNDER THIS ACT

S.9 (2)
For the purposes of subsection (1), this Act shall apply if,
for the offence in question, the computer, program or data
was in Malaysia or capable of being connected to or sent
to or used by or with a computer in Malaysia at the
material time.

TERRITORIAL SCOPE OF OFFENCES UNDER THIS ACT

S.9 (3)
Any proceeding against any person under this section
which would be a bar to subsequent proceedings against
such person for the same offence if such offence was
committed in Malaysia shall be a bar to further
proceedings against him under any written law relating to
the extradition of persons, in respect of the same offence
outside Malaysia.

POWERS OF SEARCH, SEIZURE AND ARREST

S. 10 (1)
Whenever it appears to any Magistrate upon information
and after such inquiry as he thinks necessary that there is
reasonable cause to believe that in any premises there is
evidence of the commission of an offence under this Act,
he may, by warrant directed to any police officer of or
above the rank of Inspector, empower the officer to enter
the premises, by force if necessary, and there to search
for, seize and detain any such evidence and he shall be
entitled to--

POWERS OF SEARCH, SEIZURE AND ARREST

S. 10 (1)
(a) have access to any program or data held in any
computer, or have access to, inspect or check the
operation of, any computer and any associated apparatus
or material which he has reasonable cause to suspect is or
has been in use in connection with any offence under this
Act;

POWERS OF SEARCH, SEIZURE AND ARREST

S. 10 (1)
(b) require--

(i) the person by whom or on whose behalf the police

officer has reasonable cause to suspect the computer is or
has been so used; or
(ii) any person having charge of or otherwise concerned
with the operation of, the computer, apparatus or
material,to provide him with such reasonable assistance as
he may require for the purposes of paragraph (a); and

POWERS OF SEARCH, SEIZURE AND ARREST

S. 10 (1)
(c) require any information contained in a computer and
accessible from the premises to be produced in a form in
which it can be taken away and in which it is visible and
legible.

POWERS OF SEARCH, SEIZURE AND ARREST

S. 10 (2)
Whenever it appears to any police officer of or above the
rank of Inspector that there is reasonable cause to believe
that in any premises there is concealed or deposited any
evidence of the commission of an offense under this Act,
and the police officer has reasonable grounds for believing
that by reason of the delay in obtaining a search warrant
the object of the search is likely to be frustrated, he may
exercise in and in respect of the premises all the powers
mentioned in subsection (1) in as full and ample a
measure as if he were empowered to do so by warrant
issued under that subsection.

POWERS OF SEARCH, SEIZURE AND ARREST

S. 10 (3)
Any police officer may arrest without a warrant any person
whom he reasonably believes to have committed or to be
committing an offence against this Act, and every offence
against this Act shall be deemed to be seizable offence for
the purposes of the law for the time being in force relating
to criminal procedure.