State v. Randal Lee Schwartz

Randal Schwartz (defendant) worked as an independent contractor in Intel Corporation’s Supercomputer Systems Division (SSD). Each user of SSD computers had a unique password to gain access to the data stored on the system. The passwords were encrypted and stored in computer files. Schwartz had a disagreement with an Intel system administrator, terminated his SSD contract with Intel, and started working with a different Intel division. Intel neglected to disable Schwartz’s personal password for the SSD computer Brillig. Schwartz ran a program on Brillig that permitted external access to Intel computers, ran a password-guessing program, obtained a user’s logon password, copied the entire SSD password file onto another Intel computer, ran the password-guessing program on that computer, and learned the passwords of more SSD users. Schwartz believed that by obtaining this information, he could demonstrate that SSD’s security had deteriorated since his departure. Intel contacted the police after a systems administrator noticed that Schwartz was running the password-guessing program. Schwartz was convicted of knowingly accessing a computer system for the purpose of committing theft of Intel’s SSD password file and individual users’ passwords in violation of Oregon’s computer-theft statute. On appeal, Schwartz argued that the trial court should have granted his motion for judgment of acquittal because the state (plaintiff) failed to prove that he had taken property with the intent or purpose to commit theft. Schwartz contended that he had not taken, appropriated, or withheld the password files because the files and passwords remained on Intel’s computers and could still be used by the users. The state maintained that once Schwartz had copied the passwords, the passwords were useless for the purpose of protecting access to information in Intel’s computers. According to the state, the loss of exclusive possession of the passwords constituted theft.