Computer Misuse Act Quiz

Reviewed by Editorial Team
The ProProfs editorial team is comprised of experienced subject matter experts. They've collectively created over 10,000 quizzes and lessons, serving over 100 million users. Our team includes in-house content moderators and subject matter experts, as well as a global network of rigorously trained contributors. All adhere to our comprehensive editorial guidelines, ensuring the delivery of high-quality content.
Learn about Our Editorial Process
| By Collegeprof101
C
Collegeprof101
Community Contributor
Quizzes Created: 1 | Total Attempts: 681
| Attempts: 685
SettingsSettings
Please wait...
  • 1/15 Questions

    Using a Computer to access data without authorisation is covered by which section of the Computer Misuse Act?

    • Section 1
    • Section 2
    • Section 3
    • Section 3ZA
Please wait...
About This Quiz

This quiz assesses knowledge of the UK's Computer Misuse Act, focusing on legal implications of actions like virus creation, unauthorized data access, and misuse of computer systems. It's ideal for learners interested in cybersecurity and legal compliance.

Computer Misuse Act Quiz - Quiz

Quiz Preview

  • 2. 

    A friend often comes to your house and will use your tablet computer when you are out of the room. You tell her that she is not allowed to do that even though the tablet is not password protected. The next time she comes over she again uses your tablet when you are out of the room. Has she committed an offence under the CMA?

    • No, you should have password protected your tablet.

    • Yes, this is an unauthorised modification of your data

    • Yes, this is an unauthorised access to your tablet and its data

    • No, if you invite her into your home she has an implied right to access your tablet

    Correct Answer
    A. Yes, this is an unauthorised access to your tablet and its data
    Explanation
    This is essentially Ellis v DPP. As soon as you told your friend she was not entitled to do this whe was put on notice that her access was unauthorised.

    Rate this question:

  • 3. 

    Where does the Computer Misuse Act 1990 apply?

    • The EU

    • The UK

    • Globally

    • England & Wales

    Correct Answer
    A. The UK
    Explanation
    Although the Act can regulate actions which have effects overseas the territorial scope of the UK is to the UK only.

    Rate this question:

  • 4. 

    To be guilty of the offence in section 1 of the Computer Misuse Act 1990 what must a defendant cause a computer to do?

    • Allow access to data without permission

    • Commit a fraud

    • Perform a function

    • Obtain money

    Correct Answer
    A. Allow access to data without permission
    Explanation
    The s.1 offence (hacking) is accessing data without authorisation on a computer

    Rate this question:

  • 5. 

    A security tester, based in the UK, who tests computer security by attempting to hack into them is committing an offence under the Computer Misuse Act if...

    • He is authorised to attempt to gain access to they systems

    • The computer he used and the computer attacked aren't in the UK

    • He uses the access he gained to commit a further crime

    • He doesn't test the system properly

    Correct Answer
    A. He uses the access he gained to commit a further crime
    Explanation
    Section 2 of the Act states that any access to computer programs or data which is done with the intent to commit further crimes is illegal.

    Rate this question:

  • 6. 

    A person installs a new piece of software on their own computer which subsequently slows it down impairing their use of it. Could the software manufacturer be prosecuted under the Computer Misuse Act?

    • No, the act doesn't cover consumer software.

    • Yes, the software has impaired the operation of the computer so s.3 applies

    • Yes, the user didn't give the software permission slow down their computer

    • No, the user gave authorisation for the software to be installed and run therefore the Act does not apply

    Correct Answer
    A. No, the user gave authorisation for the software to be installed and run therefore the Act does not apply
    Explanation
    This law deals with unauthorised access, modification and impairment only. Not authorised actions.

    Rate this question:

  • 7. 

    A friend accesses the LSE's servers to find the home address of another student as they are obsessed with them and want to get their address to "stalk" them. They then find the LSE servers do not have the home address of students so this was a waste of time. What offence if any have they committed?

    • No offence. As the information they sought was not there there is no offence

    • Section 2 offence. Access with intent to commit another offence

    • Section 1 offence. Unauthorised access but they could not commit a further offence (impossible)

    • No offence. Students are allowed to use the LSE system

    Correct Answer
    A. Section 2 offence. Access with intent to commit another offence
    Explanation
    This is a s.2 offence, even though the further offence could not actually be committed in this fashion - see s.2(3). Also stalking is covered as it has a potential 5 year prison sentence.

    Rate this question:

  • 8. 

    You work as a journalist for a local newspaper. One day someone files a story saying Andy Murray (the great tennis player, not law professor) is in town. You really want to meet him and get his autograph so you look at the story details filed on your employer's database to see where he is staying. Have you committed an offence?

    • Yes, this is a breach of s.1 of the Act

    • Yes, this is a breach of s.2 of the Act

    • No, this is access of a type which is generally authorised to you

    • No, the Act is not engaged at all

    Correct Answer
    A. Yes, this is a breach of s.1 of the Act
    Explanation
    This is based upon Bignall and Allison. Allison overruled the Bignall authorised access for an unauthorised purpose defence. It is not s.2 as an autograph is not a further offence.

    Rate this question:

  • 9. 

    Someone uses a laptop as a hammer to destroy a Hard Drive containing sensitive data, could they be convicted under the Computer Misuse Act?

    • It would depend on whether they were authorised to access the data on the Hard Drive

    • Yes, this is using computer equipment for modification of data

    • No, physical damage isn't covered by the Act

    • It would depend on whether they were authorised to modify the data on the Hard Drive

    Correct Answer
    A. No, physical damage isn't covered by the Act
    Explanation
    The physical damage is still covered by the Criminal Damage Act. The CMA only deals with alteration, impairment or deletion of data.

    Rate this question:

  • 10. 

    Is the creation of viruses specifically prohibited under the Computer Misuse Act?

    • No, viruses are not mentioned in the Act

    • Yes because viruses are harmful

    • Yes because viruses slow down computers

    • No, viruses are only prohibited when the cause (or intend to cause) impairment of a computer

    Correct Answer
    A. No, viruses are only prohibited when the cause (or intend to cause) impairment of a computer
    Explanation
    The Act doesn't prohibit the creation of viruses, or indeed using them on equipment/data with the owners permission. However if the virus does access or modify data or impair a computer without authorisation it becomes illegal

    Rate this question:

  • 11. 

    Is there following statement correct and why?"System administrators have a legal obligation (as part of this act) to protect their systems from hackers"

    • True, sysadmins are required to do all they can to protect data

    • False, the Act has no such obligation

    • False, the Act doesn't specifically mention hacking

    • True, sysadmins are required to stop hackers at all costs

    Correct Answer
    A. False, the Act has no such obligation
    Explanation
    This is beyond the scope of the Act but may be covered under some contract law

    Rate this question:

  • 12. 

    Where could Gary MacKinnon have been tried?

    • Anywhere that is a signatory of the Cybercrime Convention

    • Only the UK

    • Only the US

    • Either the UK or the US

    Correct Answer
    A. Either the UK or the US
    Explanation
    He could be tried under s4(1)(b) in England & Wales (the UK is of course not a single jurisdiction) and he could have been tried under Federal Laws in the US.

    Rate this question:

  • 13. 

    A person is convicted of accessing the LSE network and modifying their grades in the student records, what is the maximum penalty they face?

    • Up to six months in prison and a fine of up to £5000

    • Up to 10 years in prison and an unlimited fine

    • Up to 5 years in prison and an unlimited fine

    • Up to 12 months in prison and a fine of up to £5000

    Correct Answer
    A. Up to 10 years in prison and an unlimited fine
    Explanation
    This is an offence under s.3(2)(c) of the Act "to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data" This carries an up to 10 year sentence.

    Rate this question:

  • 14. 

    A hacker group attacks the webpage of 10 Downing Street and occupies it using a DDoS attack. They issue a statement that this was done to protest the UK's climate change policy. Have they a defence against any charges under s.3 of the CMA?

    • Yes, this is protected political speech under s.3(5)(d)

    • No, these acts do not meet the political speech defence in s.3(5)(d)

    • Yes, the Act has a general defence for political hacktivism

    • No, there is no defence for hacktivist speech

    Correct Answer
    A. No, there is no defence for hacktivist speech
    Explanation
    Firstly, there is no s.3(5)(d). Secondly there are no defences for hacktivists.

    Rate this question:

  • 15. 

    A poorly constructed mailserver goes a little crazy and sends 100,000 messages to [email protected]. This causes the LSE mailserver to fail. Is there a possible CMA offence?

    • Yes, under s.3

    • Yes, under s3A

    • No, there is no intent

    • No, mail servers permit the sending of mail in this fashion so it was authorised

    Correct Answer
    A. Yes, under s.3
    Explanation
    Even though there was no intent this could be seen to be reckless under s.3(3)

    Rate this question:

Quiz Review Timeline (Updated): Mar 15, 2023 +

Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.

  • Current Version
  • Mar 15, 2023
    Quiz Edited by
    ProProfs Editorial Team
  • Feb 27, 2017
    Quiz Created by
    Collegeprof101

Popular Topics

+ Show more
Back to Top Back to top
Advertisement
×

Wait!
Here's an interesting quiz for you.

We have other quizzes matching your interest.