hacking
Clean Hands doctrine and Plausible Deniability
<p>There is a question on the <a href="https://superuser.com/questions/1217160/ssid-with-very-similar-name-is-this-an-attempt-of-hacking/1217181?noredirect=1#comment1778400_1217181">Superuser</a> forum wherein a bad actor is trying to trick someone into connecting to an access point, presumably so they can sniff information.   They are doing this by setting up an access point with a very similar name to their victim.</p>

<p>Were the victim to turn the tables and deliberately make use of the provided connection, using a VPN to neutralise the threat, would they have "plausible deniability" being that the name of the access points were very similar (but bearing in mind they are using a VPN)?</p>

<p>Also, assuming this matter ever went to a court (which I assume is unlikely), could the user use a defense that the other party did not have clean hands?  Would it matter if it was dealt with as a Criminal and Civil matter ?</p>

<p>I'm interested in the general concepts underpinning these concepts more then explicit statutes, so pick a jurisdiction if it can help the mental processes!</p>

<p>Given that both parties have committed criminal offenses (the 'bad actor' is attempting fraud and the 'victim' has committed unauthorized access to a computer system), no court would hear a civil case between these parties. As a matter of public policy, criminals do not owe a duty of care to each other so no one can win this case.</p>
