While Rucker, Jr. is merely the host of the affected server and is not in any way responsible for the BadTrans.b virus, and he did, after all, shutdown the affected server as soon as he realized what was happening, three questions still pend. First, why did Rucker, Jr. not contact the FBI or law enforcement officials when he discovered the database of stolen goods? Second, why are FBI officials being barred from full investigative rights while reporters are allowed to peruse the information? Finally, should witnesses to crimes be allowed to determine just what information is pertinent to an ongoing investigation? If a thief dumped a load of stolen goods in my backyard, am I to be allowed to provide only plaster casts of the footprints or shouldn't I be expected to release the stolen goods as well?

The San Francisco Bay Guardian article also strays into the conspiracy theorist's territory that somehow there's a link between BadTrans.b and Magic Lantern. In fact, Magic Lantern is still under development and would not be utilized without appropriate judicial authorization, much the same as wiretaps employed during criminal investigations.

Certainly it is unfortunate that anyone should peruse the victims' cyber-diaries. It seems even more unfortunate when perusing rights are granted to reporters - and who knows who else - but not to the very ones responsible for solving this crime and preventing others like it from occurring. This is one crime scene that is being trampled by everyone except those charged with solving the dirty deed. Will you rest easier tonight knowing that Mr. Rucker is making the decisions about who sees your cyber-diary and who doesn't? I know I won't.