Skip to content

CS Professional · Internal and Forensic Audit · Cyber Forensics

Ravi, an outsider with no authorisation, knowingly accesses a government database restricted for reasons of the security of the State and obtains access to it. Which statement about Section 66F is correct?

This is cyber terrorism under Section 66F(1)(B). Knowingly accessing a computer resource without authorisation and obtaining information restricted for reasons of State security or foreign relations suffices. Proof of death, injury, a contaminant or sale to a foreign state is not required under this limb.

  1. AIt is cyber terrorism under Section 66F(1)(B), as he knowingly accessed without authorisation and obtained restricted informationCorrect
  2. BIt is not cyber terrorism unless he also caused death or injury
  3. CIt is cyber terrorism only if he introduced a computer contaminant
  4. DIt is cyber terrorism only if he sold the data to a foreign state

Explanation

Section 66F(1)(B) covers knowing or intentional unauthorised access, or exceeding authorised access, by which the person obtains information restricted for reasons of the security of the State or foreign relations. This limb does not require death, injury or a contaminant, so the options requiring them are wrong.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Cyber Forensics shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Cyber ForensicsFree diagnostic mock

More Cyber Forensics questions