Law / United States / Missouri

Tampering with computer data, computer equipment, and computer users

Mo. Rev. Stat. Secs. 569.095 to 569.099

In force since .

A computer misuse rule binding public and private bodies.

Audit expectation
none

What it requires

  • Do not access a Missouri-connected computer, computer system, or computer network without authorization or without reasonable grounds to believe you have authorization.NIST AI RMFMAP 4.1
  • Do not modify, destroy, disclose, or take computer data, programs, or supporting documentation, or a password or other access-control information, without authorization.NIST AI RMFMAP 4.1
  • Do not access a computer and intentionally examine information about another person without authorization.NIST AI RMFMAP 4.1
  • Do not deny computer system services to an authorized user.no control in the NIST AI RMF
  • A scheme to defraud or obtain property worth 750 dollars or more, or equipment damage of 750 dollars or more, escalates the offense from a misdemeanor to a felony.

These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text.

In the frameworks

NIST AI RMF
  • MAP 4.1Approaches for mapping AI technology and legal risks of its components – including the use of third-party data or software – are in place, followed, and documented, as are risks of infringement of a third party’s intellectual property or other rights.

Our reading of where this law's duties sit in each framework, and in the NIST AI RMF, line by line beside each duty above. It never says that running a control meets the law. How we read a framework against the law

If you get it wrong

Criminal exposureYes

Criminal exposure note

A class A misdemeanor (up to one year in jail), rising to a class E felony where the conduct is committed to defraud or obtain property worth 750 dollars or more, or (for computer-equipment tampering) causes damage of 750 dollars or more, and to a class D felony where equipment damage reaches 25,000 dollars or more.

What it makes you log

Logging duty

Section 569.095 defines tampering with computer data (modifying or destroying data or programs, disclosing or taking data or passwords, accessing and examining information about another person, and receiving or using data obtained in violation). The page the row cites holds only this section; sections 569.097 and 569.099 are not on it and are left out of this answer. Section 569.095 imposes no duty to create, keep, produce or review a log or record and states no territorial clause, so no hook is recorded.

Kind
None
As of

What this law does

Drafted with AI

Drafted with AI from the cited sources under the direction of UnGovr staff. UnGovr holds editorial responsibility for this page. How this site is made

Research summary

Legal information, not legal advice. This is LexLint's own research summary of a public legal source, and it creates no attorney-client relationship. For decisions that matter, consult qualified counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. About LexLint

A person commits tampering with computer data, computer equipment, or computer users if, knowingly and without authorization or without reasonable grounds to believe he or she has authorization, the person modifies, destroys, discloses, or takes computer data, programs, or supporting documentation; discloses or takes a password or other information controlling access to a system; accesses a computer and intentionally examines information about another person; accesses, modifies, destroys, damages, or takes computer equipment or a computer, system, or network; or denies computer system services to an authorized user.

Each offense is a class A misdemeanor unless committed to defraud or obtain property worth 750 dollars or more, or (for tampering with computer equipment) causes damage of 750 dollars or more, in which case it is a class E felony, rising to a class D felony where the equipment damage reaches 25,000 dollars or more.

The without-authorization test is undefined by the statute and, unlike Virginia's parallel statute, carries no separate requirement of malicious intent or intentionally deceptive means; no Missouri appellate decision was located applying it to automated collection of a public, unauthenticated web page.

When LexLint raises it

When your app profile says your app crawls the web.

Back to the example  ·  Lint your app

Page updated .