Categories
Law

Computer Misuse Act 1990

The Computer Misuse Act 1990 (CMA) is a UK law that was introduced in 1990 to address the issue of computer-related crime. The law is designed to protect computer users and systems from unauthorised access, hacking, and other forms of cybercrime.

In this article, we will explore the Computer Misuse Act in more detail, including its key provisions, penalties for breaking the law, and notable cases where the act has been enforced.

Key Provisions of the Computer Misuse Act

The Computer Misuse Act contains three main sections that outline offenses related to unauthorised access, unauthorised modification of computer material, and unauthorised access with intent to commit or facilitate a crime.

Section 1: Unauthorized access to computer material

Section 1 of the CMA makes it an offense to gain unauthorised access to any computer material. This includes accessing data or systems without permission, as well as using any unauthorised method to gain access to a computer.

Section 2: Unauthorized access with intent to commit or facilitate a crime

Section 2 of the CMA makes it an offense to gain unauthorised access to a computer with the intention of committing or facilitating a crime. This could include stealing data, distributing viruses or malware, or using a computer to commit fraud.

Section 3: Unauthorized modification of computer material

Section 3 of the CMA makes it an offense to modify or destroy computer material without authorization. This could include deleting files, changing data, or introducing malware.

Penalties for Breaking the Law

The penalties for breaking the Computer Misuse Act vary depending on the severity of the offense. For less serious offenses, the maximum penalty is a fine or up to two years in prison.

For more serious offenses, such as those involving significant financial loss or damage, the maximum penalty is ten years in prison.

Notable Cases

Over the years, there have been several notable cases where the Computer Misuse Act has been enforced. In 2018, a teenager was sentenced to two years in prison for his role in the Mirai botnet attack. The attack, which used hundreds of thousands of compromised Internet of Things devices, caused significant disruption to websites and services around the world.

In 2015, a man was sentenced to two years in prison for hacking into the US Department of Defense’s computer system. The man, who was based in the UK, used a technique called “SQL injection” to gain unauthorised access to the system.

Summary

The Computer Misuse Act is an important law that helps to protect computer users and systems from cybercrime. The act contains several provisions that make it illegal to gain unauthorized access to computer systems or data, modify computer material without authorization, or use a computer to commit a crime.

Penalties for breaking the law range from fines to prison sentences, depending on the severity of the offense.

The Computer Misuse Act has been used in several high-profile cases over the years, highlighting the importance of strong laws to combat cybercrime.

The Ministry of Injustice was attacked on the 14th March 2023 from outside of the UK and the jurisdiction of the Computer Misuse Act 1990. Better luck next time.

The gov.uk website has various help and guidance on Crime, justice and the law.


The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.


Latest Articles


Most Popular


You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

[post_title] was last updated on the 9th June 2026

By Dom Watts

Dom Watts founded the Ministry of Injustice in July 2021. Dom is an IT Professional with 30+ years experience in Tier 1 Banking, Government, Defence, Healthcare and Global Blue Chips. Dom has no legal training and is not a lawyer but has previously consulted for a Magic Circle Law Firm. You can find Dom on X or Google.

Dom Watts publishes the Ministry of Injustice as a citizen journalist. The journalism exemption is detailed in the Data protection and journalism code of practice published by the ICO and Section 124 of the Data Protection Act 2018.

Section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of truth. Section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of honest opinion. Section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of public interest. Section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the single publication rule.

Section 4a of The Limitation Act 1980 defines the time limit for actions for defamation or malicious falsehood as one year from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives the right to freedom of expression. "This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."

"Free speech encompasses the right to offend, and indeed to abuse another." - Para 43 Scottow v CPS [2020] EWHC 3421 (Admin)

"Free speech is a fundamental common law right" - Para 21 R v Shayler [2002] UKHL 11 [2003] 1 AC 247 per Lord Bingham and Para 42 Phillips -v- Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs [2024] EWHC 32 (Admin)

Dom is a member of The Free Speech Union

“A key issue here is the need to distinguish between conduct which, however objectionable, does not justify invoking the criminal law and conduct which crosses the line and results in criminal liability" - Para 31 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

“Harassment is generally understood to involve improper oppressive and unreasonable conduct that is targeted at an individual and calculated to produce alarm and distress” - Para 38 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

"The behaviour said to amount to harassment must reach a level of seriousness passing beyond irritations, annoyances....The gravity of the misconduct must be of an order which would sustain criminal liability" - Paras [40-44] Hayden v Dickenson [2020] EWHC 3291 (QB)

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything"

In 2002 Dom Watts was an unlikely consumer champion. The dad of three from Croydon took on the power and might of Kodak – and won...Dom on BBC Working Lunch

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent