- 6 - arrange that that could be done secretly and in an almost undetectable manner. In other instances computers may be accessed in secret and confidential business information may be obtained. The pernicious effect of the use of such a device as the Back Orific program cannot be over emphasised. If login names and passwords can be obtained from someone else’s computer without their knowing about it, it is a very short step to other information also being extracted. There are undoubtedly many considerations which a court would have to take into account in arriving at an appropriate sentence in respect of offences under sections 60 and 161 of the Crimes Ordinance. First and foremost would be the loss and damage which was caused to the victims. The gravity of the offence to the victim would be another matter. The purpose of the access would also be relevant as would be any gain financial or otherwise to the person perpetrating the access. In the present circumstances we consider it sufficient to say that where access has been obtained to someone else’s computer whether for gain or for some other reason, the act can in many respects be likened to burglary. What has happened is that there has been access to the computer of another, much in the same way as a person who enters a house or an office and goes through a drawer or filing cabinet. Some of the aspects of the offence of burglary are undoubtedly not present in relation to unauthorised computer access. The analogy is by no means perfect. Whilst indicating that we feel it inappropriate to lay down guidelines now we would indicate that unless there are most unusual circumstances a non-custodial sentence would be inappropriate for offences against section 161.