Computer Fraud and Abuse Act: https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R46536.pdf

> Broadly speaking, § 1030(a)(5)141 prohibits a variety of acts that result in damage to a computer. Subsection 1030(a)(5) may be used to prosecute many of the activities that are commonly associated with hacking, such as the transmission of viruses or worms and unauthorized access by intruders who delete files or shut off computers.142 The provision may also be used to prosecute the perpetrators of Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks,143 which occur, for example, when an attacker overwhelms a server’s ability to process legitimate requests by overloading the server with a flood of illegitimate traffic.1

Kicking your friend offline (via DDOS or other) would prevent it from processing legitimate requests and count as a breach of CFAA.

>would prevent it from processing legitimate requests

Your friend is not hosting a server and they are not incurring damages due to having trouble connecting to the internet.

The damages from not being able process legitimate requests is like if you DDoS an ecommerce site which means that they are unable to receive orders from legitimate customers which causes them damage.

> Your friend is not hosting a server and they are not incurring damages due to having trouble connecting to the internet.

But they are, right? Whoever is hosting the multiplayer match is running a server. And damages come in the form of being rendered unable to enjoy the video game they paid money for. "Damages" do not have to come in the form of lost customers.

I don't agree with that. If your DDoS prevents me from using services I paid for, I could rightfully sue you in small claims for the damages. They'd be small- a percentage of a monthly Internet bill. It's still damages.

It would depend on if being unable to access services you paid for would be considered damage to a "protected computer" which is specifically the kind of damage 1030(a)(5) protects against.

The law includes a special level of "protected computer", but it broadly includes many other devices.

The example about servers is not the complete interpretation of the law. It is merely a simple, understandable example.

> The CFAA broadly38 defines “computer” as any “electronic, magnetic, optical, electrochemical, or other high speed data processing device performing logical, arithmetic, or storage functions,” including “any data storage facility or communications facility directly related to or operating in conjunction with such device . . . .”39 The CFAA excludes only automated typewriters, typesetters, portable hand held calculators, and similar devices from its definition of computer.40 These limited exceptions to the CFAA’s definition of “computer” “show just how general” the statute’s definition of computer is.41 As one court explained, the definition includes any device with an electronic data processor, of which there are numerous examples.42 Thus, under the CFAA, computers include not only laptops and desktops, but also a wide array of computerized devices ranging from cellphones to objects embedded with microchips, such as certain microwave ovens, watches, and televisions. 43

The definition is extremely broad; which means it also includes things like modems and routers.

According to the FBI, 18 U.S.C. § 1030 proves you wrong, and I'm going to believe fbi.gov over anonymous HN commenters 99 times outta 100. Even if you think you're right because you think some part of the law is unconstitutional, or the way you worded the question was specifically chosen such that you think it doesn't fall under this law, or something I am not aware of idk, I don't believe that the FBI agrees with you, and they're the ones who would be charging me/my kids.

https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/anchorage/fbi-i...