The router IS classified as a computer according to the Dutch rubric. It has a processor albeit not x86 it's a SOC (system on a chip). It does store quite a bit of data to include configurations, routing tables, and includes passwords. The data was also accessed and exploited (indirectly) by the intruder to gain access to the Internet, thereby classifying this as illegal to thier own standard. The judge was wrong on his classification, and the prosecution failed to provide the proper expert witness testimony to clarify what a router is and does.
As far as the misguided "you better learn how to secure your router or it's your own fault." routine... Wireless is always considered an unsecure medium for this of us that are in the security field. Even WPA-2 is vulnerable given penetration software (freely found on the Internet), rainbow tables, time and other methodology. WPA-1 and WEP are even worse and a script kiddy can look up how to break into thier neighbor's wifi on YouTube. Fact of the matter is... If u have a wireless access point (most of us do) it's not impossible to crack. But, if you do encrypt it (and in this case it was encrypted)... most people feel they have a right to privacy on that network and should be able to assume that it's "reasonably secure" as the law should afford us (the general public) these rights and protections. (from a western legal ideological point of view). In the U.S. This has been accomplished by the electronic data acts... And the constitution.
Posted from my iPhone :-)
