Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 266, § 120F (2026)

Unauthorized access to computer system; penalties

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 120F. Whoever, without authorization, knowingly accesses a computer system by any means, or after gaining access to a computer system by any means knows that such access is not authorized and fails to terminate such access, shall be punished by imprisonment in the house of correction for not more than thirty days or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars, or both.

The requirement of a password or other authentication to gain access shall constitute notice that access is limited to authorized users.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1996–2024 · leading case: Pub. Emp. Ret. Admin. Comm'n v. Bettencourt, 47 N.E.3d 667 (Mass. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Pub. Emp. Ret. Admin. Comm'n v. Bettencourt, 47 N.E.3d 667 (Mass. 2016). · cites it 4× “On October 26, 2006, Bettencourt was indicted for unauthorized access to a computer system, in violation of G. L. c. 266, § 120F; the indictment contained twenty-one separate counts.”

State Bd. of Ret. v. Finneran, 71 N.E.3d 1190 (Mass. 2017). “17 The case involved a police officer who unlawfully accessed the civil service promotional examination scores of twenty-one of his fellow officers in violation of G. L. c. 266, § 120F. See Public Employee Retirement Admin.”

Andrew Bisignani v. Justices of the Lynn Div. of the Dist. Court Dep't of the Trial Court & Another., 100 Mass. App. Ct. 618 (Mass. App. Ct. 2022). “266, § 120F, a misdemeanor, was imprisonment for thirty days and fine of not more than $1,000, court concluded that Bettencourt's aggregated maximum penalty for convictions of twenty-one counts - 630 days in a house of correction and a $21,000 fine - did not "indicate a…”

Commonwealth v. Piersall, 853 N.E.2d 210 (Mass. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 5× “After a jury trial, the defendant, who appeared pro se, was convicted of fifteen counts of unauthorized access to a computer system (G. L. c. 266, § 120F) and of one count of criminal harassment (G.”

Commonwealth v. Farley, 6 Mass. L. Rptr. 175 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1996). · cites it 7× “INTRODUCTION The defendant, Mark Farley, has moved to dismiss forty-four counts alleging violations of G.L.c. 266, §120F. Farley seeks dismissal on the grounds that the statute is unconstitutionally vague within the meaning of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment…”

Pub. Emp. Ret. Admin. Comm'n v. Bettencourt, 27 Mass. L. Rptr. 299 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2010). · cites it 3× “On October 26, 2006, Bettencourt was indicted by a Suffolk County Grand Jury on twenty-one counts of violating G.L.c. 266, §120F, which prohibits unauthorized access to a computer system.”

Latoya L. v. Kai K. (Mass. App. Ct. 2024). “ed the judge that the case remained in status quo as the guardian ad litem had not yet completed the investigation necessary to provide a recommendation regarding whether the defendant could 4 The plaintiff has represented in her brief that the defendant was arraigned in the…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.