Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: As Aaron Swartz's case fades, new ones arise!

Expand Messages
  • rlbaty50
    A more recent story and an interesting reader s comment: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/mar/18/us-hacker-andrew-auernheimer-at-t US hacker Andrew
    Message 1 of 11 , Mar 18, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      A more recent story and an interesting reader's comment:

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/mar/18/us-hacker-andrew-auernheimer-at-t

      US hacker Andrew Auernheimer given three-year jail term for AT&T breach

      Karen McVeigh
      Monday 18 March 2013 17.09 EDT

      (excerpts)

      Auernheimer's prosecution, under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, was being closely watched by critics of the US government's harsh line on hackers.

      His sentence on Monday comes after a massive outcry following the suicide of free information activist Aaron Swartz in January.

      Swartz's was facing multiple charges and a prosecution that his supporters said was excessive.

      Hanni Fakhouri, a staff attorney with the EFF, said:

      > "It's excessive to say the least. The prosecution
      > was excessive because he did not hack into anything.
      > He obtained information from a public information
      > website. It would be like me going into the Guardian
      > website and copying information and emailing it to
      > someone else."

      Fakhouri said the law was misinterpreted and said:

      > "We hope on appeal to get the sentence thrown out.

      US attorney Paul Fishman described Auenheimer's reasoning that he was trying to expose security flaws in AT&T's website as a "fiction." Fishman said in a statement:

      > "Andrew Auernheimer knew he was breaking the
      > law when he and his partner hacked into AT&T's
      > servers and stole personal information from
      > unsuspecting iPad users.

      > "When it became clear that he was in trouble,
      > he concocted the fiction that he was trying to
      > make the internet more secure, and that all he
      > did was walk in through an unlocked door.

      > The jury didn't buy it, and neither did the
      > court in imposing sentence upon him today."

      David Velazquex, the FBI acting special agent in charge of the investigation, said Auernheimer's "self-serving cyber attack" was carried out to promote his business.

      He said his conviction and sentence signified the

      > "continued and growing efforts of the US attorney's
      > office and the FBI in investigating and prosecuting
      > computer hacking and intellectual property crimes."

      Auernheimer's co-defendant, Daniel Spitler, 27, of
      San Francisco, California, previously pleaded guilty
      to the same charges and is awaiting sentencing.

      Reader's Comment:

      From: Sophlady
      Date: 19 March 2013 1:23am

      'Weev' (Andrew Auernheimer) and his associates discussed selling the list, as proven by transcripts of their conversations entered into evidence.

      His codefendant, Daniel Spitler, testified against him, admitting they intended self-enrichment from the scheme.

      Weev, a bat xxxx crazy, drug addicted racist and anti-Semite who has harassed people online for years, is guilty as sin.

      The people writing articles defending him misrepresent what happened, mainly by omitting the fact that only the people who owned those accounts had legitimate access to them.

      Any time a person uses unauthorized access to log into a server or computer he is violating the statute.

      I was involved in a case in which the former security chief of a corporation, trying to be rehired by proving his expertise, broke into his former employer's servers. He was, rightly, convicted under the statute.

      If you do the crime....

      As for Auernheimer being restrained in court after handling his smart phone, a cell phone can be used to set off explosives. The court was right not to let him manipulate his.

      It is a wonderful irony that the judge who heard the case and sentenced Weev is African-American. I am sure it taxed his self-control not to call her the n-word.

      All-in-all, good riddance (for three years) to bad rubbish.

      I've reposted part of this comment from elsewhere because threads for articles like this invariably fill with false information.

      People need to know what what really happened.

      There is no question 'Weev' guilty as charged. He will get nowhere with an appeal because what he did is exactly what the law forbids.

      ------------------------------------
      ------------------------------------
    • rlbaty50
      This morning s story on the case (This guy and Kent Hovind would seem to have a lot in common when it comes to whining about their problems):
      Message 2 of 11 , Mar 19, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        This morning's story on the case (This guy and Kent Hovind would seem to have a lot in common when it comes to whining about their problems):

        http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/att-ipad-hacking-thats-41-months-jail

        AT&T iPad Hacking: That's 41 Months Jail

        9:30 AM EDT, Mar. 19th, 2013
        By Jeff Gamet

        (excerpts)

        Andrew Auernheimer...has been sentenced to 41 months in prison...

        Mr. Auernheimer was arrested shortly after the incident on drug-related charges in Arkansas by FBI agents.

        The Federal agents found cocaine, ecstacy, LSD, and schedule 2 and 3 pharmaceuticals during a warrant-based search of his home.

        In early 2011, Mr. Auernheimer and Mr. Spitler were hit with Federal charges for fraud and conspiracy to access a computer without authorization, sending them down the path that eventually led to Monday's sentencing. Mr. Spitler pled guilty in 2011.

        While there doesn't seem to be any doubt that the men were involved in the incident, whether or not they actually hacked AT&T's computers, or gained access without authorization, could be seen as something of a grey area.

        The script they accessed was openly available and routinely used to help link iPads to their owner's accounts. They way the men used the script, however, fell outside of its intended scope since it was never meant to be a tool for gathering user names and email addresses en mass.

        The two never accessed private servers in the incident, and in the sense that most people mean "hack," never hacked into the AT&T computers.

        Instead of breaking into AT&T's servers, they wrote code that randomly generated SIM card numbers and presented those to the public server. If the card number matched AT&T's database, the server returned the matching user name and email address.

        Mr. Auernheimer said he felt his prosecution was politically motivated, and told The Verge,

        > I hope they give me the maximum,
        > so people will rise up and storm
        > the decks.

        There were questions as to what constitutes unauthorized access, meaning did the use of PHP to request user information qualify, or did the men need to work their way into servers that weren't open to the public.

        The trial pushed journalist Tim Pool to comment on Twitter,

        > "I felt like I was watching a witch trial
        > as prosecutors admitted they didn't understand
        > computers."

        Mr. Auernheimer has already been remanded into custody to start serving his sentence, and he plans to appeal the ruling. Before his sentencing hearing, he told people outside the courthouse,

        > "I'm going to jail for doing arithmatic."

        While Mr. Auernheimer's statement is technically true, it's all about how he used arithmatic. He did build a list of customer names and email addresses that AT&T never intended to be public, and he used hand-rolled PHP code to help get as much as he could from the servers.

        Whether or not the punishment is fitting for the crime, however, is what's up for debate now. The prosecution no doubt feels the sentecing is approriate, while Mr. Auernheimer thinks he's a scapegoat.

        With his plan to appeal, Mr. Auernheimer will likely stay in the public eye while the courts decide if what he did really does warrant a sentence that spans more than six years.

        --------------------------------
        --------------------------------
      • rlbaty50
        Another account of the most recent case: http://lezgetreal.com/2013/03/hacker-gets-41-month-sentence/ Hacker Gets 41 Month Sentence Posted by: Linda Carbonell
        Message 3 of 11 , Mar 20, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Another account of the most recent case:

          http://lezgetreal.com/2013/03/hacker-gets-41-month-sentence/

          Hacker Gets 41 Month Sentence

          Posted by: Linda Carbonell
          March 19, 2013.

          (excerpts)

          In a jury verdict and sentence that might have repercussions for all those hactivists out there, Andrew Auernheimer has been sentenced to three years and five months for stealing personal data about 120,000 iPad users.

          Auernheimer's defense was that he was trying to make the Internet more secure by walking through an unlocked door at AT&T.

          The jury didn't agree.

          Aeurnheimer was indicted with co-defendant Daniel Spitler and Goatse Security. They used an "account slurper" to match e-mail addresses with identifiers for iPad users, and then used a "brute force" attack to get information about the users from the AT&T servers.

          The information was then provided to the Gawker.com, which published an article about the people whose information was hacked.

          Spitler pleaded guilty in June, 2011, and is still awaiting sentencing.

          This verdict is probably just a beginning.

          It could take a few more before the message gets through that people are no longer impressed with the idea that hacktists are overflowing with altruism.

          -------------------------------
          -------------------------------
        • rlbaty50
          http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/why-matthew-keys-is-not-the-next-aaron-swartz/2013/03/20/0eae21f4-90c7-11e2-9abd-e4c5c9dc5e90_story.html# Why
          Message 4 of 11 , Mar 21, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/why-matthew-keys-is-not-the-next-aaron-swartz/2013/03/20/0eae21f4-90c7-11e2-9abd-e4c5c9dc5e90_story.html#

            Why Matthew Keys is not `the next Aaron Swartz'

            By Caitlin Dewey
            March 20, 2013

            (excerpts)

            Matthew Keys is no Aaron Swartz.

            But the Reuters social media producer will face decades in jail under the same law used against Swartz if convicted of helping Anonymous hack the Los Angeles Times Web site in late 2010 — a parallel that has Keys's lawyers and some commentators grouping the two as twin victims of America's mangled computer crime laws.

            Their cases may look the same, but they involve entirely different sections of a controversial cyber crime law.

            Keys was recently charged with different computer crimes under the same law.

            Prosecutors allege the 26-year-old journalist, who has been suspended from Reuters with pay, helped Anonymous deface the Los Angeles Times Web site by giving log-in credentials to a hacker in an Anonymous chatroom, shortly after Keys was fired by the company that owns the Times.

            But legal experts caution that the cases are different, despite their apparent parallels.

            And bloggers like Jason Gooljar are finding out exactly how controversial it is to call Keys "the next Aaron Swartz" — Gooljar quickly updated a post with that title after Redditors slammed the comparison as an "insult" to Swartz's memory.

            > "Aaron Swartz and Matthew Keys are very different,"

            said Orin Kerr, a law professor at George Washington University and a respected expert on cyber crime.

            > "They were charged under completely different
            > parts of the law."

            The law in question is the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the much-maligned, much-amended 1984 computer crime law that governs many government and commercial cases. The CFAA has not gotten much love from legal experts in the past few years: it's "outrageous," "bullying" and "shockingly vague," depending on whom you ask, and its sweeping terms have been used to charge people for crimes ranging from hacking a Playstation 3 so it could run third-party programs to downloading the client database of an ex-employer.

            But while it's easy to see the CFAA as one monolithic relic, Kerr says, the law actually has several parts, and Keys was charged under the least controversial one.

            That's because the CFAA's biggest problem lies in its use of the phrase "unauthorized access" — a vague, only loosely defined term that has left prosecutors and courts to their own interpretations.

            Keys's part of the law doesn't mention that term.
            Swartz's does.

            Aside from the difference in their alleged crimes, there's also a split in apparent motives.

            As many of Swartz's defenders have pointed out on social media, Swartz was a documented Internet activist who fought publicly for freedom of information.

            On the other hand, in chat room transcripts released by the Department of Justice, the user alleged to be Keys urges an Anonymous hacker to "go f--- some s--- up."

            That isn't just a public-relations issue: motives can factor into sentencing, too, Kerr says.

            --------------------------------
            --------------------------------
          • Ned Netterville
            Robert, Voluntaryists would do away with the silly, statist concept of intellectual property, which would, of course, exonerate Aaron Schwarz. Lots of
            Message 5 of 11 , Mar 21, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Robert, Voluntaryists would do away with the silly, statist concept of "intellectual property," which would, of course, exonerate Aaron Schwarz. Lots of literature on the wisdom of this position at mises.org
              r enemies; it befuddles 'em!--Ned Netterville
            • rlbaty50
              ... Similarly, if we would only repeal laws against..., we could eliminate prison over-crowding and exonerate rapists, bank robbers, Bernie Madoff, Charles
              Message 6 of 11 , Mar 21, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
                Ned Netterville <nednetterville@...> wrote, in part:

                > Robert,
                >
                > Voluntaryists would... which would, of course,
                > exonerate Aaron Schwarz.

                Similarly, if we would only repeal laws against..., we could eliminate prison over-crowding and exonerate rapists, bank robbers, Bernie Madoff, Charles Manson, etc., etc., etc.

                Sincerely,
                Robert Baty
              • Ned Netterville
                The similarity is not logical. Real crimes, like those you name, have victims. Who was victimized by Aaron Schwarz s crime? ... -- Love your enemies; it
                Message 7 of 11 , Mar 21, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  The similarity is not logical. Real crimes, like those you name, have victims. Who was victimized by Aaron Schwarz's crime?

                  On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 3:13 PM, rlbaty50 <rlbaty@...> wrote:
                   



                  --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
                  Ned Netterville <nednetterville@...> wrote, in part:

                  > Robert,
                  >
                  > Voluntaryists would... which would, of course,
                  > exonerate Aaron Schwarz.

                  Similarly, if we would only repeal laws against..., we could eliminate prison over-crowding and exonerate rapists, bank robbers, Bernie Madoff, Charles Manson, etc., etc., etc.

                  Sincerely,
                  Robert Baty




                  --
                  Love your enemies; it befuddles 'em!--Ned Netterville
                • rlbaty50
                  Ned, It would not seem to me to be productive to quibble with you about real crimes and victim/victimless crimes . You spoke of exoneration, and that was
                  Message 8 of 11 , Mar 21, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Ned,

                    It would not seem to me to be productive to quibble with you about "real crimes" and "victim/victimless crimes".

                    You spoke of exoneration, and that was the subject I addressed.

                    I think my logic was impeccable, valid and sound.

                    That is, criminals of all stripes can be exonerated if the laws which they transgress are repealed, retroactively.

                    Ned, are you now proposing that some Government is appropriate, some laws justified and subject to enforcement by "the long arm of the law/Government", and maybe even some taxes levied to pay for the operations thereof?

                    Sincerely,
                    Robert Baty

                    --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
                    Ned Netterville <nednetterville@...> wrote:

                    > The similarity is not logical.
                    >
                    > Real crimes, like those you name,
                    > have victims.
                    >
                    > Who was victimized by Aaron Schwarz's crime?
                    >
                    > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 3:13 PM,
                    > rlbaty50 <rlbaty@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >> --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
                    >> Ned Netterville <nednetterville@> wrote, in part:
                    >>
                    >>> Robert,
                    >>>
                    >>> Voluntaryists would... which would, of course,
                    >>> exonerate Aaron Schwarz.
                    >>
                    >> Similarly, if we would only repeal laws
                    >> against..., we could eliminate prison
                    >> over-crowding and exonerate rapists,
                    >> bank robbers, Bernie Madoff, Charles Manson,
                    >> etc., etc., etc.
                  • Ned Netterville
                    Robert, OK, I see. I should read more carefully. You are right! (Add a Ned notch.) But the analogy was onerous because of the Grand-Canyon size distinction
                    Message 9 of 11 , Mar 21, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Robert, OK, I see. I should read more carefully. You are right! (Add a Ned notch.) But the analogy was onerous because of the Grand-Canyon size distinction between actions that harm people and victimless crimes.

                      No, not proposing as you suggest. No need for government or its laws,

                      Ned



                      On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 11:01 PM, rlbaty50 <rlbaty@...> wrote:
                       

                      Ned,

                      It would not seem to me to be productive to quibble with you about "real crimes" and "victim/victimless crimes".

                      You spoke of exoneration, and that was the subject I addressed.

                      I think my logic was impeccable, valid and sound.

                      That is, criminals of all stripes can be exonerated if the laws which they transgress are repealed, retroactively.

                      Ned, are you now proposing that some Government is appropriate, some laws justified and subject to enforcement by "the long arm of the law/Government", and maybe even some taxes levied to pay for the operations thereof?

                      Sincerely,
                      Robert Baty

                      --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
                      Ned Netterville <nednetterville@...> wrote:

                      > The similarity is not logical.
                      >
                      > Real crimes, like those you name,
                      > have victims.
                      >
                      > Who was victimized by Aaron Schwarz's crime?
                      >
                      > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 3:13 PM,
                      > rlbaty50 <rlbaty@...> wrote:
                      >
                      >> --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
                      >> Ned Netterville <nednetterville@> wrote, in part:
                      >>
                      >>> Robert,
                      >>>
                      >>> Voluntaryists would... which would, of course,
                      >>> exonerate Aaron Schwarz.
                      >>
                      >> Similarly, if we would only repeal laws
                      >> against..., we could eliminate prison
                      >> over-crowding and exonerate rapists,
                      >> bank robbers, Bernie Madoff, Charles Manson,
                      >> etc., etc., etc.




                      --
                      Love your enemies; it befuddles 'em!--Ned Netterville
                    • rlbaty50
                      ... Just for clarification, Ned, in proposing the exoneration of Aaron Swartz, you did not mean to limit your exoneration proposal; right? That is, your
                      Message 10 of 11 , Mar 22, 2013
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
                        Ned Netterville wrote most recently, in part:

                        > No, not proposing as you suggest.
                        > No need for government or its laws.

                        --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
                        Ned Netterville wrote, in part:

                        > Voluntaryists would do away with...which
                        > would, of course, exonerate Aaron Schwarz.

                        Just for clarification, Ned, in proposing the exoneration of Aaron Swartz, you did not mean to limit your exoneration proposal; right?

                        That is, your proposal would exonerate the likes of drunk drivers, rapists, shop lifters, graffiti artists, speeders, bank robbers, Bernie Madoffs and Charles Mansons as well; right?

                        --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
                        Ned Netterville wrote, in part:

                        > Real crimes, like those you name,
                        > have victims.

                        That kinda sounded like you were in favor of "real crimes", but now you sound like you are for not having any crimes or criminals.

                        Sincerely,
                        Robert Baty
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.