Slashdot Mirror
Russian Snared By The FBI Sentenced To 3 Years
Mark Cantrell writes "Vasiliy Gorshkov, one of two Russian crackers who were arrested in November 2000 after the FBI broke into their computer systems were sentenced Friday. Taking pity on Gorshkov's family, they sentenced Gorshkov to 3 years in prison and a fine of nearly $700,000 USD. They also mention how a U.S. judge found that the FBI wasn't breaking any laws in breaking into a Russian computer system, despite the fact that they were breaking a Russian law doing so. So apparently, it's ok for Americans to break Russian law if they're in the U.S., but not ok for Russians to break U.S. law, even while in Russia."
It seems like these kind of things happen all the time and all we ever do is talk about how bad it is. We talk about abstract concepts like freedom and liberty, but what do we do to put those things into action? This is it, folks. Today is the first day of the rest of your life. Stand up and say something. I'll see you later, I have a letter to write.
Is it any wonder why the rest of the world sees us as arrogant? We just keep acting like our laws are the only ones that are important. At least we are consistent since we are doing the same thing to the UN Security council.
They seem nice to me too.
Matter of fact, I get e-mails every day from this lonely Russian women that's just looking for a good American man to marry her.
Why has Russia been so subdued in the media lately? Is it really because they have been broken by the US, or is something deeper going on?
US policy makers know some answers, but aren't talking. People in various circles of thought (re: conspiracy) know things, but don't have proof, per se.
This whole Iraq issue is a big smokescreen. Russia is no longer important. The real issue the American public should be scared of is the recent EU submission by the US, that will not only give more power to the US, but in the long run, make it near to impossible for other countries to counter.
Scary.
user@host$ diff
Advice: Pick your battles.
Gorshkov was convicted a year ago on 20 counts of computer crimes, fraud and conspiracy after being accused of helping Alexey Ivanov steal credit card numbers from U.S. online banks, e-commerce companies and Internet service providers, the U.S. Attorney's office in Seattle said.
Let the Russian government and foreign policy pundits work this one out. This is nothing like the Skylarov case. These were real criminals committing real crimes.
I hate the government as much as the next guy, but give me a break!
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
do as we say, not as we do
Here, you have government espionage going on from within the US, against someone in Russia. If they break any laws, tough shit, they're espionage. It's not like Russia can do anything about it, especially since they would like to remain a favored American trading partner.
Meanwhile, if you are a private American citizen, break some Russian laws over here, then fly to Moscow, they'd probably arrest you a la Sklyarov. Dmitry Sklyarov did the reverse: he broke American laws in Russia, then entered America's borders, and was arrested.
International law has always been spotty on these matters, and the Internet has aggravated the situation even worse. But it's hard to draw a parallel between Sklyarov did and what the FBI did, because they are very different circumstances.
Judges aren't stupid. If you're going to say something as bold as that, please provide a link to a court ruling where the reasons for the decision are made. With such a wording, and no support, the statement comes off as "Yankee judges think we have the right to hack into any computer system in the world 'cause we own the Internet," which is no doubt the intention.
Such a statement may very well be true, but please provide a link to where the Judge explains himself. He's probably a lot smarter than most of us. Even without beeing tech-saavy any judge would quickly pick up on the implications behind being able to break in to foreign systems without impunity.
Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
"Taking pity on Gorshkov's family, they sentenced Gorshkov to 3 years in prison and a fine of nearly $700,000 USD"
With pity like this, who needs enemies?
Ah, once again, the principle of Enforceable Jurisdiction has come into play.
It would be more accurate to say: It's not illegal to break into any system, do any kind of damage, and arrest using entrapment, as long as you're an agent of U.S. law enforcement, since any judge that doesn't support you 100% can later be labeled a "Communist", uh... "Terrorist" sympathizer...
I am alone, yet I also surf the universal backwash of undifferentiated Being, which is LOVE.
The bureau created a fake company, called "Invita," and asked the Russians to come to Seattle for job interviews. The men were asked to prove their skills and given permission to scan an Invita computer network for vulnerabilities. The computers they used had software on them that logged every keystroke and FBI agents were able to later grab the men's passwords and download evidence off their computer network in Russia.
Interesting that they used human intelligence [HUMINT] to gain the passwords. Once they had the passwords, however, I wonder if they got [or needed] a warrant to search the Russian network.
If an agent were to lift a key, make a wax impression of it, return the key, and use the wax impression to make a duplicate of the key, it seems like he would still need a warrant before he could enter the door [and the premises behind it] that the key unlocked.
PS: For all you girlie-boyz with your panties tied up in knots, THESE RUSSKIES WERE STEALING CREDIT CARD NUMBERS!!! THEY ARE FELONS, NOT HEROES!!!
Run for Congress.
How did the FBI catch this guy? I mean, actually catch him? Extradition? If so, then the Russian government agreed to allow him to be tried in the US.
If the Russian government felt that the FBI's crimes weren't very much of a big deal.
Besides Russia isn't exactly a bastion of civil liberties anyway, I'm willing to bet that Russian law enforcement breaks their own laws all the time.
What the FBI did may have been technicaly illigal, but you have to consider motives and damage as well. Buzz Aldrin didn't get prosicuted when he punched that moon-hoax guy in the face and he shouldn't have been.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Well... isn't everyone in the world an American and speaks English too instead of that hard-to-understand Mexican? I mean, Russia's our partner in the War Against Terror!
Karma whorin' since 1999
The Institute of Internet Security recently created in Moscow, considering the importance of the new methods used on arresting the two Chelyabinsk hackers, invites the FBI investigators to participate on the conference "International Investigations on Cyberspace". Submission of thesis and demonstration of the new practices will be highly accepted. There should be mentioned that, Russian investigators are eager to learn and apply the new methods due to the new conditions they face on cyberspace and will be very happy to see their american colleagues...
"apparently, it's ok for Americans to break Russian law if they're in the U.S., but not ok for Russians to break U.S. law, even while in Russia."
You complain about the discipling of the Russian hackers, yet call for the government officials to be disciplined for the same thing ?
The only people who can say that the government officials broke the law is the Russian judicial system. If they think the US broke their laws, they should go and prosecute them.
The USA trying to push it's own agenda on the world, enforcing their laws and beliefs on other countries and cultures, makes me sick. If there is any hope for the USA or the rest of the world, America must be restrained from trying to enforce its own laws in other countries. Trade embargoes are needed against the USA for such disgusting practices.
GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
"player 4 hit player 1 with 0 stroms"
Make bucket loads of cash (not easy but on par with getting elected to congress) and contribute to candidates of both parties making sure they know and intend to push your agenda.
1> Adobe does business in Russia.
2> Adobe is a US company.
3> Therefore, Adobe is a US interest.
4> The ebook cracking software was being distributed worldwide, but specifically, back in the US.
The judge found, therefore, that the FBI had the right to investigate the Russian company, to build up evidence against the company to show to the Russians for possible extradition. (Nice link on the judges decision, btw)
So even THEN, the US couldn't touch him until he came to the US.
I realize everyone wants to bash the US, and I don't care if you want to, but use some common sense. If he had ordered the killings of US citizens, by hiring hitmen in the US, the US would be perfectly justified in hacking into the guys records, and arresting him if he arrived on US soil. The same thing the Russians would do if the roles were reversed.
While software cracking and murder are not on the same level, the judicial principle is the same.
Are you fishing russians perhaps?
"They also mention how a U.S. judge found that the FBI wasn't breaking any laws in breaking into a Russian computer system, despite the fact that they were breaking a Russian law doing so. So apparently, it's ok for Americans to break Russian law if they're in the U.S., but not ok for Russians to break U.S. law, even while in Russia.""
Duh. What planet has this person lived on for the last 50 years, that they are shocked by such hipocrisy from the US government? President Bush straight up wants to enforce international law while also simulataneously breaking it and insisting that he or his minions not be prosecuted under it for doing so, all in the name of enforcing it.
It makes me mad that it takes something like one person going to prison unjustly to open peoples eyes, while the mass starvations of women and children, people whom have never harmed the U.S., are occuring for a petty dictator that the U.S. themselves built up and made strong in the first place.
Hipocrites. One and all, including myself, that is what we Americans are. And liars, dishonorable, with no respect for other peoples or nations. I mean, we can say nice things about how we supposedly respect others, but OUR deeds speak louder than words.
Show me an effect without cause and then I'll believe in chaos.
Having said that, it is a pity that cases like this cannot be tried in the International Criminal Court, where the issue of legitimate and illegitimate means of gathering evidence could be impartially considered.
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
Sometimes things aren't so "the-USA-is-really-bad" as Slashdot says they are (and sometimes they are, and sometimes they're probably worse).
Of course, if we use Law and Order as our legal source (and, though IANAL, I've watched a lot of L&O), then Jack McCoy would say that we have a responsibility to prosecute criminals when their own countries won't, and that as long as an element of the crime was taking place within jurisdiction of the court, the court should have prosecutorial powers. But in the episode where Jack and Carmichael were outside of the Supreme Court and the decision comes out, after attempting to prosecute a foreign diplomat for murder, they (frustratingly) don't tell us what the decision is. D'oh!
-- Erich
Slashdot reader since 1997
They would have gotten
Away with it if Boris
Badenov had helped
The article here said:
The subtle yet immensly pertinent difference has been completely lost to everyone posting here. Now it's a complete freebie for anyone wanting to up their karma. All you have to say is, "No wonder everyone thinks Americans are jerks."
Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
Hail to whoever has the bigger guns.
Imagine the Creator as a stand up commedian - and at once the world becomes explicable. -Mencken
It all depends on whos view you use. It was OK for the Russians to break US law in russia, from the russians point of view. It was ok for the US to break Russian law from the US, from the point of view of the US. However, I would venture to say, It is wrong for the US to break Russian law from the US , from the russians point of view. AND it is wrong for Russians to break US from russia, from the US point of view.
Now with that all said and done, it is the side with the power to do something about the situation that makes the change. Obviously the russian gov doesn't care, or (most likly) can't much about the situation of the FBI breaking their laws. The US, however, does care about the russians breaking US laws in Russian, and can and HAS done something about it.
I don't agree with the US.
Can't compare these jokers to Dmitri Skylarov. Skylarov was doing something that's allowed by Russian law, and frankly shouldn't be illegal in America. These jokers were running credit card scams which aren't allowed at all, no matter where you go.
The Russians objected to the FBI's means of gathering the evidence, not to the prosecution for the crimes themselves. The FBI "hacked" the computers by luring the Russians to the USA under the guise of a job interview, and installing keylogging software on their PC's as they were invited to hack a virtual network that the FBI set up. Using the keylogging software, the FBI was able to get their passwords, and use it to remotely access their computers in Russia. Using this evidence, they were extradited to the USA for prosecution.
What they did could be called Entrapment, and it could be called Espionage. But I still have to laugh that the l337 h4xx0rz from Russia were dumb enough to allow it to happen. They were running unsecured boxes at home, and for some unearthly reason decided to remotely access those boxes while partaking in an experiment to hack a virtual network in Seattle. Idiots. They get no sympathy at all from me.
If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
You know what I've heard works really well. Write a letter to the editor of your local paper about the issue. Clip the whole letters page (so you have both the identity of the paper and the date of issue) and highlite your letter then send it and a professional letter version to your congressman. They supposably take it more seriously if they know a lot of people have read the letter.
close your eyes,
think cesar and the roman empire,
open your eyes
and watch america.
I think the article doesn't tell the whole story:
the judge agreed that Russian law does not apply to the agents' actions.
I suspect that the judge's opinion was more like this:
"It is not my duty as a federal judge in the U.S. to enforce Russian law."
So it's not an issue for the courts, but for diplomacy. "I'll respect your laws if you respect mine."
We need more uniform treatment of these legal matters in a networked world. It shouldn't be ok for one nation to create laws that protect criminals in their jurisdiction, but you have to be careful with this. If the legal justification of the FBIs actions is say, the DMCA, it's really not reasonable to extend that to every nation. Reasonable legislatures can handle this issue differently, and the FBI should use the Russian standard for actions taken in their country.
How is it right for a US judge to decide which foreign laws do and don't apply to the FBI in a foreign country? This requires an international framework, and there is no way around that. Anything else suggests that US laws and US citizens are above everyone else. Get a grip, your in a world with many voices and they need to be respected.
This is not something that writing your congressman can fix.
The problem is in the American feeling of superiority that emanates from all walks of life.
When America and its citizens realize that they are not the only important people in the world, things WILL change.
If this isn't realized soon, then no one should feel sorry for America when shit happens to her.
Something's gone wrong with our society. Rule of law vs political influence and money. I'm still coming to grips with the insurance companies and radar gun manufacturers using law enforcement as profit centers.
Life for The average guy is really starting to be faced with the outcomes of all the various dirty tricks that are shaping society. Still flooding the country with the H1B workers despite so many of us being unable to find work.
There's some cold hearted motherfuckers in this world, how have they gained so much control over our lives?
The U.N. decree also says that a country has the right to build weapons to protect herself. Damn Anonymous Coward! I Pity the Fool!
I think it would be great if FBI agents who set foot on Russian soil get thrown in jail for cracking. I mean, there is no question they're guilty; they confessed. Off to Siberia with them!
So apparently, it's ok for Americans to break Russian law if they're in the U.S., but not ok for Russians to break U.S. law, even while in Russia
Yep. There's no American law against breaking Russian laws. In fact, there's no American law against violating non-American citizens rights that Americans would be guaranteed in the constitution. If you're not an American citizen and you are arrested in the United States, you aren't guaranteed a jury of your peers, etc. Usually the punishment is extradition, but when no country will take you back, you get to rot in American prison without trial for the rest of your life. (Sadly, 60 minutes doesn't post old stories on the internet, so I can't put up a link for more information.)
Quite frankly, I have zero sympathy for this guy. He assists in stealing millions of dollars, credit-card fraud, etc. He's just as bad as the executives of Enron and Global Crossings (i.e., Gary Wennig). His actions cost people their life savings.
So, quite frankly, I feel little pity for him.
But there are important issues of Sovereignty that arise here, as well as other human rights issues.
The person of one nation should be subject ONLY to that nations laws. If he does nothing illegal by that nation's laws, he should not be arrested in another nation he visited simply because he did something in his homeland which violated that nations laws. However, when a law violated was one which was common between the two nations, then it does make slightly more sense (to be explained and extrapolated on earlier).
Consider if China can arrest a US visitor who visits China because that visitor violated Chinese law while in the US. Lets say that the visitor had more than one child, or criticized the Chinese government online, while in the US. Its would be outrageous for the Chinese government to arrest that person; and, if they did, the US government would undoubtedly protest adamently. We wouldn't tolerate that crap. Firstly, this constitutes what is effectively analagous to RETROACTIVE application of the law; it is unconsciable to punish someone for violating a law which they knew not existed and had no obligation to obey in another country.
There are certain *narrow* cases where international law should allow one nation to arrest the citizens of another while visiting: only in cases where the law that foreigner broke were common to both nations. If a person in Russia arranges for a murder to be committed in the US and travels to the US, we should have the right to arrest him, because what he did is illegal both in the US and in Russia. However, in such cases where nation A arrests a citizen of nation B, that citizen must be trialed by the laws of nation B.
Thus, Gorshkov very well can be arrested in the US. However, he should be trialed in accord with Russian law, not US law, for good or bad. This means that he gets the same rights (or lack thereeof) that he would get in Russia if he were accused of the same crime, and shall face the same punishment as he'd face in Russia.
But if a Russian citizen like Skylarov breaks US law while in Russia, and its an activity that the laws of both nations to not ban, then the US shouldn't have authority to trial that person in the US. We should, however, have the right to hold him a reasonable period of time to interrogate him and learn anything we can to prevent such activities in the future (i.e., if he's a member of a mafia ring), and we should have the right to exile him from coming or returning to the US. If he returns, the punishment should be whatever it is we do to those exiled who return.
This is all very simple and obviously common sense. Apparently, the US government doesn't get it. A government only has sovereignty over its own nation. The US has no sovereignty over what goes on in Russia or anyplace else in the world. We certainly wouldn't want our citizens travelling to China to be arrested and trialed by Chinese law. There's also very simple human rights issues at stake. It is unreasonable (and in some cases impossible) to ask any one person to obey the laws of several different nations at once, while only residing in one. It is a human rights violation to trial someone under a law which he had no obligation to find out existed (i.e., Russians have no obligation to know US law).
On a similar vein, a person (while in a nation) should obey the laws of that nation, and the laws of his homeland shall not follow him to other nations. That would be asking someone to obey the laws of two nations at once, something which is unreasonable and in some cases impossible. However, if someone violates a law in one nation and there's no corresponding law in his homeland, he should be deported (exiled) and sent back to his homeland. We wouldn't want a US citizen being put in jail for life in China because while in China he said something critical of the Chinese government.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
It's the "on-line banks, e-commerce companies and Internet service providers" that are putting their customers at risk through shoddy security. We can spend billions on arresting "cyber criminal" and "hackers", if those companies don't get their systems to be secure, it just won't end.
There is no reason for any bank or company to leave their systems in a state that allows a "hacker" to break into them--making systems secure against break-ins from the outside is not costly. Failing to protect against outside break-ins is negligent and should subject the company to civil and possibly criminal liability. Companies should not be able to shrug off poor security with a simple "oops", and the tax payer should not have to foot the bill to have the police and legal system solve a problem that is much more easily and cheaply prevented before it ever occurs.
So it's ok to invade US, because we have
weapons of mass destruction too, right?
Considered harmful.
Maybe the congress critters would take our crys for rights more seriously if so many of us didn't run around with tin foil hats.
And yes, I want the US to enforce US law as much as possible on anyone who acts to harm any American in any way. Why shouldn't I?
The US government has the right and even the responsibility to act in the National Interest, just like every other government. Duh!
To you critics of the US: demonstrate to me even one time when your government acted beyond it's own National Interest - and following the US lead doesn't count. Here, I'll give you some US examples to demonstrate what I'm talking about: WWI, WWII, and the League Of Nations/UN.
BTW: To you critics of the Bush Administration's Foreign Policy: where were you when Clinton was Wagging the Dog in Serbian; bombing Libia; bombing Iraq? That latest is especially hideous; occuring purely as a distraction from the Impeachment, it made weapon inspections impossible, and thereby guaranteed the continuation of the 10 year embargo which has produced so much suffering and death among the people of Iraq. And before you Bush-haters try to pin that on Bush the Elder - no one ever imagined that the Bush administration would be followed by one so cowardly and heartless as to ignore the people of Iraq and their plight for the next eight years!
There are plenty of reasons to critisize US foreign policy, but the truth is that the situation we are in is the accumulation of many years of mistakes. Personally, I think the US failed to adapt to its new role as sole remaining superpower. As such, we need to be, and be seen to be, as even-handed with the rest of the world as possible. We did become more even-handed in Asia, but barely did so in Central Europe, and have actually become worse than ever in the Middle East.
Whatever. At least Bush is focused more on addressing the problems and less on pawing the help.
"Lord, grant that I may always be right, for Thou knowest that I am hard to turn" -- A Scots-Irish prayer
Sad but true.
... oh, you must mean a Foreign Domestic, we have one at the summer place.
Natty
Maybe the rain Isn't really to blame. So I'll remove the cause, But not the symptom!
Realize that having your credit card number stolen is the issuing banks problems, and not really yours.
If you read your cardholder agreement, you will most likely find that you are not responsible for fraudulent use of the card UNLESS the *card* is stolen, and then only before you report it, and even then, damages are limited.
The onus is on the merchant to prove that the charges are authorized. Always.
I'm not saying credit card theft is no big deal.. but you have to remember where the responsibility lies. It's not like having your savings account drained. It's just a nuisance.
This has nothing to do with the Adobe case. This case was about a real hacker stealing real credit card numbers.
This isn't really accurate. They were busted when on US soil after coming here after falling for an FBI ruse. If they'd remained on Russian soil, they would've never been arrested by us. If asked politely, I suppose there's some chance the Russians would've detained and later extradited them, but once in our hands there was no reason to test that theory.
Likewise, if the FBI agents who broke the Russian law visit Russia, they may be busted for having broken Russian law. In theory Russia could ask the US to arrest and later extradite the FBI agents so they can be tried. In practice it doesn't appear as though the Russians care enough to raise a big stink about it. The Russians who were busted were, after all, common criminals.
There seems to be a certain symmetry to the picture, no?
More realistically, how did we react last year when the Taliban arrested three Americans who had gone there to spread christianity and convert muslims? It is illegal in Afghanistan, so did we let them die?
We must stop acting as if American law, and only American law, applies to the rest of the world too. This might answer a lot of "why"s!
All your favorite sites in one place!
Did you?
They lured them to the US using a fake job interview, then sent them home.
The interview was to gather information needed to gather evidence.
The gathered more evidence, and then HAD THEM EXTRADITED
But police have MANY rules they must follow when using firearms. The same goes for hacking. The difference is that the US didn't follow those established rules. This is made even more absurd when the US then uses illegally gathered evidence to prosecute someone for an almost identical crime. Not to mention that the US judge basically said that US law is above Russian law. I find the whole situation quite scary.
If the FBI broke into their computer systems, then the FBI should be sentenced to spend time in the slammer, and these men should receive monetary compensation for the inconvenience.
Take a look at:7 6. php
:-(((
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/09/715
or
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/53428.stm
http://smeschini.altervista.org
You can't be serious! In Japan the age of consent is 14, in Moslem countries it's even lower! In the UK the legal drinking age is 18. There's not exactly such a thing as copyright in China, so is it OK for chinese to come across and start manufacturing CDs? During WWII would it have been ok for the germans to go into America and carry on 'purifying'?
You're crazy! If anything they should have to follow both sets of laws.
The situation of a person of nationality X in country Y breaking those laws is rather different to a person of nationality X in country X breaking laws of country Y. Nearly every country demands foreigners to follow all their laws whilst in their country; but there are rare exceptions for pragmatic reasons.
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"Since it is also reasonable for a sovereign nation to have other rules, this question isn't really central. The burdon of proof should be on the U.S. and the FBI to show why they need to curcumvent those rules. And then the obvious question of what court would have authority to decide whether this burdon is met.
Here, you have government espionage going on from within the US, against someone in Russia. If they break any laws, tough shit, they're espionage.
Funny, the pilots that where flying that little spy plane near China where labeled as prisoners by all the politician and media lackeys. Maybe you should have a word with them regarding the proper lexic.
But it's hard to draw a parallel between Sklyarov did and what the FBI did, because they are very different circumstances.
Maybe so, but that does not mean what the FBI is both legally and morally WRONG, even with the pimp judge okaying his actions. What he should have done is get a subpoena from the proper authorities to do such a thing.
My other OS is the MCP!
Do U.S.A. own atomic bombs (weapons of mass destruction)?
...)/ 12/111862.ph p ...
Yes
Do U.S.A. use weapons of mass destruction?
Yes
(Japan, Afganistan, Balcans,
See:
http://www.sf.indymedia.org/news/2001
So should U.N. "invade" U.S.A?
I don't know...
http://smeschini.altervista.org
About that, see What should be the Response to Violence? .
A quote:
"The money donated by the U.S. government to Israel is like fuel thrown on a fire. The amount is said to total about $5.25 billion per year, when all amounts are considered. This is an enormous amount of money to a prosperous country of well-educated people. The population of Israel is about 5.8 million people (1996), so Israel receives from the U.S. government an astounding $905 per year for every man, woman and child who lives there. (In the entire world, there are only about 14,000,000 Jews.)"
Does it sit well with anyone here that someone who cracked into FBI computers gets the same prison sentence as Chris Tresco? What bullshit.
I mean, come on....threat to national security vs. (arguably) lost revenue.
This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
..actually use them on... er... human bei... hm... nevermind.
RMN
~~~
Live Free or Die!
Obviously, you did NOT read what I said.
A person should obey the laws of whatever nation they're in. But if someone's in China and (while in China) does something which is illegal by US law, then comes to the US, (s)he shouldn't be arrested for that. However, if while in the US, they break US law, they should be arrested.
What I'm talking about is person of nationality X in country X doing something which is illegal in country Y, then travelling to country Y and being arrested. This is a violation of sovereignty and human rights.
If person X of nationality X travels to nation Y, they should obey the laws of nation Y, and not be expected to follow any of the laws of nation X. We can not ask a person to obey the laws of two nations, because those two laws may conflict.
The laws of the US shouldn't follow its citizens wherever they go. When US citizens leave US territory, they are no longer obliged to obey US laws, but only the laws of whatever nation they're on.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
How about an election where you can say Yes, don't care or No to candidates?
;)
Yes= +1, No = -1, don't care or spoilt vote = 0.
You can vote on more than one candidate.
Total them up. Least negative wins.
Alternatively: Most positive = win, if no positives, least negative= "probation" seat, other negatives banned from running for post for X years.
Is it better to put in an unknown person who nobody cares about than a "net negative" candidate? Maybe not. But hey you wanted democracy didn't you?
What are the chances this system will ever be implemented...
If a US citizen travels to, say, Moscow, and offers to spy for the FSB, and it's noticed -- you can sure as hell bet that he's risking arrest when he comes back. Somehow, that doesn't seem wrong to me.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
Yeah, the US knows that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.
p on s
p ag ename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1 033423291456&call_page=TS_News&call_pageid=9683321 88492&call_pagepath=News/News
How? They kinda sold them to Iraq.
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=iraq+biowea
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?
Disgusted as I am with the DMCA, I think Timothy's comment was quite a stretch. If I break a Russian law in the U.S., I'm not going to travel to Russia anytime soon, especially to a public seminar to detail what I did.
-- "On second thought, let's not go there. Camelot is a silly place."
If these hackers were mobsters who had ordered US hits, the FBI would still have the ability to appropriate evidence.
Look at it this way:
What the FBI did is essentially the same as inviting the Russian Hackers to the US and filling out a work visa form, and then using the phone numbers and addresses written on the form to call over to Russia and "social hack" whomever they're calling to get the evidence.
But I have to point out.
When they broke into American computers and stole American data form them, they were committing illegal acts IN THE UNITED STATES. The fact that they were physically in Russia is moot. Let's pretend they were in a country where this activity was legal. Their home country would never extradite.. but the US could STILL charge them under it's own legal system, and deal with them should they set foot on US soil.
This is not simply a case of someone doing something in a foreign land that would have been illegal if it was happening in the US, it WAS happening in the US.
You are responsible for your actions. If I go to one country, do something illegal, and leave, and this is not a crime in my own country, my own country should not extradite me. However, should I ever end up in that foreign country again, why should I deserve protection?
>> ...US law is above Russian law.
The U.S. would have been negligent not to prosecute simply because he used computers in another country. I'm ignorant of U.S. and Russian laws regarding extradition, etc., but presumably they exist.
Perhaps a better question is why the Russians did not prosecute? Is it legal for Russians to break into networks in other countries?
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
How you describe things is how things work now.
You obey the laws of the country you are in. US law does not follow you wherever you go.
But if you fly to China, copy 30000 Britney Spears CDs, and then ship them to the US, you can bet the US courts will charge you with copyright violation, and arrest your ass if it ends up back on US soil. Why? Because your actions partly took place in the US.
If oyu are in the US, and you break into computers in, say, the UK.. and then you decide to vacation in the UK, are you saying the Brits shouldn't be able to charge you?
Why should he be arrested? He was in Russia, thus subject to RUSSIA's laws, NOT OURS.
If he, however, offers to offer such espionage services, his citizenship in the US should be cancelled, and he should be deported/exiled upon returning, and banned from ever coming to the US.
Try to get this through your head. When a citizen is in nation X, (s)he is obligated to obey the laws of nation X and ONLY nation X, not any other nation, including his/her homeland.
Simply because something does or doesn't "seem" right/wrong to you is NO REASON to violate sovereignty. Sovereignty is a very simple concept. The US government is sovereign over the US. The Russian government is sovereign over Russia. Individual's in Russia are obligated to obey the laws of Rusia ONLY, and not those of the US. Individual's in the US are obligated to obey the laws of the US ONLY and not those of Russia.
Your insistance that a US citizen vistiting Russia obey both Russian laws and US laws is as unreasonable as it is short-sighted and ignorant of sovereignty issues.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
It seems that most debaters so far wants to see the russian crooks sacked but are worried about the liberty FBI was taking while hacking the computer that was still residing in russia. So if the computer where actually in the USA and accessed through an IP tunnel back from russia (giving the access point the russian IP)? Would it still be wrong then? How can you be sure of the geographical location while at the hack? Just the IP will not do the job.
The only problem I have with FBI doing what they are doing is that they are not allowed to do what they are doing. The Internet should have its own international laws. Local laws should only apply to the people using it. FBI should in such an international internet law have protocols to follow and warrants like admittance granted before accessing computers in russia and elsewhere. The same should apply if my country would like to hack a computer belonging to someone doing bad things to people here.
Ladies and gentlemen, it's a war out there, lets agree on rules how to fight it nomatter where!
Starbar!!
The US is preparing to invade a sovereign nation -- advertising the fact at the top of its lungs for months now -- in a war that will add significantly to the over 500,000 Iraqi civilians murdered by its bombing and sanctions over the past decade.
Currently the US is getting upset about the Iraqis attempting to defend their airspace. Wonder how many Americans will wind up dead too, especially if Iraq actually has the weapons Bush and Blair claim exist.
As for the oil issue by the time the war is finished all the Iraqi oil wells will look like those in Kuwait did at the end of the last gulf war. Blowing up an oil well does not require anything high tech.
Laf, who would be foolish enough to try?
/. anti-american posters would feed on an post like this. Why don't you spend your time and defend someone that isn't a criminal that had their rights lost, country hacked, whatever, because of American's sphere of influence.
Mod me down, like it or not, the reason why we can extend our sphere of influence to other countries is simply because we can. 40% of my paycheck doesn't go to the government [defense/offense] for nothing.
If Russian gave a shit, why don't they stand up and say something? I don't see ANY mention of ANY Russians officials who are upset about the US hacking into their systems. In face, WTF is as "foreign computer network" anyways?
It figures that
Mod me down, I don't give a shit, I have excellent Karma so my posts will continue to come out +2. I'm just sick and tired of all the anti American comments.
Live web cams
troll on... :)
Show me an effect without cause and then I'll believe in chaos.
Ever hear of colombia, panama etc.
True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
all i can hope is that the Russian law enforcement agencies attempt to extradite the agents who carried out the illegal hacking of the computers that were on russian soil, the whole principle of the american government being able to attack anyone's network with impunity, in any way they see fit, as long as it isnt in the us is horrific for us in the rest of the world. It's made alot of nonamericans very wary about ever helping American law enforcement, seeing as they deem it perfectly legitimate to ride roughshod over the sovereign rights and laws of another state.
My other OS is also FreeBSD
So if an American drives to mexico for the weekend, breaks into a dozen computers in the US, steals tons of cool data, spreads lots of copyrighted software around, etcetera...
then returns to the US...
The company who's computers he broke into cannot have him charged with a crime, because he was not on US soil when he did it? They have to take it up with the Mexican authorities, who would have to extradite, etc....?
U.S. judge found that the FBI wasn't breaking any laws in breaking into a Russian computer system, despite the fact that they were breaking a Russian law doing so. So apparently, it's ok for Americans to break Russian law if they're in the U.S., but not ok for Russians to break U.S. law, even while in Russia
I would suggest the FBI agents involved not travel anywhere that the Russian government has jurisdiction. I'm sure they have the same standards we have with respect to the sanctity of their systems.
"So apparently, it's ok for Americans to break Russian law if they're in the U.S., but not ok for Russians to break U.S. law, even while in Russia."
Yeah, so what else is new?
This basically sums up America's foreign policy.
---- I've fallen, and I can't get up.
Sharon is approximately 1/3 of the problem in the region. He's a hardline psychopath and he's only creating hatred in a large group of people who will continue to murder and commit suicide bombings because of their hatred.
He's also a fucking idiot. He's in the middle of a group of people who will soon outnumber Israeli's 2:1 or more, and he's sticking to his policy of absolute domination and force. He apparently hasn't studied much history.
It's easy to be a hardliner and blame all the death on your enemies, it's harder to watch the bodies pile up because your leader refuses to compromise over anything.
He's commited a few atrocities of his own over there - his hands aren't exactly clean.
Heh...keep an eye out for the white vans outside your house, after that comment...and don't take your tinfoil hat off!
Mike
These guys were stealing money from US companies. The FBI wouldn't give a shit if they were ripping off Russian companies in Russia. When they rip off OUR companies and Russia doesn't care to stop them, it is most certainly the FBI's responsability to do something.
The answers simple. Economic sanctions against Israel, economic sanctions against the United States. Not to be ceased until they have disarmed themselves of weapons of mass destruction and destroyed their munitions factories.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
If only it was just Israel...
No mention of that part in the blurb.
Nah. The black people are in the higher-security prisons, or on death row, because the aren't able to afford pricey lawyers and live on mommy and daddy's budget like some moronic slashdot posters I could mention.
the UK and the US only went to war with Germany when their allies were attacked,
The UK went to war when it's allies were attacked, but the US did not until two years later when it was attacked by Japan in Pearl Harbor. Germany immediately declared war on the US.
So technically the US made no decision to go to war. Japan and Germany made that decision for them.
Not that I get how is credit card hacking the same as the holocaust, but one vaguely related point is that most of the killed jews were not German. so had they stayed within their borders, it would have been a much smaller holocaust.
What? I *said* it's a nitpick!
...has said for a long time that in the u.s people don't have freedom and has advised to foreigners to not go to the u.s to work in the computer industry
Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
Seeing as a great deal of posters seem to have trouble getting their heads round this concept... JUST BECAUSE THIS GUY IS RUSSIAN DOES NOT MEAN HE IS DMITRY SKLYAROV! Rarely is the question asked, is our slashdotters learning to read?
All you need to do with Bush is say it'll help fight terrorism and he'll sign it.
It's not an issue of sovereignty, because individual people aren't nations -- _Snow Crash_ excluded. It's not a sovereignty issue if a private citizen chooses to flout the law of his own country. Contracts, obligations, and responsibilities do not magically vaporize should one make it to foreign soil, any more than one can protect one's own salary from the IRS by accepting it in cash in the lobby of the French embassy.
A citizen retains the obligations of his citizenship, and -- depending on the country he's physically in -- possibly some of the rights and privileges, at least should he make it to the consulate... In addition, being in a country in which you are not a citizen may cause you to have second-class status; for instance, you can much more easily be ejected from the country.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
"If you wanted to condemn a country for ignoring UN resolutions, having weapons of mass destruction, expanding its territory through violence and bloodshed, and treating ethnic groups badly, not to mention being lead by a nasty man, you could have picked the US itself."
You understand, don't you, that this sentence of yours only *strengthens* the parent post's argument?
KFG
They weren't doing it in Russia. While they were physically in Russia, this is not where the action has taken place.
The Mayans??? I didn't know Mayans lived in Texas or California.
Yeah, good source. I like this headline on their site:
Sensation: Cities Found on the Moon!
Live web cams
Yes, both countries have done VERY bad things in the past .
...
Yes, they both have weapons of mass destruction .
Yes, they will most likely do bad things in the future .
Every country in the World has done it, from the Chinese to the Russians, the mass murders in Rwanda , the machete massacres in the streets of Indonesia, and so on and so on .
The "real" issue here is what is the end game for Saddam, what is his final goal . Let me tell you about something that he has now, and is mass producing .
Botulinum Toxin...
Go punch that into google and see what the CDC has to say about it , or any international medical agency .
It is the single most Toxic substance know on Earth, and there is now proof that Iraq is training Al-qaeda in Bio/Chem warfare, and suspicion that any one else that wants to know it as well .
1 gram in crystal form = 1 million dead .
Feel safe now, standing on your soap box blaring about the evil US and evil Israel .
With an unlimited supply of suicide terrorists and toys like this, we are in a world of $hit . Do you really think it will stop once the US is wiped out, do you think the Islamic radicals will be happy with less than total world conversion to the one true faith ???
The US media is not covering this due to the panic it might cause, only Tony Blair had the BALLS to bring it up to Parliment to try to bolster support for what is about to happen .
The rush, the urgency, the almost blood thirsty appearance of Bush is not one derived of desire of conquest . This is about fear, annihilation, ppl do you even want to hear the weather balloon dispersion scenario ???
I think not
This is one, ONE weapon he has at his disposal, there are MANY others .
So before you blather on, take a look at the BIG picture, consider what is planned that we don't know, how far would he go, is there even a limit .
Ex-MislTech
Tech Support
Guantanamo Bay
Cuba
google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=41578&threshol d=0&commentsort=0&tid=172&mode=thread&cid=4395 113
google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
... Nelson Muntz:
HAHA!
Don't dottle in the affairs of moderators, for they are subtle and quick to anger.
"Entropy is the bad-guy, and he is everywhere"
Back in the 1960's, the U.S. State Department used to warn U.S. citizens of the dangers of travelling to the USSR, siting that the KGB (secret police) could do whatever they wanted to them while they were there. NOW..we have the Russian Foreign Ministry warning Russian Citizens of the dangers of travelling in the USA, siting that the FBI (secret police) could do whhatever they wanted to them while they were there. Is it me, or is something really, really wrong here? It sure seems to me that the USA has become more and more oppressive even as the (former) USSR becomes less so.
Would you approve if Italy took this pilot and condemned him for life for slaughtering twenty people (luckily for him there would be no death penalty in the EU) ? Would you approve if they lured him somehow out of US territory and then do whatever they pleased with him?
After all, he got almost nothing done to him here, despite the fact that he killed 20 people.
Alright try this: My grandfather was Jewish, but neither I nor any ancestor for 100+ years have ever lived in Israel. My friends (palestinian) parents were born in Israel. Israeli law gaurantees me the right to become a citizen and live in Israel if I choose, but my friend would not be allowed off the plane. Explain how this is anything but atrociously racist.
or are u just trying to be flamebait? Nobody says that terrorism is supportable but the fact of the matter is the United States as well as Israel have used it when it suits them.(Remember Britain agreed to the partition of Palestine only after a serious of bomb attacks in London and what the US has done in Latin America is pretty shamefull).
I dont support terrorism of any kind but history shows it works.
The truth of the matter be said it doesnt matter who is right or wrong. It only matters who wins. If Germany had won WW2 a lot more attention would have been paid to the internment of Japanese Americans than German Jews.
The intelligent thing to do is to support whoever wins. Right now the USA is winning so they have my wholehearted support.
If I wake up tomorrow to find out that Osama is winning he will have my wholehearted support.
See it really doent matter. I still have to get up tomorrow and go to office and work my ass off!
**Life is too short to be serious**
I'm not really, its seems to be, that once you get before the courts, :\ )
they don't seem to mind exactly how you got there,
just the fact that you are there..... (damn, this formatting takes some getting used to, i bet this looks like a poem.
The "real" issue here is what is the end game for Saddam, what is his final goal . Let me tell you about something that he has now, and is mass producing .
.. smallpox, plauge et. al.)
Botulinum Toxin...
And where did they get the cultures for that???
CDC gave them to Iraq in the late 80-s & early 90's..
Along with a few other nasties...shipped back to Iraq in a case (i believe it was 12 or so different virues/bacteria
Who supplied the computers for the nuclear research??
Who supplied Iraq with Fuel-Air Bombs in the late 80's???
What goes around, comes around my friend
Yet another failure by the US in controlling the global political climate...
Ex-MislTech
Tech Support
Guantanamo Bay
Cuba
In that case you can release or charge the prisoners you have there... THE most inccorect thing the US has done since WW2
Democracy my ass...
Burma?
He's in the middle of a group of people who will soon outnumber Israeli's 2:1 or more, and he's sticking to his policy of absolute domination and force. He apparently hasn't studied much history.
Or possibly he has. Being at war can ensure that political opposition is reduced. Claim that the country is under threat and thet not standing behind the leader is unpatriotic often works quite well. Also a policy of aparthied worked for some time South Africa...
It's interesting that you raise the issue of sovereignity but don't seem to know what it means. Sovereignity basically means that, as a nation, you can do whatever the hell you feel like and you're not responsible to anyone else. So, guess what - the US acted as a sovereign nation. Had the FBI gone to Russia and kidnapped these guys back to the US there would be an issue of violating Russia's sovereignity.
And, if you actively criticize China - I wouldn't recommend taking a trip there.
it is a *democracy* with free elections and free speech
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Some people are so gullible.
has only "invaded" its (and I laugh at this term) "neighbors" to prevent its own destruction
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
It's morons like you that allow these pigs to continue their aggression against their neighbours.
Let's see the US is a threat to numerous countries around the world so let's attack them them. We're justified after all, right?
Take the Internet out of it and provide an anology that is pertinent to the issue. Your analogies are helpful, but don't carry to the situation we're discussing.
Citizen A, of and in the Country A casts a stone across the border to the neighbouring country Country B and smashes a window in the car belonging to Citzen B.
Now argue your case. The Laws in Country A are not going to apply to this situation because it's not a crime to throw a stone across the border, but Citizen B has been financially injured. Who's laws apply to Citizen A, and what should happen to him if he ever crosses the border?
Okay I've stretched it a bit, hopefully you get the point.
My own opinion is that it's not easy to simplify every case that is going to happen to this analogy, but Gorshkov is Citizen A here and his laws are being applied to a crime he, arguably, committed in Country B, the US.
This is where it gets more complicated, where was the crime committed? At the keyboard in Russia or on the Server in the US? I think that future law will be based around whatever decision is made on the location of the event of the crime...
Cheers.
Irrelevant of where the crime was committed, the punishment should be determined by the nation the criminal was in when (s)he committed the crime, whether (s)he crosses borders or not afterwards.
If someone in Mexico shoots someone in the US, then travels to the US, (s)he should be arrested, because murder is illegal in Mexico just as it is in the US. However, the punishment should in accord with Mexican law, not US law. In this case I doubt there's any difference, between the punishment for murder in Mexico and that for it in Texas.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
A Russian cracker, tricked by the FBI into visiting the US on the pretext of a job interview, has been sentenced to three years in jail.
Vasiliy Gorshkov, 27, was also ordered to pay $690,000 in compensation for his crimes by Federal District Court Judge John Coughenour, who took his family's medical and financial problems into account in sentencing the Russian to serve far less time than the 16 years demanded by prosecutors.
Last October, Gorshkov was convicted of 20 counts of conspiracy, various computer crimes, and fraud against online banks and e-commerce operations. His co-accused, Alexey Ivanov, 20, pleaded guilty in August to similar charges along with five counts of extortion, Reuters reports. He is currently in custody, awaiting sentencing.
The circumstances surrounding the November 2000 arrests of the pair put the spotlight of FBI tactics used in the case and prompted Russia's counterintelligence service, the FSB, to take the unprecedented step of charging FBI Agent Michael Schuler with hacking.
Schuler was praised by US authorities for an elaborate ruse that resulted in the arrests of Gorshkov and Ivanov. The operation arose out of a nationwide FBI investigation into Russian computer intrusions against e-commerce sites, and online banks which identified Gorshkov and Ivanov as prime suspects.
It was suspected the pair cracked into victims' computers to steal credit card information and other financial information, prior to attempting to extort money from the victims with threats to expose the sensitive data to the public or damage the victims' systems. Gorshkov and Ivanov were also suspected of defrauding PayPal through a scheme in which stolen credit cards were used to generate cash and to pay for computer parts.
The FBI lured the two to the US by posing as representatives of the fictional 'Invita' security firm, and offering the dynamic duo good jobs if they could prove their skills.
Of course the Feds set up a box rigged with a key logger and then set the pair to work demonstrating their amazing prowess. When they accessed their machines back home, the Feds recorded the login info, and later returned to root the boxes.
Having placed the pair in handcuffs, the FBI obtained a wealth of evidence from the compromised machines.
All perfectly above-board a judge said, ruling that Russian law does not apply to the agents' actions. Russia disagreed and, anxious to assert its sovereignty, filed a complaint against Schuler to the US Department of Justice.
No further news of that as yet. The case will probably die a quiet death with some form of diplomatic compromises and vague promises from the FBI to work more closely with the Russians in future.
Thank you. That's my point exactly. You DO have the right, under US Law, to take them to court. The US just has no jurisdiction to force them to BE THERE, as they are on foreign soil.
Should the guy who broke into your computer from country X, where it may be legal, suddenly end up in the US, you could have him charged for the crime.
So in this case.. the US had every right to charge them with this crime, and the fact that they caught them IN the us, means they have jurisdtction over their asses now.
THe fact that they did hte hacking in russia does not mean they did not break any US laws.
I`m just a script kiddy from Romania and I think it is not fair for the FBI to brake into a russian server even to catch a cracker carder or whatever... they could not know for sure that he really is one and i think everybody should have his privacy on his own server...so if FBI has the wright to do it why souldn`t have anyone else...? Who gives FBI the wright to do it ?...I think it`s not fair...and i think it should be an international law for this...wich should be respected by everyone including FBI and all the others so called security agencies. Anyway Vasiliy mustaked if the FBI manage to brake into his server and i guess he knows that... Hope he will be out soon...that`s all...by
"Your diatribe is pointless."
Not nearly as pointless as yours. Jeeze, try thinking, it may hurt at first...
"a.) They followed US law."
*US* law is applicable in US jurisdiction. If I grow pot in Amsterdam, should the DEA be able to break down my door and confiscate my pot and equipment? Do you have any clue at all, whatsoever, as to what national sovereignty is about?
"b.) They had no choice. In the US they could have gotten a warrant. In Russia they can't. They got their job done."
And you are sure of this because... oh, that's right, I know... you read some news story about it online, so that makes you a big expert. Well expert, here's something for you to think about, it is the job of US law enforcement to enforce US law in, surprise surprise, the US! US law enforcement != russian law enforcement. If I comit a crime in Russia, that is not the job of US law enforcement to prosecute me.
"c.) Where have you been? Europeans have been wanting to arrest US officials for executions and other violations of "enlightened" European laws for a long time. Get a freaking clue."
Wanting to arrest US officials and actually doing it are two different things. Right now, I'd like to smack you upside the back of your unthinking head, but it would only be a crime if I actually did it. In this case the US enforced US law in a country that is not the US. Have you gotten the clue yet?
Show me an effect without cause and then I'll believe in chaos.
Rule #7: Silence is not acquiescence.
Contrary to what you may have heard, silence of those present is
not necessarily consent, even the reluctant variety. They simply may
sit in stunned silence and figure ways of sabotaging the plan after
they regain their composure.
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...
Precisely. Rather than supporting Iraq to get back at the Ayatollah, we should have simply nuked Tehran the minute the hostages were out of Iranian airspace and out of range of the bomb. Now we know.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.