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.
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?
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!!!
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.
"player 4 hit player 1 with 0 stroms"
"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.
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
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.
he 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.
:/
With previous presidencies there has been the same thing happening, but never to the scale that the Bush administration is trying to go to. The best comparison I have is of a teenage brat who hassed pissed everyone off and then wonders why nobody supports him when he goes an picks on the next guy, whether or not this time he may or may not be in the right. Until the USA can start acting a team player, it is going to feel that it lacts respect - this goes to any country acting in the same manner.
There are countries around the world, that still 'interfere' with the foreign policy of other countries. But at the same the methods appear to be more to keep things calm, than to fluff everyone's feathers and to risk a bigger problem down the road. Sure Russia and Chechnia probably is just as a bad, but not everything fits into a generalisation
BTW In the case of the story, it would probably have been wiser for the Russians to charge these guys, if they were resident on Russian soil. It does happen in the international political arena that if a crime is judged extreme enough that criminals can be handed over to the other country. Ironically, they will probably get better treatement in a US jail that in one in Russia.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
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.
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!
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.
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
~~~
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
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.
"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