Ask Kevin Mitnick

Okay, Kevin Mitnick is getting back online and can start taking email tomorrow, January 21. We've spoken with Kevin by phone, and he agrees that a Slashdot interview is a fine way to help celebrate his return to the Internet, especially since he has a book to sell and a consulting business to build. (Don't forget: Kevin hasn't been able to make much money for a number of years, and has a lot of lost time to make up for.) One question per post, please. We'll email Kevin 10 of the highest-moderated questions, and post his answers shortly after he gets them to us.

Comments

No Offense meant, but..

[ackthpt]

No offense meant,but

he has a book to sell and a consulting business to build. (Don't forget: Kevin hasn't been able to make much money for a number of years, and has a lot of lost time to make up for.)

Knowing all this as the result of your choice, would you choose this path again? If so, why?

Re:No Offense meant, but..

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think he chose to be kept in Federal prison without a trial for more than 4 years. I don't think he chose to have the software he downloaded (and did not distribute) valued at an amount way beyond reality because the Feds said to. I don't think he chose to have terms of his probation which kept him from using his First Amendment rights or being able to make a meaningful use of his technologic abilities.

Did he choose to be the poster-boy of government corruption when it comes to prosecution of technology-related case? I don't think so.

You're the type of person who would ask Skylarov why he chose to come to the U.S. to speak at a technology conference.

Re:No Offense meant, but..

[ackthpt]

You're the type of person who would ask Skylarov why he chose to come to the U.S. to speak at a technology conference.

On the contrary, I applaud Dimitri Sklyarov and feel his work was construct, in the face of unjust legislation the USA exports and tries to exert on other peoples. It should be the choice of each sovereign nation to determine the extent of copyright/patent protection to inventors. One country, such as the USA, may attempt to hold all others in thrall as long as the life of intellectual property protection.

Besides, Kevin didn't attempt to bypass electronic IP safeguards, except as the DMCA may regard hacking. He revealed the swisscheese security of information systems in their infancy. He made people afraid, powerful people. We already, well most of us, are aware what sort of democracy-for-sale the Congress and Administration are, when their friends sneeze, they catch cold, and act within or without the law. It's a matter for the defendant to pry him/herself out of such a mess. As often as such examples play it's remarkable anyone wants to open themselves to such harrassment, particularly without alerting the ACLU or some group ahead of time that they intend to demonstrate how unjust the system is, in whole or part.

Anyone remember the 414's? A group of young men in the Milwaukee area who, when caught breaking into DEC systems wanted to sell movie rights? It wasn't too hard to figure how they did it, hell, I was admin on a DEC system and there were default passwords and field service passwords easy enough to guess. You just had to be bored and stupid enough to go trespassing.

I have plenty of sympathy for those treated unjustly, but those who go alone to spread fear among powerful interests are no more clever than a swimmer dogpaddling around in a shark tank.

Re:No Offense meant, but..

[overunderunderdone]

I don't think he chose to be kept in Federal prison without a trial for more than 4 years.

Actually (a little googleing reveals that) in many instances he DID - or rather his lawyers did. The trial kept getting delayed due to it's complexity - often at the request of HIS lawyers. Hiring and firing three different lawyers doesn't usually speed things up any either (though I'll grant you it is possible they were incompetant - but the real possiblity exists their client was part of their problem). As for being denied bail that whole time - well that is sort of a natural penalty for running & continuing to commit the same crimes while on the run - for some reason people just don't trust you not to it again. Wasting time in useless appeals to GET bail when no sane judge would give it to you is just another thing that drags out the time you spend waiting for trial.

I don't think he chose to have the software he downloaded (and did not distribute) valued at an amount way beyond reality because the Feds said to.

And they should have been valued at less because he & his lawyers said so? I have no idea what the real value of the damage he caused to various systems was or the value of the information he stole. I doubt HE knows it's value. I am sure his victims and the prosecution exagerated it's value. On the other hand it is not difficult at ALL to assume that the value was quite significant. Big companies worth many billions of dollars keep stuff on their computers that really do have multi-million dollar values to those companies. Those where the kinds of companies he liked to hack and the kind of information he liked to steal BECAUSE he wanted to be a big deal and make a big splash. Well he did.

I don't think he chose to have terms of his probation which kept him from using his First Amendment rights

While convicts have rights the whole point of being a convict is having certain rights taken away. As for his specifically first amendment rights - I don't know of any instance during his sentence when the government established a religion for him, forbade him to excersise his own, forbade him to speak, talk to the (or even run a) press, assemble peacably or petition the government to redress his greavances (this last I think he excersiced far more than most of us) Being forbidden to use a computer after being convicted 4 or 5 times (on multiple counts each time) of computer fraud & abuse is not much different from being forbidden to own a gun after being convicted of a gun crime. Being forbidden to use a tool that you only seem adept at using criminally seems appropriate and fitting not cruel nor unusual. Having himself argued in court before that he was compulsive and unable to control himself probably didn't help his case any on this point.

Did he choose to be the poster-boy of government corruption when it comes to prosecution of technology-related case

After being caught and convicted on numerous prior occasions and being dealt with fairly leniently by the courts at first - then doing the same thing again *while on probabation* - then running when a warrant is issued - then continuing to commit the same high profile crimes while on the run IS asking for it.

Yes, there are murderers that have been dealt with less harshly. That's a GREAT argument for harsher treatment of murderers IMO than for more lenient treatment of multiple offense fraud artist fugitives. All the time I hear on /. that online crimes should be dealt with the same as offline - well his punishment doesn't seem so out of whack for a string of multiple breakings & enterings, thefts, & frauds while on the run from the law.

Was Your Penalty Fair and Will It Deter?

[mikehihz]

Seeing that you have taken some responsibility for your actions, do you think your penalty was fair and will a penalty like you received, fair or not, deter others from following in your footsteps?

How do you see yourself?

[Astrogen]

There has been alot of press, and over the years you have been a hero, and a Martyr to thousands of geeks and hackers, in addition to phone phreaks and anti establishment movements.

In what light and or combination of these types do you see yourself now, is that different from how you were 20 years ago, and do you see yourself as a champion of these things in the future or do you intend to just mix back into society and get a "normal" life back (after your book of course)?

For better or worse...

[crashnbur]

For better or worse, what is the most important thing that you have learned that applies to us all?

Re:What are the ten worst Windows vulnerabilities?

[TheAwfulTruth]

Since this is slashdot and since Open Source and Linux are more our concern here, shouldn't the question be:

"What are the ten worst Linux vulnerabilities to hacking, how would you attack such systems, and what has to be done with Linux to prevent such vulnerabilities?"

Surely you don't actually believe that Linux is unhackable? Wouldn't finding out what Linux's weakest areas are and fixing them before Linux becomes widspread enough on "Dumb User" hardware that it becomes the next great hacking target?

Re:How do you find it?

[TGK]

Welcome back. Things have changed a lot in the last 8 years. People with your kind of skills are becoming rarer while the number of people that commit on line "crimes" has increased.

The hot issue for many of us concerns the idea of Fair Use, copyright, and copyright enforcment. Government regulations have been changed and are changing in favor of the same kinds of large corporations that claimed huge damages against you during your less than ideal experiance with the Judidical System.

My question is this. What are your thoughts on the continued expansion of corporate copyright enforcement rights, including the legalization of some of the techniques you were convicted of using?

Do you trust corporate america to weild the tools you've used and helped pioneer and what if any regulation do you consider both accecptable and feasable?

When given lemons make lemonade

[nhavar]

I don't think that Mitnick has ever suggested that he didn't deserve to be punished or that he didn't break the law in some way. The issue is with the way he was handled by the justice system and those companies. Both wanting to make an example out of him, the handling was disproportionate to the crime.

Mitnick has knowledge and skills that will make him a productive part of society. The area he's promoting himself in is a legitimate legal business so why shouldn't we get behind him and support him. This would constitute a "regular job" - unless you mean flipping burgers or selling clothes at the gap, or maybe insurance salesperson. There are plenty of former criminals in areas of expertise that relate directly to their original crimes. Their knowledge is often very helpful in stopping future crimes and in showing how people can reform and rebuild their lives after having made mistakes.

Mitnick served out the punishment given by the state and now he should be allowed to live his life unencumbered by that "criminal" title. This includes seeking ANY gainful employment he can find.

I feel that society does have an obligation to help people who we've allowed to be mistreated.

The problem with the justice system today is:

1. They bend a little too much to the corporate will.

2. Punishment is never really centered around "correction" even though people are remanded to the "Department of Corrections".

3. There's no procedure for quick and fair correction of mistakes (i.e. false imprisonment, misshandling, etc.) Most compensation has to be gained via lawsuit. False judgements can stay with a person for life, damaging not only their mental health but their future job prospects and personal relationships.

4. Too much stock is put into conviction rates and not enough in to quality of prosecution and/or honesty in prosecution.

5. Justices allow stretching the word and spirit of the law in order to help prosecutions of people not exactly covered under existing laws. I.E. Some people get prosecuted under RICO when their crime has nothing to do with it.

6. Prosecutors withholding charges in order to pursue additional charges should they lose in the first round - an attempt to circumvent double jeopardy rules. (i.e. I murder someone during a robbery - the evidence is fairly thin, so I'm prosecuted for Murder (alone). When I'm acquitted the prosecution charges on attempted robbery, weapons charges or one of the many other charges that they can dig out that might have stronger evidence. The possibility of prosecution might loom for years, along with the stigma of "suspect".)

7. The ability to punish/pursue a suspect through (ab)use of the media. ("person of interest"). Placing pressure on a subject via media "leaks" or press releases that lead the public to believe certain things about a person. While not exactly lies we all know that it's the prosecution using the media to manipulate the public against a SUSPECTED criminal. (defense and prosecution should be barred (ethics) from using the media as a tool against the other side.) Remember INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

What Really Happened

[Tuxinatorium]

The government had access to all the records that Mitnick could have used for his defense, but they arbitrarily withheld the records indefinitely. Each six months Mitnick was given the choice of going to trial with an unprepared defense and some crappy government lawyer with no access to the records necessary to prove his innoccence, or to sign a waiver allowing the government to delay the trial for another 6 months while he stayed in jail. In other words, they were just trying to fuck with him untile he broke, gave in, and pleaded guilty. They never had any intention of giving him a fair trial. It was a total mockery of the legal system and a travesty of justice.