Slashdot Mirror
T-Moblile Cracker Pleads Guilty
hackajar writes "The Register is reporting Nicholas Lee Jacobsen plead guilty to cracking into T-Mobile's phones. He was picked up in mid October of last year in the "Operation Firewall" sweep by the FBI. He faces "maximum five years' prison and a $250,000 fine" according to the site."
Other than the "respect" we give him for being able to pull it off, he had no noble intensions in mind what so ever. This man deserves none of our, or your, sympathy.
Why the hell are the secret service sending unencrypted emails (!!!) other a PUBLIC, wireless phone system. I don't like our president or anything, but he deserves more than some hack jobs practically advertising themselves to the world.
Hi, Is it just me, or does somebody at Slashdot have a personal vendeta against The Society for Correct Spelling? *rolls eyes* It's happened so many times in the past few weeks that I was starting to think it was intentional, some clever attempt to subvert the Establishment and show how progressive they are....or, maybe I'm over-analysing it.... Anyway, back to the topic - I wonder if the FBI will cut a spill-the-beans deal with him? I mean, breaking into a major telco...that's gotta be worth at least a couple of hacker brownie points... bye, Victor
This story was already covered in more detail on Slashdot before. The funny thing about the other article is it details the political implications of such prosecution. The government is using it as justification to whittle away at our rights one at at time. Before too long there will be nothing left for us to defend. The Constitution will be a vague memory.
Well, it is going to happen to some extent anywhere, but the thing is that there seems to be a culture of tolerance and acceptance of it in the States. It's expected. I can never believe that rape is something that is just casually joked about in the US. Also, many states have severe overcrowding with understaffed and undertrained security. That certainly doesn't help.
better yet, pass a law that says anyone convicted of a computer crime can't work with computers. something like what they do with criminals who harm children. laws make it illegal for them to work or be around children.
even with driving privliges, after so many tickets, they will take a drivers license away.
oh, about your statement that incarceration is a waste of money, no it is not. it keeps these animals out of mainstream society, and after their sentance is done, they will still be in databases so we know who they are. that is the real value. employers can weed them out. better colleges can make admissions more difficult. neighborhoods can make living there difficult. it is all about punishment. no more three strikes and you're out. i say, fuck up once, and that is it.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
... and hope nobody realises that if this guy can read secret service emails by himself, foreign government intelligence agencies (ie. whatever the KGB is called these days) with more resources and more staff must be finding it laughably easy.
Always the subject of debate, eh?
:(
Why not just call 'em all hackers and let things like adjectives sort 'em out.
Oh, wait! That'd get people to stop being righteously indignant, and we can't have that.
by offering them a chance to wank off instead of turning into raping each other? by making it less accepted, making the prisons less overcrowed? with that attitude, why do you mind about rapes outside of prison?
you know, it's not really civil to punish one from selling crack by few years in prison and 88 assrapes - it would be considered quite uncivilised if it was said out loud like that in court(it would be torture! or death sentence if you manage to get hiv). for a country that prides on having standard freedom and rights for all it's quite backwards to be thinking that you lose them the second someone deems you guilty.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
The only real reason why hackers get caught is because they always have to boast about what they have done.
Yes. If A uses B's "CC#, SSN and bank PIN" without authorization by B, then A has stolen money from B and defrauded the bank as well (having obtained services from the bank under false pretenses, and making them liable for B's loss). He's also defrauded the merchant. A is in a whole lotta trouble, if caught.
At least, that's the way I see it -- if you want a legal opinion, buy one from a lawyer.
This brings up an interesting point. We actually do have long experience, in law, with the taking of "virtual property". Forging a check, for example, gives the forger possession of money which rightly belongs to someone else, even though the money may never have existed as physical coin or currency. Much of the money circulating today never existed in the physical world. This blows another hole in the argument that taking someone's information is fundamentally different from taking his silver candlesticks.