Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Hilton Hacker Gets 11 Months

Posted by Zonk on from the shades-of-dade-murphy dept.

B747SP writes "Well, the guy who 'acquired' the contents of Paris Hilton's Sidekick telephone and published them on the Internet has had his day in court. T-Mobile USA and the State of Massachusetts are pleased to report that he has been sentenced to 11 months in a juvenile facility. He's also not allowed to own or use a computer, a cellphone, or any other device that can access the Internet for two years. It turns out that the Hilton hack was just one of many Bad Things(tm) that he had been up to: calling in bomb threats to schools, creating T-Mobile accounts for himself and his friends, breaking in to data broker LexisNexis' systems are just a few of his exploits."

7 of 390 comments (clear)

  1. How Hilton Was Hacked by airherbe · · Score: 5, Informative


    An explanation of how Paris Hilton's Sidekick was hacked can be found here. A pretty interesting read.

    //J

  2. Re:2 Years by Ruprecht+the+Monkeyb · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's a deterrent in that if he gets caught, he's in violation of the court order which could get his ass thrown back in jail.

  3. Re:To coin a phrase... by Fox_1 · · Score: 4, Informative

    He most certainly was not Mitnicked, that would require 4 years of imprisonment without a trial. It would require overzealous prosecution by the state and the media. This kid got a speedy trial, not imprisonment without a trial, and a relatively light sentence considering the scope of his crimes.

    --
    The rock, the vulture, and the chain
  4. Re:Nice kid by terrahertz · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you're talking about Glen A. Reed, here's the real scoop, from http://www.newsoftheweird.com/archive/index.html:

    "Said Glenn A. Reed, 31, upon being sentenced in Waco, Texas, in July to 99 years in prison as a habitual criminal (after rejecting a plea bargain that would have meant a 15-year sentence): "There's things I choose to do, like, if I go in a store and choose to take a Snickers bar, if you catch me, you catch me. If not, I'm going to go home and eat it up and go on about my business, dog."

    --
    Slashdot? Oh, I just read it for the articles.
  5. Re:Hmm by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 3, Informative

    The police could have the felon illegally get evidence that lets them know what the need to investigate, then all the need to do is find the right pretext to get at the data, like perhaps going into a business that the illegal investigation turned up some dirt on, buy something, and check the money you get back as change for drug residues (nearly 100% likely to be positive) and use that as a pretext for a drug investigation, and then "legally" find what you already illegally know and use the "legally" found info in court.

    Or just watch those the illegal info points you to like a hawk so closely that you catch them in the act. Tail them and when they do a 36 in a 35, pull them over, say they look nervous, and search the car for example or have it sniffed for drugs possibly (have a K9 unit pull them over - have the dog and the cop go up to the suspects, etc).

    Yes, the above isn't ethical, but it is possible.

    And law enforcement does "hire" felons, just not on the payroll.

    They are called "paid informants", or "rats".

    --
    Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
  6. Re:Hmm by Zordak · · Score: 4, Informative
    The guy who the movie "Catch Me If You Can" was based on ended up in the employ of the FBI detecting counterfeit stuff because he was so damned good at it. Then people started arresting those who did such things. It's far less common for these people to get security jobs after their jail-time.
    Frank Abagnale, Jr. spent six months in a French prison where he could not stand erect and where he slept in his own excrement. He was borderline insane when he was finally released to the custody of (IIRC) the Netherlands, where he spent about a year in a much nicer prison. He was slated to be turned over to (again, IIRC) Spain, where he would have spent time in another miserable and inhumane prison, but his Dutch captors took pity on him and found a way to invalidate his passport. That meant they had to "deport" him to the United States, where he promptly escaped by crawling out of the toilet when his plane landed. He was re-captured and spent some time in a US prison. He still managed to start his own security consulting business and make millions of dollars. The difference was not the jail time. The difference was that he was truly brilliant and he apparently did not have a truly criminal disposition. He was basically a horny teenager (much of his crime was committed in pursuit of women). When he got some maturity, he was able to put his skills to a beneficial use. He also eventually paid back all of the money he stole.

    In contrast, I'm betting this little hacker twerp is some wannabe who got ahold of a computer and read a couple of "howto" sites. He may or may not have the disposition of a hardened criminal, but until he does something original, nobody will notice him. Maybe if he's lucky, he'll get a wikipedia entry.

    --

    Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
  7. Re:Hmm by gid13 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Um, the point is not that the criminal will use illegal techniques to gather evidence.

    The point is that the criminal will be more comfortable with the illegal techniques others use, and be able to explain those techniques, expose whatever weaknesses to legal evidence-gathering they may have, and harden security against them.

    I'm not saying it always makes sense to hire a criminal for a security job, but I can certainly see the advantages.