Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Tricks Hacker Into Jail
CompotatoJ writes "Wired News reported that William 'IllWill' Genovese was sentenced to prison after being tricked by a Microsoft Investigator offering to pay $20 for a copy of the secret source code. From the article: 'The investigator then returned and arranged a second $20 transaction for an FBI agent, which led to Genovese's indictment under the U.S. Economic Espionage Act, which makes it a felony to sell a company's stolen trade secrets ... [Microsoft] has also expressed fears that making its source code public could allow hackers to find security holes in Microsoft products -- though, so far, intruders are doing fine without the source.'"
Um, no...this isn't even remotely entrapment.
I haven't exactly gone looking for it or anything, but isn't the Windows source code available on P2P?
If so, that is pretty damn stupid to be selling something that is readily available like that. I am betting these undercover folks would be his only customers.
Freedom would be not to choose between black and white but to abjure such prescribed choices. -Theodor Adorno
Probably just someone stupid enough to think he can make a quick buck by downloading something from a p2p network.
No, I don't think anyone says "entrapped" because this case has as much to do with entrapment as it has to do with tea in China. Entrapment requires an agent of the government to coerce someone into comitting a crime they would not otherwise commit. In this case, the guilty party offered the source for sale on his website. This is like someone putting up a sign saying "Crack For Sale" in their yard. He was offering regardless of police interference. That's as far from coercion as you can get.
The laws of probability forbid it!
Pamela Anderson's private home sex video stolen and sold is legal to sell because it's public interest a judge ruled.
Microsoft source code stolen and sold is industrial espionage with 3 year sentence.
"Microsoft Tricks Hacker Into Jail"
/.ers who write code self-described hackers? This guy was trading in pirated software. So, he is a "Pirate," not a "Hacker." I'd complain about the editing, but this is /..
That's not a very good headline. I mean, aren't many
Ben
What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
When I first read these types of articles, I usually think, that's outrageous, he didn't do anything, the code was already leaked, now the poor sap has a conviction for something trivial.
Then I realize, hey, I'd NEVER post stolen code or offer stolen code for sale on my website. Its friggin stupid. Its obviously stolen and obviously illegal and completely traceable to me. I'd expect to have the FBI knocking on my door if I did something so stupid. Like many criminals, this guy didn't cause any real harm but completely lacks judgement. Now he'll suffer a bit for it.
No problem here, surely. Bloke caught for doing something wrong. Large organisation protects its IP.
Asserting that code in the public domain might cause security problems is just spin consistent with protecting IP. It's PR and would anyone here expect anything different. Might not be convincing but MS wants its code to itself, sees it as IP and wants to keep control over it. How is this different to any other organisation? Deride MS for being closed but if it acts consistently, where's the problem?
Wasn't there a war recently where the justification didn't really appear to reflect reality? Unless this guy is some kind of freedom fighter then where's the issue?
I am sure that their terms of agreement has a clause that allows for them to investigate where their source code is going. As for the entrapment, the defendant allegedly started the transaction by advertising. It would be different if the FBI agent intiated the conversation and requested the stolen goods without said advertisement.
A police officer can't walk up to a scantly clad woman and hold out a $20, but a scantly clad police officer can wait for someone else to hold out a $20 and make a clear verbal offer ("Can you say that again, a little louder and into my only piece of jewelry please?").
Since the government isn't supposed to engage in entrapment, private companies will.
You give way too little credit to the government. They could just have avoided coming up with the idea of entrapment in the first place. All of these defenses and legal terms were either coined by the government (through civil law), or used by a clever lawyer and accepted by the judge (through common law). If they wanted to, they could've built a Star Chamber. They haven't*. Here's a surprise: the justice system is actually meant to carry out justice.
Why should private companies be distinguishable from governments? In a capitalist society, private companies are the best group of the people - and where have you heard those last three words before?
*Yes, I know there are some Star Chambers in the US, but they're only used for a few cases like terrorism where you can't get a fair trial in the US anyway. Not that I'm defending them, just that this particular case will be tried in a fair courtroom.
The comment: :)
"...[Microsoft] has also expressed fears that making its source code public could allow hackers to find security holes in Microsoft products..."
reminded me of something I've often thought while glacing over the "who has more security holes/patches" diatribe that flops around periodically. Back when the whole Linux thing was still relatively new, I remember seeing many conversations about how having all that source code for the main system publically available means it will be eaiser for people to find and exploit that software. Microsoft tends to bolster this view, stating that one purpose of its closed source code is increased security. But you don't seem to ever seem to see this concept followed through on. Linux and BSD based systems are all over the place (i.e. the internet) these days, and the majority of web servers out there are running Apache. The code for all this software has been publically available for a very long time now, but there don't seem to be (from my perspective, at least) the increased security issues that there "should" be based on the "closed proprietary" security argument.
Nothing earth shattering, just a small observation. Take it for what you will.
RFC2119
what the hell? since when did we start handing out the title of Hacker to any douchebag who can figure out how to run a p2p app?
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
No, there's no difference. What he did was not illegal given the state of the intellectual property in question. On the advice of the public defender, he plead out for 2 years instead of the 10 he could gotten if convincted. However, with adequate counsel, there's no way in the world he would've been convicted.
No. Last season's losers.
Some people are just ridiculously stupid.
For he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.
This being said, Microsoft has won nothing. He was responsible for distributing the source code to exactly 1 person, a Microsoft snitch. If it wasn't for the snitch taking him up on his offer there would have been nobody that cared.
How do you know? Besides, if "illwill" thought that nobody would care, why did he bother trying to sell it anyway? And doesn't the fact that he actually sold it twice say that he actually believed people wanted to buy it? Intent is everything in criminal matters.
Even if nobody would have cared, this is still important in setting a precedent that selling someone else's source code isn't ok.
Taking away 2 years of a persons life over such trivial shit is appalling and only serves to make us more numb and hateful to the laws of our society.
For someone who has already admitted to not caring one bit about doing things that are wrong, it's quite amusing to hear you denounce someone else doing such things as "appalling". Not so fun when the tables are turned, eh?
I'm glad this idiot is going to jail, and I would probably be if you did to. I have little sympathy for sociopaths who don't care about hurting others, as do the rest of the world.
Apparently noone read the friggin article about this on cnn.com, the guy is a little bastard with numerous prior arrests including several computer crimes, and some form of touching an underage girl.. I'm sure he's your 1337 buddy and all, but from where I'm sitting, the guy is a waste of oxygen and shoulda been locked up long before now.