Slashdot Mirror
Man Hacks 911 System, Sends SWAT on Bogus Raid
An anonymous reader writes "The Orange County Register reports that a 19 year old from Washington state broke into the Orange County California 911 emergency system. He randomly selected the name and address of a Lake Forest, California couple and electronically transferred false information into the 911 system. The Orange County California Sheriff's Department's Special Weapons and Tactics Team was immediately sent to the home of a couple with two sleeping toddlers. The SWAT team handcuffed the husband and wife before deciding it was a prank. Says the article, 'Other law enforcement agencies have seen similar breaches into their 911 systems as part of a trend picked up by computer hackers in the nation called "SWATting"'"
True, but in a good way. It's a pretty harrowing experience for the innocent victim but at least it was just a prank. A more nefarious criminal could use the same exploit to send a SWAT team to the other end of their jurisdiction while they carried out a robbery. This way the security flaw can be found and fixed with relatively little harm done.
http://twitter.com/onion2k
I totally don't condone the "prankster" jerk's behavior in this incident, or anything similar.
However, I have to say that a silver lining in this sort of incident is that it might help the more zealous members of law enforcement (ever more beefy, ever more armored, ever more anonymous, ever more hair-triggered) remember that there are innocent people out there who don't deserve a knee in the back, a taser in the ass, or a broken door. A citizen who is drunk at a restaurant, or who is loud at a rally does not equate to being dangerous or resisting.
When you assume, it makes an ass of you and me. When a cop assumes, all too often he reaches for his sidearm.
[
Hrmm. 911 uses ANI, not your garden variety CID. I'm not saying it's impossible to spoof, but WAAAAAY harder and typically involves something being mis configured at your telco. ANI is also used to handle billing for 1-800 numbers, etc.
What he hacked up was their caller id system, so it looked like the call was coming from the house in question. He stated in the call that he'd overdosed on cocaine, was shot, and that someone was going to kill his sister. Sounds like they sent 20 guys, which would seem to be a rational response given drugs + guns + unknown number of assailants.
They handcuffed the homeowner because he went out in his skivvies with a kitchen knife because he thought he heard people on the lawn. I guess he saved his door getting kicked in, but I'm not sure he sees it as a good thing.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
Alright so here's the rant:
So do we all feel safer after the establishment of Homeland Security and the billions of dollars spent in upgrading the ease of violating our civil liberties here at home in the name of protecting those same distinctions that make America different? This is another nail in the coffin of fear that we're building for ourselves here in the name of safety. When our most basic methods of crying out for help to our protectors can so easily be broken and used by the tormentors I feel a tremendous sense of loss for what we could have done with the same motivation and money that has been spent on this fear mongering compaign with the almost transparent attempts to simply gain power using the real threats that we face as a shield. America is great because of the people who don't love it or leave it, but protect it and improve it. The swearing in of the presidency is the paramount symbol of this nation, to make an oath to protect America against threats forign and domestic and uphold the constitution. It's not a choice between the two. For without the constitution there would have been no America to protect. At least no America where you would have the rights that allow you to be protected in the first place.
It's sad that the most basic of methods to protect the people is so vulnerable.
) Human Kind Vs Human Creation
) It'd be interesting to see how many humans would survive to serve us.
I'd agree with you if the hackers had told the cops about the flaw and they didn't fix it - but in this case, they just exploited the flaw for their own amusement. Someone could have been killed, and then a lot of lives would have been ruined. Off the top of my head: the cop who shot an innocent or the innocent who shot a cop, the person who was shot, and possibly the hacker. Fucking with the cops is only funny in the movies.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
If this kid doesn't get jail time, it's just time to do away with all of our laws. What's the point?
The victimized family should bring a a civil suit and make sure they get a monetary judgement that docks his wages for years to come. If he gets away with it, we'll be hearing about him again.
It was a typo. I mean, Q and N are right next to each-other.
Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
The problem here is the illegality and absurdity of the drug war.
Yeah, That's the problem with people hacking the 911 system to dispatch SWAT teams, good call.
Just a prank? Good god man! Mistaken ID gets people killed in situations like this. Frequently these searches are executed without any announcement. Just men with guns breaking through your door. What's a good law abiding citizen going to do if they live in an area where home invasion robberies aren't uncommon? They're rightfully going to defend themselves. The cops will rightfully defend themselves. Long story short, people die because of lesser screw ups than this. Don't minimize it.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Mod parent up. He's absolutely right and doesn't even know why--It's not at all funny that it's so appallingly EASY to fuck with people who have the power to arrest or execute someone who justifiably engages in defense of their home and family against armed invaders. In fact--it's downright distressing.
The cops should be held responsible for acting with preparation and intent to utilize lethal force based solely upon such readily compromised intelligence, and the flaw should be fixed immediately. The hacker--an idiot. But everyone knows the old saying--fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. The cops have been getting fooled around the country for years and still done nothing to correct the situation.
Posting from work?
What?
For people who do this kind of stuff.
Whitehat Grayhat Blackhat Asshat
It may be the police's / politician's own fault for having the unprotected system and bla bla bla... But when they catch the guy who did it, 5+ years in the slammer I say. That's the kind of situation when you can take the Hacker Manifesto and wipe your ass with it.
I dunno, I think these days you would've found yourself under arrest if you had warned the police about the exploit. Plus, they'd likely charge you for terrorism.
I always thought it was, "Fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again."
http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071017/NEWS02/710170400 Basically he used a system for the hearing impaired to relay a message... the operator then called the police. He also tried to do the same thing to someone else who was "cheating in an online game". You have to love these kids...
scenario: Instead of a knife the homeowner gets out a gun (who cares what kind, pistol, shotgun, rifle). He goes outside and sees a cop in shadows under a bush and points the gun at him/her... all perfectly legal to him since all he can't tell is that these are prowlers trespassing on his property. (I am assuming California is a state that allows a home owner to actively defend his/her home with a gun. Regardless, the 'hacker' could have caused this to happen in a state where it is permissible.) The other police see him point the gun and shoot him. This could have been the result of this and would not have the fault of the police nor reflect badly on their training or on the quality of their work. It would be well within their training since they think the home owner is an armed and dangerous felon.
There are many permutations of this scenario.
Bottom line: you are wrong. Anyone, including the police can say that, 'this was an irresponsible and dangerous action the hacker took and someone could have been killed.' And by saying it, it certainly does not indicate any lack of confidence in the police training. And I don't believe the police are infallible, nor do I think that they believe they are infallible. Otherwise they wouldn't train so hard to make sure they do things as well as they possibly can. Why train if you are infallible?
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
SWAT isn't going to shoot unless they have reason to AT THE SCENE. There is no way in hell anyone could send orders to SWAT to say "kill person XYZ". SWAT doesn't do assassinations, they are called in to prevent deaths if possible.
Even if orders do get sent to SWAT saying "kill person xyz at address abc", they aren't going to do anything because they'll immediately recognize that it's not real. The only reason SWAT members discharge their weapons is if there is an immediate danger to themselves or others (I.E. madman pointing a gun at police or shooting from a window at people below).
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
Well, that's very true. But it would be stupid to do that, and I clearly somehow manage to miscommunicate my point in my post if that's what you think I meant.
To be perfectly clear, here are the steps you would follow:
Poof, there's a recipe for a likely 'accidental' shooting of an innocent person by the cops. You've basically told them there's a horribly deranged and dangerous person somewhere and then primed the person to react belligerently in the first instant the person notices anything.
It wouldn't work as well if your target were a woman because of cultural conditioning, but you might still be able to pull it off.
Even better, because the cops never, ever admit they're wrong, ever, the person then ends up framed for some bogus crime so the shooting seems justified.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
It is offset though by the fact that more of our laws are being written, passed and enforced by them too.
"Doctor, it's not the voices I hear in MY head, but the voices I hear in YOUR head that really frighten me."
The only reason SWAT members discharge their weapons is if there is an immediate danger to themselves or others (I.E. madman pointing a gun at police or shooting from a window at people below).
Yeah, that's what our firearms cops said too, right before they shot the guy carrying a table leg in a bag based on nothing but a poorly executed confrontation (easy to say with hindsight, of course) after a tip-off from a paranoid guy in a bar. Oh, and that little incident on the London Underground, where they shot the guy for getting on a tube train. (Apparently he was exhibiting suspicious behaviour by getting off a bus on the way to the station, then getting back on again; the observing officer had failed to notice that the underground station he had got off to enter the first time happened to be closed that day, and the controlling officers interpreted his actions as counter-surveillance techniques. This was just one in a string of ****-ups that led to the man's death.)
I appreciate that cops with guns are in an inherently difficult position. Make the wrong call, and someone you're supposed to protect dies because you didn't take out the criminal; make the wrong call the other way, and you kill an innocent civilian. But don't ever kid yourself that just because these guys are cops with some firearms training that either their physical or emotional reactions are perfect in a high-stress situation. Humans just don't work that way, no matter how well-intentioned and well-trained.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
The officer involved, a 17-year veteran with long tactical experience, pulled up in a car behind the undercover officer's. "As the officer came out," Horan said, "he was bringing his weapon up. In the course of bringing his weapon up, it discharged. He has no real explanation how."
The officer's name was not released.
Horan said the officer shouted "Police!" at Culosi. "Right after 'Police!'" Horan said, "it went pow."
Culosi was killed almost instantly.
Horan said the bullet entered Culosi's left side, traveled through his body and was recovered on his right side. Horan said the officer was aware that he should not have had a finger on the trigger and that he should not have had his
Cheryl Noel feared criminal intruders had broken into her home and grabbed a lawfully registered gun and held it pointed at the floor, the suit states.
Artson kicked in her bedroom door with his boot and, without identifying himself or telling Noel to drop her weapon, shot her three times, including once after she already had slumped to the floor
You can't take the sky from me...