Slashdot Mirror


Police swoop on 'Hacker of the Year'

AcidAUS writes "The Swedish hacker, Dan Egerstad, who perpetrated the so-called hack of the year, has been arrested in a dramatic raid on his apartment, during which he was taken in for questioning and several of his computers confiscated. Egerstad broke into the global communications network used by embassies around the world in August and gained access to 1000 sensitive email accounts."

223 comments

  1. "Broke in?" by Evangelion · · Score: 5, Insightful


    I thought he just listened in on Tor traffic.

    1. Re:"Broke in?" by hsdpa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He did, and that's what's so stupid about this police-raid.

      --
      :(){ :|:& }:;
    2. Re:"Broke in?" by TigerTime · · Score: 5, Funny

      There's a guy down the street from where I work that had a bullhorn talking about the end of the world. I completely hacked into his message this morning.

    3. Re:"Broke in?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's also what's so stupid about what he did. Intercepting traffic is legally questionable. Doing it to an embassy and then publishing the results is pretty stupid. Calling it "security research" in an attempt to promote yourself as a smart security dood is really stupid. Of course he does have his picture in the paper now, and any publicity is good publicity. I hear Swedish prisons are very nice too.

    4. Re:"Broke in?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only those using the embassy accounts weren't the embassy employers. TOR is largely used by CIA and US military intelligence when they spy to cover their tracks. In this case, it seems he may have intercepted CIA spies, doing their dirty work and spying on foreign embassy employee's emails.

    5. Re:"Broke in?" by Torvaun · · Score: 1, Informative

      I hear Swedish prisons are very nice too. Frank Abegnale said they were better than either French or American prisons. Sweden apparently cares about rehabilitating its prisoners, instead of just punishing them.
      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
  2. Well, that's what you get by Lally+Singh · · Score: 5, Funny

    90% of what makes a really good hack hard is STFU'ing about it.

    --
    Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
    1. Re:Well, that's what you get by luvirini · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That is the point authohorities all over the world seem to be making... Do not report Security flaws.

      If you notice a security flaw and are quiet about it nothing happens.

      If you notice a securoty flaw and report it you get charged for hacking.

      Guess what happens in future...

    2. Re:Well, that's what you get by Praedon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I completely agree... some of the best hacks in the world happened without anyone ever even knowing except the person who did it... He just had the balls to take credit for it... I don't know if in Sweden they brand hackers terrorists or not, like in the U.S., but if they do, he could be in a lot of trouble.

      I have a prediction about this guy... what's going to happen in about 5-10 years, is he will end up writing articles like other hacker sellouts that we know.

      --
      Just me
    3. Re:Well, that's what you get by Praedon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There was an article a while back on slashdot, that mentioned about this guy who found a way to duplicate boarding passes for an airline... before he published the information to the internet, he contacted his congressman, which did nothing about it.. but then published how to do it, and the template to the internet. He was then considered a "terrorist" and I have heard nothing more about him.

      --
      Just me
    4. Re:Well, that's what you get by _14k4 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I think the "sellout" part of those hackers is actually the part that grew up and realized (real - as mentioned above)hacking is not a way to support a family - and it will always be a hobby. As it should be, no?

    5. Re:Well, that's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Guess what happens in future...
      Oooh ooh! I know! A sentient robot named Bender gets jettisoned into space and learns a lesson about unintended consequences while acting as god to a bunch of wee people living in a colony on his abdomen?

      Oh... I thought you said "Guess what happens in Futurama". Never mind.
    6. Re:Well, that's what you get by olddotter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So your saying his government is made up of morons?

    7. Re:Well, that's what you get by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

      And what did we learn today? Don't report a security hole, sell it to Russia.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:Well, that's what you get by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, but of people with a one track mind. He who knows how to break the law breaks the law, since if he didn't mean to break the law, he wouldn't know how to do it. He who finds a security hole must have been looking for a security hole, and the only reason to look for a security hole is to use it.

      Another train of thought follows the logic that what is forbidden does not exist. And if it exists, simply crack down with utmost force on it, and it ceases to exist.

      The core fallacy about it is that this doesn't mean crimes don't happen, it just means you won't hear about them. Which is, for the statistic, identical. It's a bit like closing your eyes and pretending that since you can't see the problem it doesn't exist.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:Well, that's what you get by Billosaur · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No more than anybody else's... listen, the guy just exposed a major security flaw that has an impact on diplomatic communications all over the world. On the one hand, the guy's doing a job no one else thought to do, and to let governments know that their secrets are easily tapped. Governments should be funding his work, to see if he can come up with a solution to the problem. But being governments, they're a bit paranoid (even the Swedes) and heavy-handed. This guys knows about a security vulnerability -- what else does he know? So they drag him in and give him the "treatment".

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    10. Re:Well, that's what you get by Jarjarthejedi · · Score: 2, Funny

      *Sticks fingers in ears and closes eyes*

      LALALALALA I can't hear you!

      --
      There are two kinds of fool One says 'This is old therefore good' Another says 'This is new therefore better'- Dean Ing
    11. Re:Well, that's what you get by bytesex · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A bit too paranoid. He was told to shut up about it, but nothing happened to him. It was a journalist who'd found out that if you made two boarding passes at home, one in his own name (not conspicuous) and one in the name of Osama Bin Laden, and you switched bottom barcodes on them, you could get Osama on the plane. Or something. Apparently, the two barcodes are read at different stations, and only the first one checks for identity (but not the no fly list), and the second one checks for the no fly list (but not the identity). Or something.

      --
      Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
    12. Re:Well, that's what you get by techpawn · · Score: 1

      First rule of true hacking... You don't talk about Hacking! Second rule of Hacking... YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT HACKING!

      That's why people just assume Crackers are Hackers... Crackers talk, Hackers know better...

      --
      Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
    13. Re:Well, that's what you get by camperdave · · Score: 1

      That's because he printed himself up a boarding pass to a non extradition country before publishing to the net.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    14. Re:Well, that's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the security flaw was intended to provide misinformation and mislead those listening in, and exposing it means they have to do something about it and coming up with another that isn't as easy to find but still gets the same information out to the same people hacking into their systems is going to be a lot harder...

    15. Re:Well, that's what you get by kihbord · · Score: 1

      The Moral of the Story: Ask permission first!

    16. Re:Well, that's what you get by tucuxi · · Score: 1

      The core fallacy about it is that this doesn't mean crimes don't happen, it just means you won't hear about them. Which is, for the statistic, identical. It's a bit like closing your eyes and pretending that since you can't see the problem it doesn't exist.

      It's not only used by children and politicians; there you have "don't shoot the messenger" (royalty and military), "the ostrich algorithm" (100% effective for technical woes), and "Gandalf Stormcrow" (LOTR version of the above).

    17. Re:Well, that's what you get by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      that's why police can quite easily get away with beating people at free parties, because free parties don't exist, they don't even make the news.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    18. Re:Well, that's what you get by somersault · · Score: 1

      You're probably giving them wayyyy too much credit ;)

      --
      which is totally what she said
    19. Re:Well, that's what you get by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      So wanting to eat and pay bills is selling out?

      Is the only way to "keep it real" is to starve out on the streets because you're homeless?

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    20. Re:Well, that's what you get by olddotter · · Score: 1

      I call that the ostrich syndrome. Although even ostriches are not really that stupid.

    21. Re:Well, that's what you get by somersault · · Score: 1

      Not the "treatment"?!!!? :o Hopefully thats a sauna, then a government security job offer with a company Volvo?

      --
      which is totally what she said
    22. Re:Well, that's what you get by ozbird · · Score: 1

      Do not exploit security flaws. There, fixed it for you.

    23. Re:Well, that's what you get by boyfaceddog · · Score: 5, Funny

      You can't really blame the governments for their response. Most agencies are only authorized to punish citizens, not ask them for help.

      Remember the Air Force Axiom; when the only tool you have is a multi-warhead thermo-nuclear ICBM, all your problems look like the Soviets invading West Germany.

      --
      Here will be an old abusing of God's patience and the king's English.
    24. Re:Well, that's what you get by WwWonka · · Score: 1

      90% of what makes a really good hack hard is STFU'ing about it.

      THIS is the smartest thing I have read about "hackers/slackers/crackers". I have worked in the security realm for the past ten years and worked along side some of the best hackers in the world, and from each of their mouths came the same statement...

      "the best hackers in the world are the ones you will never know about."

    25. Re:Well, that's what you get by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      So, all these diplomats sharing a "party line" of sorts... hmmm, makes me think they all (or many of them) get together to plan the next famine, war, coalition, etc. I mean, why do diplomats get immunity from a lot of potential types of prosecution for which you and I could be locked up forever? They can enter countries and not be fingerprinted, transport dubious items under diplomatic seal, employ couriers to do the more dangerous conveyance work, and you and I can't f*scking take a non-full 4oz or 3oz bottle on the plane.

      Yeh, a big cabal, racket, con game I feel sometimes.

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
    26. Re:Well, that's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the one hand, the guy's doing a job no one else thought to do

      C'mon, you really think that no one at any of the US's 3 letter agencies, or Interpol, or any other government intelligence service in the entire world wasn't aware of how people were using tor insecurely? It's the fact that this guy alerted certain embassies (like one of Iran's) that their personnel were compromising their networks' security, that prompted this raid. He basically made intelligence gathering/law enforcement snooping a little harder now, and he's facing retaliation for doing that, even though what he did isn't illegal by the spirit of the law. This state action is nothing more than tactic to intimidate independent security researchers from publishing their research into network infastructure flaws that governments don't want exposed.

    27. Re:Well, that's what you get by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      We learn not to drop articles OR particles... hehehhe or add enumeration or drop enumeration...

      I don't GIVE a shit...
      (I don't give shit)

      I don't GIVE A rat's ass
      (I don't give rats ass)

      I didn't hear JACK SHIT from her
      (I didn't hear ANY Jack Shit from her...)

      I going to cut my nail
      (What, just one? What about the other 9?, or 19?)

      I cut my hairs....
      (Oh, how many?)

      At that party we ate chickens and fishes and rices?
      (Oh, how many whole chickens? How many fish? How many grains of rice? Did you count?)

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
    28. Re:Well, that's what you get by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      "hacking is not a way to support a family - and it will always be a hobby. As it should be, no?"

      Oh, really? Tell that to Leatherface. But, I'm not sure if it was also a hobby to him... After all, the "Family Secret" ingredients in the chili won them a lot of awards in Texas. I wonder what's in K.C. Master Pieces...

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
    29. Re:Well, that's what you get by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Worse...

      Morons with big guns.

    30. Re:Well, that's what you get by hiryuu · · Score: 1

      Remember the Air Force Axiom; when the only tool you have is a multi-warhead thermo-nuclear ICBM, all your problems look like the Soviets invading West Germany.

      I love that - is it an original paraphrasing, or something you'd heard somewhere? I'd like to make sure I attribute it properly should I happen to use it. :)

      --
      Karma: Excellent, but still won't get you laid.
    31. Re:Well, that's what you get by Brandonski · · Score: 1

      Another train of thought: Wrap a towel around your head to avoid the gaze of the Ravenous Bugbladder Beast of Traal (a mind-bogglingly stupid animal, it assumes that if you can't see it, it can't see you- daft as a brush, but very very ravenous); -encyclopedia galactica

    32. Re:Well, that's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...the US's 3 letter agencies, or Interpol, or any other government intelligence service in the entire world wasn't aware of how people were using tor insecurely?" People are using the Internet insecurely, and the government agencies have access to that traffic. They don't need to worry about Tor, because they can get the traffic after it exits the Tor network along with all the other unencrypted Internet traffic.

    33. Re:Well, that's what you get by MikeDirnt69 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He who finds a security hole must have been looking for a security hole, and the only reason to look for a security hole is to use it.

      Yes, he was searching for it. But your assumption that he intent to use it is not correct. Hackers are not always made by "pure evil", they can do good stuff if they want to. It's fun to find breaches and it makes you fell good when you report it and is recognized.

      I'm not saying that the guy is innocent, just telling the possibilities.

      --
      Am I eval()? - http://www.monst3r.com.br
    34. Re:Well, that's what you get by hoooocheymomma · · Score: 1

      Pay attention. The person to whom you are replying was describing the point of view of the authorities, not his own point of view.

    35. Re:Well, that's what you get by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 1

      There is also one that goes something like: if you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

    36. Re:Well, that's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So your saying his government

      his saying his government? Go to school.
    37. Re:Well, that's what you get by hiryuu · · Score: 1

      There is also one that goes something like: if you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.


      I'm aware of the original quote:

      "When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" (Abraham Maslow, though a similar quote is attributed to Bernard Baruch)

      ...and just found the re-phrasing funny, hence my curiosity as to its origins. :)

      --
      Karma: Excellent, but still won't get you laid.
    38. Re:Well, that's what you get by idontgno · · Score: 1

      The tendency to blame the messenger is ancient. Just ask Cassandra.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    39. Re:Well, that's what you get by unlametheweak · · Score: 1

      Another train of thought follows the logic that what is forbidden does not exist. And if it exists, simply crack down with utmost force on it, and it ceases to exist. The first mistake was arresting him.
      The second mistake was letting him free http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect.
      Just like CIA secret prisons; if you let people out of them, then they won't be secret for too long. Like in this case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_El-Masri.

      If in fact nothing arises from this then the government(s) will just end up looking more stupid than it / they already were for ignoring his warnings in the first place.

      The sad thing is that eavesdropping on Tor exit nodes isn't an original idea, and it's even posted right on the Tor Website itself https://wiki.torproject.org/noreply/TheOnionRouter/TorFAQ#head-5e18f8a8f98fa9e69ffac725e96f39641bec7ac1. Why the government would want to publicize this vulnerability is a real conundrum.
    40. Re:Well, that's what you get by dave562 · · Score: 1

      Growing up is selling out, duh! Hackers being accused of selling out is like bands being accused of selling out. For every one hacker/band out there that makes it, there are thousands of others that wish they had the talent/skill/luck to do the same thing. The REAL sell outs go and work for the NSA and various other agencies and companies that you never hear about. The sloppy ones get caught and make some money off of their brief notoriety.

    41. Re:Well, that's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regardless of his 'intention,' he was engaged in espionage. He'll be lucky if he doesn't end up with a bullet in his brain coming from some Foreign agency.

      Honestly, you think he deserves a reward? There is nothing noble about what he did. He deserves hard time.

    42. Re:Well, that's what you get by ToasterMonkey · · Score: 1

      Why exactly is anyone defending this guy? Security research is a good thing, but you don't go to other people's houses testing their locks, then telling the whole neighborhood where you were successfully able to break in. This was extremely unprofessional, so why should he get paid for this "work"?

      The government, and you if it were your house, SHOULD be paranoid.
      We have no idea what this man actually did with the information he found. I say it warrants an investigation, plain and simple.

    43. Re:Well, that's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "He who knows how to break the law breaks the law"
      That is a really retarded statement.

      Everyone probably knows how to break thousands of laws. You know how to walk don't you? Well then you know how to jaywalk! You know how to be drunk don't you? Well then you know how to be publicly drunk! You know how to grasp items and walk don't you? Well then you know how to commit grand theft (and all other categories of theft). You can drive a car? Oh my god, you know how to commit hundreds of traffic violations, grand theft auto, murder, assault with a deadly weapon and more! You can speak and write right? Well you know how to commit a whole range of crimes from conspiracy to do $ANYTHING to libel to breaking national security. Better lock you up you dangerous potential criminal!

      This was just political embarrassment & CYA that motivated this action, plain and simple.

    44. Re:Well, that's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I spoke with the guy who did that a while ago and he said they let him off since they didn't have any charges against him.

    45. Re:Well, that's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah that's that you get for being an attention seeking idiot - seriously posting the logins on his website - what was he hoping to achieve? that is just malicious like graffiti

      notice a security flaw and offer 'consultancy services' to the organization with the flaw that's what the smart people are doing.

    46. Re:Well, that's what you get by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That's pretty much it, with the twist that this also sticks fingers into your voters' ears, which is more important for a politician. Voters don't hear about it, so they deem it a non-issue, so you don't have to address it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    47. Re:Well, that's what you get by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I presented you the train of thought of a politician. If I was thinking that, it would be time to turn myself in for drug manufacturing and bomb building. I have done neither, but I know how to do it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    48. Re:Well, that's what you get by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, if I see that correctly, they're big time against publishing it. Which in turn makes one wonder whether they themselves are running TOR exits for that purpose and don't want people to know about the sniffing capabilities.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    49. Re:Well, that's what you get by jasonjacks0n · · Score: 1

      You can't really blame the governments for their response. Most agencies are only authorized to punish citizens, not ask them for help.

      Err.. and how is that not blame-worthy, exactly?

      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
  3. Bragger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can we now safely call this guy the #1 Bragger?

  4. is hacker appropriate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought this was the type of group that was all upset if someone misused the term hacker.

  5. Good. by MSFanBoi2 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Break the law, go to jail. You don't have to like the laws, but breaking them ain't going to do you a bit of good. And then to go as far as start messing with the cops? Good going there Dan! Enjoy your time in prison!

    1. Re:Good. by spleen_blender · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And my faith in humanity drops to yet another record low.

      I'm getting sick of a society that has ZERO room for exceptions. Make exceptions for the exceptional... that is why they are exceptional.

      Although listening to TOR traffic is hardly exceptional, but the point he proved without malicious intent was.

    2. Re:Good. by GNUman · · Score: 1

      "Egerstad was released and no charges have been laid against him, but the police are in the process of investigating the matter and nothing has been ruled out."

      RTFA

    3. Re:Good. by Elemenope · · Score: 1

      Is sniffing tor packets illegal? Clue me in.

      --
      All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
    4. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a good little fall-in-line MS fanboi, aren't ya? You like george bush, too?

      You're a tool.

    5. Re:Good. by Nos. · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Egerstad published 100 of the email accounts, including login details and passwords, on his website for anyone curious enough to have a look"
      Publishing login credentials of 100 accounts isn't what I'd call without malicious intent. Okay, he was trying to force them to react, but there are better ways of doing it.

    6. Re:Good. by spleen_blender · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Agreed, but these kind of cases should not ever be treated in the same way terrorism suspects are, or any other significant crime. It is ridiculous when I think back on the things I could be arrested for in the eyes of these people and the kind of suffering I would endure, and then compare that to the suffering I have forced on others. It is obscene to treat them like common criminals, because they are obviously not common.

    7. Re:Good. by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A law is not to be observed blindly. A law is to be questioned to test it against real life requirements. If people would not question laws, people would still be enslaved because of the color of their skin and the US would still be a colony of Britain.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:Good. by rasjani · · Score: 1

      Depends.. Whats in the package?

      --
      yush
    9. Re:Good. by Nos. · · Score: 1

      So publishing the login credentials which could provide access to very sensitive information should be treated as what? Shoplifting? This guy new what he was doing and was trying to make a name for himself. It was the wrong way to do it, and he should have known better.

    10. Re:Good. by spleen_blender · · Score: 1

      And that warrants this kind of reaction still? Of course he should be punished and informed as to the PROPER way to have handled this situation, but he should spend ZERO time in prison. All that does is build resentment of the system and increase recidivism.

    11. Re:Good. by caluml · · Score: 1

      Perhaps just publishing the usernames, and not the passwords. Or just the passwords, and not the usernames.

    12. Re:Good. by aminorex · · Score: 1

      > there are better ways of doing it.

      I've heard that before. Such as? Name a "better way" that (1) he didn't already try and (2) wouldn't involve turning over sensitive data of another nation to spooks of a potentially adversarial power.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    13. Re:Good. by cycler · · Score: 1

      Wrong!

      He didn' break any laws.

      And second, the embassytraffic could be from crackers wanting to be anonymous when they accessed stolen embassyaccounts.

      And yes, I'm from Sweden /C

    14. Re:Good. by celtic_hackr · · Score: 5, Informative

      I won't delineate all the reasons why what you said is a stupid troll.

      But here's a few gems for you.

      1) He became a tor node.
      2) All the data he examined was on his own computers.
      3) Everything on the computers belonged to him.
      4) As a responsible tor node person, he examined the contents of it.
      5) Refer to number 3. Also in the US, he could be found responsible for
            people using his tor node to traffic in say copyrighted works or child
            abuse. So he would really pretty much HAVE to inspect the contrents of
            his traffic to make sure that no illegal activity was taking place.
      6) What law is it you think he broke?

    15. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Okay, he was trying to force them to react, but there are better ways of doing it."

      Like what? Informing the concerned parties? Oh, yeah, he tried that. I'd rather have them forced to react than have my governments secrets at the behest of the criminal element. He did the right thing.

    16. Re:Good. by mtgarden · · Score: 1

      I can't speak to the criminality of this act in Sweden, but in the US it would violate the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (18 U.S.C 2701-1). Because he was providing a service to everyone, he did not have the right to read or share the information (according to US laws). I believe that he also violated the Wiretap Act and the Pent/Trace Act. So, yeah, depending on the country in question, he could be considered a criminal. The fact that it was on his hardware is a non-issue. Sorry, I don't think he should have been busted myself, but dem's the laws.

    17. Re:Good. by Anpheus · · Score: 1

      What better ways can we think of then? Perhaps he could call local government offices. Perhaps he could contact embassy officials from various countries whose login data is being compromised in this way. He did both. (Apparently the only foreign government interested in his statements was Iran.)

      Now, he had exhausted all of this easy options. He could have gone to the press, but I think you'll find it's a little harder to get on the national news, even in Sweden, with computechbabble as they understand it, and trying to make it relevant to their audience is awful hard. You only really need to speak to one group of people, the government, and they've already turned you down.

      So he published a subset of the information he acquired and said to hell with it, deleting the rest, or so his blog says. Furthermore, he no longer believes that the information he acquired was directly form the embassies, but more likely it was information that an actual hacker or hackers had obtained, and then transmitted in plaintext over tor to maintain anonymity.

    18. Re:Good. by pwolk · · Score: 1

      e.g. forwarding a series of relatively harmless messages to original sender and recipient, adding a note they shoud contact their sysadmin to improve security. Then again, hinsight is a lovely thing.

    19. Re:Good. by the_womble · · Score: 1

      the US would still be a colony of Britain.

      and the problem would be?
    20. Re:Good. by HPXX · · Score: 1

      I don't know for what reason they raided. But I'd guess that the crime he commited would be that he actually validated the data he had gained access to by login in to mail services he ain't supposed to have access to. Dan Egerstad stated this for idgsweden. If he would actually get it for having a tor node... that would imo be wrong.

    21. Re:Good. by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      the US would still be a colony of Britain.

      and the problem would be? Not a decent cup of coffee on the whole continent.

      (Kidding... I know that "American" drip coffee is considered horrible by most of the world. It was better than my "driving on the wrong side of the road joke, though.)
      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    22. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've obviously never been to Texas. Bunch of damn sheep down here, I tell ya....

    23. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      of course. This is why the following laws are still on the books:

      The entire Encyclopedia Britannica is banned in Texas because it contains a formula for making beer at home. [www.dumblaws.com]

      In Kentucky, it is illegal to carry a concealed weapon more than six-feet long. [times online, UK]

      It is against the law to mispronounce the name of the State of Arkansas in that State. [www.strangefacts.com]

      It is against the law to take a bath on Saturday.

      Obviously the law is taken seriously and are reviewed for being appropriate in today's world otherwise these wouldn't still be on the books.

      Dumb and inappropriate laws are on the books and continue to be added all the time. It's a sad fact that the more dubious laws are just ignored instead of being repealed or updated, even when those responsible for such things know about those laws. In general the laws are enforced as a matter of convenience or to make a statement by our governments and law enforcement. It's true that many of those laws that are enforced are considered by many to be "for the common good", but the fact remains that laws are enforced solely at the whims and desires of those in power or charged with enforcing them.

    24. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have wiretapping laws in Sweden? The police can sit outside your home and record all of your internet browsing and then publish it on a website? Or they can ask your ISP to do the same, and it is all completely legal?

    25. Re:Good. by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      (Kidding... I know that "American" drip coffee is considered horrible by most of the world. It was better than my "driving on the wrong side of the road joke, though.)

      Considering that a majority of coffee beans used throughout the world comes from the Panamanian areas, I'd say that's in north America.
      Central America is not a continent, it's a designation.
      What you're referring to as "American" coffee must be the cheap swill that is sold on the bottom row of supermarkets that for some reason people buy.
      Heck, even 5 O'Clock brand coffee is better than that crap.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    26. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'd say that's in North America."

      I fixed that for you, because you left in uncapitalized on purpose because you thought you'd prove a point.

      And that would make it "North American" not "American". The qualifier matters.

      "America" is vernacular for "United States of America". You can hate it, but repeatedly posting idiotic, wrong nonsense like you did won't change it.

      Fuck off now.

    27. Re:Good. by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      My history on Central America is rusty, but I don't think that the British had much of a stake there, except possibly for Belize.

      My comment was in reference to how we'd all be drinking tea.

      I'm not a big fan of pre-ground supermarket coffee, but it's still better than nothing. Plus it is way cheaper than spending several dollars a day at some shop. And it can even taste better if you don't like the over-roasted beans at your everyone's favorite chain.

      Damn it, I knew I should have just made a straight teeth joke.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    28. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...What law is it you think he broke?.."

      Umm..... a Swedish one?

      Perhaps you should look up and become acquainted with Swedish jurisprudence before commenting on the legality of a particular act in Sweden?

      The fact that there may have been some other issue in the US is pretty irrelevant. In Zimbabwe, he would probably have been OK so long as Mugabe had given him permission. So what?

      There is a lot more of the world than the US!

    29. Re:Good. by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

      I believe, Citizen spleen_blender, you require a dose of THIS. Humanity is definitely overrated.....

    30. Re:Good. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I wonder honestly why nobody ever had the idea of creating some kind of TV show around those dumb laws. For example, I remember dimly that it's still the law in some parts of the US (and also some other countries) that a man has to walk in front of a car, carrying a flag. Why not do just that and create a huge traffic jam, and when facing charges you simply refer to the law? You weren't breaking the law, quite the opposite, EVERYONE ELSE was.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  6. It was just tor eavesdropping! by sanermind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All he did was run a tor exit node, and observe the outgoing traffic, a known possibility when using tor. Not only is there the disclaimer "This is experimental software. Do not rely on it for strong anonymity" evertime you run tor, but this vector of potential attack is so bloody obvious that anyone not aware of would be a bloody idiot not to use additional encryption for accessing sensitive information on the other end, and rely on tor only for obfuscation of the fact that the route originates from them.

    --

    ---
    the pen is mightier than the sword, the sword is mightier than the court, the court is mightier than the pen.
    1. Re:It was just tor eavesdropping! by reabbotted · · Score: 0

      I have no idea what the laws are in Sweden, but I suspect he is in trouble for posting the information to his website. But this brings up a dilemma I've always had with hacking. Is it possible to do it legally? I've always thought it would be fun to do, but I'm also opposed to breaking any laws. I value the law over getting some satisfaction over hacking into someone else's computer. So the question is, is it possible to practice without breaking laws?

    2. Re:It was just tor eavesdropping! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "It was just for eavesdropping!" I will remind you of that when you catch me outside you bedroom listening to you banging your wife.

    3. Re:It was just tor eavesdropping! by zappepcs · · Score: 1

      I disagree. Listening outside your bedroom requires physical presence on your property. He committed no such act. In fact, what he did was no more incriminating than you putting a packet analyzer on your Internet connection in your living room. If you happen to hear some music on a radio station that was played without royalty payments, are you guilty of copyright infringement?

      Had he only claimed to have the login credentials, it might not seem so bad, but he has made his point in spectacular fashion. The recovery is rather simple, and no permanent damage exists, other than what information became public as a result.

      It might also be easy to argue that anyone who used the logins to see what was there knowingly violated computer security laws.

      In either case, shooting the messenger is never a workable solution.

    4. Re:It was just tor eavesdropping! by KokorHekkus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      All he did was run a tor exit node, and observe the outgoing traffic...
      And that could very likely be construed as eavesdropping on electronic communications. The Swedish penal code, 4th chapter, 8th paragraph, says:

      8 Den som olovligen bereder sig tillgång till ett meddelande, som ett post- eller telebefordringsföretag förmedlar som postförsändelse eller telemeddelande, döms för brytande av post- eller telehemlighet till böter eller fängelse i högst två år.
      Which translates to approximatly:

      The person who gains access to a message, that a postal or telecommunications company transmits, as a postal or telecommuncations message, is to be sentened for exposure of postal or telecommuncations secret to fines or a maximum of two years prison.
      Swedish laws are a bit laconic so that's the full text. I'm not really surprised that the police decide to start an investigation since what he did could be legal - it's not a clear cut case. Obviously the message were not ment for him and he didn't come by them by accident. Word to the wise: better read up on the laws where are if you're going to pull something like this. If it's in the gray area be prepared to investigated.
    5. Re:It was just tor eavesdropping! by delinear · · Score: 1

      One question though - I don't know a great deal about the Tor technology, but if he was running an exit node (i.e. he was the end point for the communication), then isn't he himself effectively acting as the telecommunications company? If people didn't provide exit nodes Tor wouldn't work, so in this case he was an essential part of the connection to the internet.

      As far as I know, telecoms are allowed to pry into their traffic as it's considered public domain and people are advised to encrypt anything they don't want falling into the "wrong hands" - it seems to me he could use the same argument, if someone agreed to send information via the computer of an unknown third party then this should always be considered non-private or always encrypted if it is private.

      As I said, I don't fully understand the technology so feel free to point out the flaws in my logic, but prima facie that seems to hold water.

    6. Re:It was just tor eavesdropping! by Liquid+Len · · Score: 1

      8 Den som olovligen bereder sig tillgång till ett meddelande, som ett post- eller telebefordringsföretag förmedlar som postförsändelse eller telemeddelande, döms för brytande av post- eller telehemlighet till böter eller fängelse i högst två år.
      Beautiful language, isn't it Marge ?

      Sorry, couldn't resist...
    7. Re:It was just tor eavesdropping! by KokorHekkus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As I said this is a gray area. Maybe he could argue that but on the other hand I'd be surprised if telcoms are allowed to snoop as they wish in Sweden but they certainly can't go around repeating my communcations at will. So the bigger problem could be that he not only did snoop but he also disseminated it publicly. Without being a legal scholar I'd say it's fairly obvious that the intent with the law was to preserve the privacy of the commmuncating parties messages.

      Maybe it would be better to argue that the senders of the messages should not have expected privacy because of the system as it was. But I think he should get a good lawyer anyhow.

    8. Re:It was just tor eavesdropping! by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      If your ISP started reading all of your unencrypted email, would you think it's OK because "it was just eavesdropping?"

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    9. Re:It was just tor eavesdropping! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Den som olovligen bereder sig tillgång till ett meddelande
      The person who gains access to a message

      You omitted the word "olovligen" - which means "illegally" - The person who illegally gains access to a message - There are legal ways of gaining access to messages, and I suspect this might be one of them?

  7. Wouldn't this technically be a cracker? by liquiddark · · Score: 1

    I mean, I'm not up on all that. But for a little while the effort was made to distinguish them. Has that effort been abandoned by white-hats?

    1. Re:Wouldn't this technically be a cracker? by Professor_UNIX · · Score: 2, Informative

      Crackers break the copyright protection on computer software. Hackers use their skills to find weaknesses in the security of software, hardware, and networks. Those that exploit them for malicious purposes are black hat hackers and those that report them to the proper people so the vulnerabilities can be fixed are white hat hackers. Script kiddies are ones that take programs written by bad hackers and just run them without actually comprehending what they're doing other than the fact that they've owned another box.

      Those have been the definitions for at least the past 20 years now and the only people who would argue that are old fat hippie open source programmers who think they are hackers when in fact they are just geeks.

    2. Re:Wouldn't this technically be a cracker? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A cracker is a derogatory term for persons of Caucasian decent.

    3. Re:Wouldn't this technically be a cracker? by liquiddark · · Score: 1

      Does this confirm your theory, or refute it? It's a Berkeley link, and an MIT Press dictionary. So maybe it confirms your "only people who'd argue it" stereotype?

    4. Re:Wouldn't this technically be a cracker? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure he a cracker yo! He a pasty-ass white boy, jus like you!

    5. Re:Wouldn't this technically be a cracker? by gazbo · · Score: 1
      Both. Note how the main reference cited is Eric Raymond's jargon file? Well if you go back to the versions before that massive twat took over (oh, find it yourself - it'd take me just as long), you'll notice that hacker used to be in there referring to people who break into systems. It was only when that self-aggrandising revisionist managed to gain control that it became "strongly deprecated".

      So not only does it show that indeed it did always have a negative meaning, but it also proves the GP's point about what sort of tool argues against that usage.

    6. Re:Wouldn't this technically be a cracker? by zabala · · Score: 1

      Yes it would be a *cracker*, not "technically" but conceptually; and pardon the arrogance, but previous posters are "outsiders looking in"-to the Hacker culture, which reflects on their opinions.

      -zabala

    7. Re:Wouldn't this technically be a cracker? by liquiddark · · Score: 1

      Not to sound like I know what I'm talking about, but your objection sounds political and personal rather than technical. In fact the sense was there, but the word "Cracker" was, according to the jargon file at least, coined well before ESR took over. Is the claim that he is lying, or simply that who-cares-it's-ESR?

    8. Re:Wouldn't this technically be a cracker? by liquiddark · · Score: 1

      You may want to look up the posted definition of cracker, by the by. It's not just copyright protection. It's computer security in general.

    9. Re:Wouldn't this technically be a cracker? by gazbo · · Score: 1
      I wasn't talking about "cracker", it was his alteration of the word "hacker" that I was complaining about. Go back to the pre-ESR version and see how it changes (in the exact opposite direction to common usage, which is exactly what such a text is supposed to reflect).

      And yes, you may have noticed I have something of a...dislike for ESR. That is because he's a pretty objectionable man - try reading through his blog some time. I assume he's still as raving mad as when he talked about feeing it would be his duty to murder a policeman if they tried to steal his porn. Or, if you can't be bothered, just consider he's the sort of person who unilaterally modifies "dictionary" definitions to suit his opinions.

    10. Re:Wouldn't this technically be a cracker? by liquiddark · · Score: 1

      The 2003 version of the jargon file still has the malicious definition in it, though it is marked as deprecated:

      [hacker] 8. [deprecated] A malicious meddler who tries to discover sensitive information by poking around. Hence password hacker

      Compare to (jargon file v1.05):

      3. A malicious or inquisitive meddler who tries to discover information by poking around. Hence "keyword hacker", "network hacker".

      I'm sure your reasons for disliking him are legion. But in the context of this discussion, his change to the file is minor at best, and prefers a different word for the malicious meaning for reasons which, if one reads the revision history and notes surrounding the change, make sense.

  8. What happend? by Fri13 · · Score: 1

    What happend to word "Cracker" and "Hacker"? Is he now a Hacker or Cracker? Few days ago was again news that how one hacker found thousands of servers without updates and firewall and he was hacker because he is security advisor and works for one company. So why this man is called as hacker too if he stoled information?

    1. Re:What happend? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You don't read news and media altogether too often. Let me clue you in:

      Hacker is someone who does illegal stuff with a computer. People have seen sneakers and swordfish, so they know the term and know it's some computer guy that does illegal stuff. So hacker is it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:What happend? by BPPG · · Score: 1

      He is definitely a cracker. Although he didn't do any real damage and may not have had any malicious intent, he basically went somewhere he wasn't supposed to go. Although what he really did wasn't incredibly impressive, it was who he did it to that has people calling it Hack Of The Year. The traditional usage of hacker is just any computer hardware/network hobbyist. Cracker was invented to differentiate the ones using their skills for "evil". I expect everyone reading this to already know this, but I didn't expect to see an article summary ignore it. Which is fine with me, the way mainstream media sees hacker subculture as being so mystical and difficult to understand makes it more interesting.

      --
      What's the value of information that you don't know?
    3. Re:What happend? by The+Anarchist+Avenge · · Score: 1

      Honestly, I'm not sure I'm going to trust some guy with a soviet russia quote in his .sig. I jest, I jest.

      --
      Today's lucky number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    4. Re:What happend? by cromar · · Score: 1

      He didn't really hack anything: just take advantage of others' stupidity. He's not a cracker because he wasn't being malicious.

    5. Re:What happend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, duh! he's a cracker hacker.

    6. Re:What happend? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Hey, in Soviet Russia, sigs trust YOU!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:What happend? by The+Anarchist+Avenge · · Score: 1

      touche

      --
      Today's lucky number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  9. They went in with all guns blazing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Dramatic raid' sort of conjures up the image of police kicking in the doors and going in with their guns blazing and shooting anyone in sight. I kinda imagine that didn't happen. :(

  10. I don't know why is he surprised by someone1234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    He fucked the police states, so the police bit back.
    He is lucky not to be in russia or china or cold war US so he got no bullet in his head.

    --
    Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
  11. Hackers, gang crime and bare breasts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Meanwhile, Swedish police stands by watching an outbreak of gang shootings in the city of Gothenburg, in which even police stations and police helicopter hangars have been destroyed by drive by shootings. The chief of police is quoted as saying "We know who they are but we can't arrest them because we have no proof".

    Isn't it amazing that it's easier in Sweden to raid and arrest a white collar hacker than a hard-core gang of criminals with machine guns?

    In other news, Swedish feminists were heard crying out for the right to display their breasts in public - "we too [want to] pull off our shirts at football matches".

    God, what a country.

    1. Re:Hackers, gang crime and bare breasts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any article involving Swedish women and the right to display their breasts in public is worthless without pictures.

    2. Re:Hackers, gang crime and bare breasts by Kazrath · · Score: 1

      I know this is off-topic but...

      If you are not well traveled (IE you have never traveled outside of the USA) you could not possibly fathom women walking around on beaches topless/naked without people leering at them. Topless women in Swim settings is the norm in the Europeian Mediterranean and also FKK (Nudism) is very popular in Germany.

      The "first" comment about pictures allows me with high accuracy to determine it is an American Civilian making the comment. Ignorance is not bliss it only makes you look stupid.

    3. Re:Hackers, gang crime and bare breasts by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      The "first" comment about pictures allows me with high accuracy to determine it is an American Civilian making the comment. Ignorance is not bliss it only makes you look stupid.


      It's not ignorance, it's called a fucking joke.
      You've made yourself look stupid by what was referred to in the 80's as eurocentric behavior.
      Get over yourself.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    4. Re:Hackers, gang crime and bare breasts by Patrik_AKA_RedX · · Score: 1

      In other news, Swedish feminists were heard crying out for the right to display their breasts in public - "we too [want to] pull off our shirts at football matches".

      I so support their cause. Where do I sign up?
  12. What's Swedish for 'hypocrite'? by argStyopa · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    From TFA:
    ""They broke my wardrobe, short cutted my electricity, pulled out my speakers, phone and other cables having nothing to do with this and been touching my bookkeeping, which they have no right to do," he said."

    Oh, they have no RIGHT to do it? As opposed to hacking email accounts, which you DID have a right to do? What if they just said that they were 'hacking' your physical life, would that make it ok?

    "While questioning Egerstad at the station, the police "played every trick in the book, good cop, bad cop and crazy mysterious guy in the corner not wanting to tell his name and just staring at me". "Well, if they want to try to manipulate, I can play that game too. [I] gave every known body signal there is telling of lies ... covered my mouth, scratched my elbow, looked away and so on.""

    Personally, Egerstad sounds like the kind of a sanctimonious dick that SHOULD get the beatdown. They should give him "every known signal" that the police don't like it when when someone is lying to them...tasers, nightstick, whatever.

    "Egerstad said the police also accused him of theft because he had eight PlayStation 2 consoles in his apartment. He said he owns a company that "handles consoles"."

    Um, yeah, his company 'handles' them. What, like, you polish them or something? SMBS...perhaps you should check your own windows before you start casting stones, Mr. Egerstad.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:What's Swedish for 'hypocrite'? by Deanalator · · Score: 1

      He hacked NOTHING. He sat on a tor exit node with dsniff. You can do that setup in minutes (I used to run driftnet-gtk on my tor exit node for kicks). He noticed a large amount of dumbasses using email with no encryption, and wanted it to stop ASAP, so he released the info.

    2. Re:What's Swedish for 'hypocrite'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does this mean that the police have the right to break the law if the suspect might have done it ?

    3. Re:What's Swedish for 'hypocrite'? by Lazy+Jones · · Score: 1
      Personally, Egerstad sounds like the kind of a sanctimonious dick that SHOULD get the beatdown. They should give him "every known signal" that the police don't like it when when someone is lying to them...tasers, nightstick, whatever.

      Personally, you sound like the kind of guy the police should protect us from. Too bad that they don't seem to get people with better morals for their own ranks.

      --
      "I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
    4. Re:What's Swedish for 'hypocrite'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "sanctimonious dick"? I guess it takes one to know one. Instead of making silly claims that Egerstad was "hacking email accounts", why don't you actually learn what Egerstad did before showing the world what a fool you are.

  13. Access credentials were sent through his node! by JackHoffman · · Score: 5, Informative

    broke into the global communications network used by embassies around the world in August and gained access to 1000 sensitive email accounts

    He acquired access credentials to 1000 email accounts used by embassies. He did so by becoming an exit node of the TOR anonymizing network and reading the unencrypted exit traffic. That may have been in violation of the law, but does not constitute "breaking into the global communications network used by embassies".

  14. What a moron! by Pedrito · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Look, I don't know if the guy actually broke any laws. It sounds like he might have, but maybe not. On the other hand, intentionally trying to fuck with the police after they arrested him is plain stupid. It doesn't buy you anything except bad will. It's not like the people interrogating him are the ones that made the decision to arrest him. You get pulled in by the police, if you're really not guilty, the only smart thing to do is cooperate. Creating that kind of bad will and then complaining that you might not get your computer equipment back for years, well what do you expect? Shit on people and expect them to shit on you back.

    1. Re:What a moron! by nfractal · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, its already been discussed here pretty much at length and as for taking credit and messing with the police.. i believe he's being plain stupid. Taking credit for a hack and reporting it does NOT mean publishing the entire list of access credentials online. Could have just reported and left to fend for themselves. Dramatic is it ? well he was the one looking for drama in the first place. nf

    2. Re:What a moron! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You get pulled in by the police, if you're really not guilty, the only smart thing to do is cooperate.

      I disagree with that. Get an independent lawyer FIRST! They could be just looking for a goat, and you were fingered. Police generally know so little about computers, and would only look at a geek as a sub-species. The more you talk, the more it can be twisted.

      RIAA for example. Your PC could have been hijacked. No mater what you say you will be viewed as guilty unless you're lucky enough there is enough evidence left to show you were setup and they bother to look for it.

      I have no idea if he is a criminal, but criminal or not, get a good lawyer ASAP. Then cooperate with your lawyers guidance.

    3. Re:What a moron! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      uhh the best thing you can do is shut your mouth if you are hauled in by police. You have no obligation to say anything except your identity. Police will try and manipulate information from you from the second you enter their "interrogation facility". #2 on the list is getting a good lawyer to do the talking, guilty or innocent.

    4. Re:What a moron! by Lazy+Jones · · Score: 1
      On the other hand, intentionally trying to fuck with the police after they arrested him is plain stupid. It doesn't buy you anything except bad will. It's not like the people interrogating him are the ones that made the decision to arrest him. You get pulled in by the police, if you're really not guilty, the only smart thing to do is cooperate.

      Actually, no. There must be limits to the criminal acts of the police one should feel compelled to show good will with. He may be a fool because he feels confident that his country will protect him from malicious acts even of the police force, but you have to stand up for your rights. If those people who are interrogating him are in the least interested in acting lawfully, then they will not harm him for refusing to cooperate with obviously illegal practices. If they are not, then he's screwed anyway...

      --
      "I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
    5. Re:What a moron! by UncleTogie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Creating that kind of bad will and then complaining that you might not get your computer equipment back for years, well what do you expect?

      He might not get the PC back working at ALL.

      A client of mine had to give a medical server over for discovery in an insurance case. After much "analysis" {which turned out to be a bunch of guessing} they returned the box 6 months later... minus hard drive. To this day, neither the insurance company nor "expert witness" will admit that they lost 10 years of patient info and charting.

      Stories like this kill me. If we had a better-informed society, the call wouldn't be "get the hacker!"... It'd be "get the idiot that thought non-encrypted communications between embassies was a good idea"...

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    6. Re:What a moron! by aminorex · · Score: 1

      > You get pulled in by the police, if you're really not guilty, the only smart thing to do is cooperate.

      That's the dumbest fucking thing I've heard this week, and I've been watching youtube links from reddit since Tuesday.

      You get pulled in by the police, it doesn't matter if you're "guilty" or not. Their job is to bust your ass, or use you as a tool to bust someone else's ass. They live to fuck people up. That's all there is to it. If you think fucking people up is smart, cooperate. I'll enjoy the smell of your burning flesh in hell. Actually, since they'll probably just use your "cooperation" as a means of putting you in prison (a bird in the hand being worth two in the bush, after all), I doubt you'll ever merit the intervention of divine retribution. Your cellmate Bubba will do the job of Satan very nicely.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    7. Re:What a moron! by Tom · · Score: 1

      You get pulled in by the police, if you're really not guilty, the only smart thing to do is cooperate. Because we all know that crime statistics are made up of "# of truths uncovered" and "# of innocents set free quickly" and not bullshit like "# of people jailed" and "ratio of convictions".

      The smart thing to do is to appear cooperative, and make sure you don't say a word you don't have to until your lawyer is there.
      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    8. Re:What a moron! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Turn about is fair play. Why did they think that pissing him off, messing with his stuff and trying to scare him with a power play was a good idea? Fucking thugs. It's the only thing they know how to do. Who do you think is more dangerous... the world to him, or him to the world? You don't take someone that has already breached your security once, screw with him just to rile him up, and then let him go. That's about as dumb as it gets.

    9. Re:What a moron! by seandiggity · · Score: 1

      You get pulled in by the police, if you're really not guilty, the only smart thing to do is cooperate.

      Oh yeah, cuz no judicial system ever punishes innocent people or doles out cruel punishment or breaks its own laws. Gimme a break.

      What do you even mean by "cooperate" here? The police and judicial system in any country do NOT have your best interests in mind and police WILL trick you if given the opportunity (in fact, are trained in this way to gather information/provoke responses from the accused). Why do you think it's important to have a good lawyer? I doubt whatever that dude did during interrogation accomplished anything, but I don't see anything wrong with it (perhaps it was unwise, but who knows).

      Fortunately, there's a good manual on protecting your rights in the U.S. when you get arrested. It's written and backed by activists, who deal with police all the time.

      --
      Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.-rms
    10. Re:What a moron! by stry_cat · · Score: 1

      if you're really not guilty, the only smart thing to do is cooperate.
      you obviously haven't watched enough Law & Order. If you're innocent and don't want to spend years in jail, you demand a lawyer immediately before talking to the police. With a good lawyer, you won't fall into any of their traps and won't be held more than a day or two. Of course if you fall for any of their traps, you'll be sent up the river before you even know what happened.
    11. Re:What a moron! by xtracto · · Score: 1

      Bah, I guess your client had no problem as he surely knew she could restore the information from THE BACKUP.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    12. Re:What a moron! by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      Bah, I guess your client had no problem as he surely knew she could restore the information from THE BACKUP.

      ...and if he'd not given *all* material pertaining to that PC {as per court order}, he might've had that backup. Too bad the judge didn't consider that...

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
  15. "Broke into" by dr_d_19 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Dan didn't break into anything. He simply set up a Tor node and watches the traffic passing. Most likely the passwords he sniffed out were not used by Embassy officials but by criminal elements who were using Tor to avoid being caught when using stolen credentials.

    Also, he notified the involved embassies weeks before publishing the material.

    I not saying it was a stupid move (I think it was) but the summary makes him look like a criminal which he is most certainly not. The Swedish police does not understand IT and obviously does whatever foreign countries tell them to do since our political leaders lacks spines.

  16. The first geek to ever be called.... by GodsBlood · · Score: 0

    a HOTY

  17. Just what is he? by Billosaur · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From the article, paragraph 1:

    The Swedish hacker who perpetrated the so-called hack of the year...

    From the article, paragraph 2:

    Dan Egerstad, a security consultant, intercepted data carried over a global communications network...

    Emphasis mine. So what is he? If he's a hacker, the raid is just desserts. If he's a security consultant, and he's exposed this flaw, he's being persecuted. Frankly, I don't know what he really is, but it seems like the press is schizophrenic on this issue. It just goes to show that when it comes to technology, the mainstream press is a bit low on clarity and high on sensationalism.

    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    1. Re:Just what is he? by nfractal · · Score: 1

      About the Mainstream media you're bang on, but Hacking per se isn't a crime. Security consultant or something else, you can attach whatever euphemisms to it -

    2. Re:Just what is he? by bcattwoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Emphasis mine. So what is he? If he's a hacker, the raid is just desserts. If he's a security consultant, and he's exposed this flaw, he's being persecuted. Frankly, I don't know what he really is, but it seems like the press is schizophrenic on this issue. It just goes to show that when it comes to technology, the mainstream press is a bit low on clarity and high on sensationalism.

      If a locksmith breaks into your home by picking your locks, he is still a burglar.
    3. Re:Just what is he? by Billosaur · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't usually reply to my own stuff, but here's Wired's report on the raid and what Egerstad actually did.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    4. Re:Just what is he? by Jizzbug · · Score: 1

      Security consultant and hacker are not mutually exclusive. As a matter of fact, why would you pay for a security consultant that wasn't a hacker? What good can he do? Hacker is to security consultant as programmer is to developer.

      The media is actually using a few terms correctly in this story, even if they got it wrong as to what Dan really did. It is you that is confusing terminologies and has bought into schizophrenic re-definition of words by the press.

      --

      -=/\- Jizzbug -/\=-
    5. Re:Just what is he? by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      I am not confusing anything. In fact, the tech community in general cannot agree on a solid definition of hacking. After all, he did not "hack" anything -- e.g. brute force his way into any system. He set up a Tor node and sniffed some packets, information that was already released into the wild via network. He was able to take this data and pull out pertinent information -- which might be part of the more popular definition of a "hack". The fact is, the word "hack", "hacker", or "hacking" should not be used at all. If he is a security consultant, then he explored a network vulnerability, published his results, and apparently drew the ire of foreign governments for showing them that using Tor for secret communications was not a good idea. A "hacker" as I define it, would have taken that data and used it for nefarious purposes, which he clearly did not.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    6. Re:Just what is he? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he's a burglar if he steals something.

      He might pick the locks to kill you, making him happy to accept your imaginary charge of burglary if he's caught.

      Thus proving the OPs point - you decided the crime before knowing what the crime was.

    7. Re:Just what is he? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He didn't break into anything, moron. He set himself up as tor exit node (legal), sniffed packets being routed through his machine (legal, as it his property), collected credentials, but did not use them to access systems where he had no authorization (legal), and then sent warnings to those embassies personel who were using passing their credentials through tor insecurely (legal). And the last thing is really what this raid is about. Basically, he alerted people to the fact that just because you use tor, it doesn't mean that your traffic is secure. And that pisses off all of the government intelligence/law enforcement services that are doing exactly what he did. Except now, those embassies aren't using tor anymore, or encrypting the traffic before it goes into tor, which make it harder for the governmental agencies to snoop.

      The raid is nothing more than a retaliation ploy designed to intimidate independent security researchers.

    8. Re:Just what is he? by bcattwoo · · Score: 1

      No, he's a burglar if he steals something.

      He might pick the locks to kill you, making him happy to accept your imaginary charge of burglary if he's caught.

      Thus proving the OPs point - you decided the crime before knowing what the crime was. You're right, it would be more correct to call it breaking and entering. The point remains that just because he has a legitimate day job as a security consultant does not automatically make his actions into a "free consultation".
    9. Re:Just what is he? by bcattwoo · · Score: 1

      The locksmith example was a poor choice. The OP however tried to make it sound like if he couldn't be a "security consultant" and yet also a "hacker".

    10. Re:Just what is he? by Tranzistors · · Score: 1

      If you send your messages using operational telephone and one node happens to remember what is said, informs you that every bloody node heard what you said and to top it all, says to others "hey, I heard what those guys said", than he certainly is equivalent to burglar.

    11. Re:Just what is he? by rthomanek · · Score: 1

      If a locksmith breaks into your home by picking your locks, he is still a burglar. If a locksmith picks your locks, he is not necessarily a burglar, nor is he breaking into your house.
    12. Re:Just what is he? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      besides, that would make him a "systems cracker" not a "computer hacker" ...

    13. Re:Just what is he? by deafpluckin · · Score: 1

      If a locksmith breaks into your home by picking your locks, he is still a burglar.
      Your analogy, though correct, does not apply. He did not break in to any thing, he mearly found all the keys for the locks laying around in a public place.
    14. Re:Just what is he? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you ask a locksmith to pass a note to your friend and he reads it, he shouldn't be sent to jail for it.

    15. Re:Just what is he? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You have two neighbours on either side of you who communicate using bullhorns, so that everyone can hear them. You usually wear mufflers, but you decide to take them off, and now you can hear them too. In fact, many people wear mufflers, not hearing what is going on, but a few, (and more and more) decide to take off their mufflers and hear what is going on.

      If you want secure communications, then you shouldn't be using bullhorns. It is not the fault of the people wearing mufflers that they can hear you when they decide to take off their mufflers to listen to say, music, but hear you as well.

    16. Re:Just what is he? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neither. He's just a somewhat knowledgable webmaster, with no real knowledge about computer security or hacking. He's trying to make a name for himself.

    17. Re:Just what is he? by Anonamused+Cow-herd · · Score: 1
      Neat article. This really stood out to me:

      As I mentioned in August, a reporter for the Indian Express newspaper was able to access the e-mail account belonging to India's ambassador to China and obtained the transcript of a meeting between the embassador and the Chinese foreign minister.
      So let's get this straight -- you're arresting the dude who sniffed information that legit clients CHOSE to send to him via Tor, and this "journalist" gets a free pass? That's about the MOST illegal thing I can possibly imagine. Plus, he's probably violating a lot MORE laws since its his own ambassador (countries tend to get pissy about stolen confidential diplomatic information). Amazing.
      --
      -----[0_o]-----
      We are not amused.
    18. Re:Just what is he? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the press is schizophrenic.

      Hope they take their medicine then (if needed).

    19. Re:Just what is he? by BoothbyTCD · · Score: 1

      What about the guy who stands outside your house with a catchers mitt and catches the keys you toss out the window?

      --
      snig
  18. Yes it's illegal by emj · · Score: 1

    I would think so, of course as long as no one can probe you are doing it, it should be fine. If you lend you computer to someone and sniff his traffic, that's going to be illegal, same thing. The question is if your intent is to inform people, does that make it less illegal. Of course it does, now being called a hacker certainly doesn't help.

    Information wants to be free.

    1. Re:Yes it's illegal by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      I'm afraid sniffing packets going across YOUR network interface is in no way illegal.
      At least not in the USA... not yet anyway.
      Otherwise it'd be illegal to reverse engineer protocols, or even use ethereal or whatever the hell it's called today.
      Thanks for playing.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    2. Re:Yes it's illegal by emj · · Score: 1

      Are you sure, I would say you can readbytes off a interface you own, but reading personal data is another matter. This is why EFF wants to sue AT&T for wiretapping the entire US population, are yu saying what AT&T is legal?

  19. Dramatic Raid indeed by Zedrick · · Score: 4, Informative

    I live a few hundred meters from his home, and was woken up that day, not by my useless alarm clock, but by sirens from 7 or 8 police cars heading in the direction of his apartment. From the TFA it seems like the were a bit more discreet when moving in on him, so I guess this was some kind of show of force to intimidate him, and his neighbours. Wouldn't surprise me, considering how the TPB-raid was done.

    1. Re:Dramatic Raid indeed by KimmoV · · Score: 1
      Oh give the Swedish police a break. This is the first time they got to use sirens in a potential spy-case since the russian sub beached in Sweden http://compunews.com/s139/sp2.htm

      Where's the fun in policing if you can't run your sirens obscenely early in the morning at least once during your career!!

      --
      This text has been written completely with recycled bits and bytes.
    2. Re:Dramatic Raid indeed by KimmoV · · Score: 1

      well of course there was the Palme thingy...but still

      --
      This text has been written completely with recycled bits and bytes.
  20. MOD PARENT UP by MadMidnightBomber · · Score: 1

    The guy did not 'break into' anything - he dumped passwords as they flowed through HIS tor exit node. Tor obfuscates the origin, it does not encrypt the traffic for you. The summary is very, very wrong.

    --
    "It doesn't cost enough, and it makes too much sense."
  21. so... the criminal cops in sweden want to hack too by Lazy+Jones · · Score: 1
    looks like those illegally acting cops just wanted a cheap way of getting their sweaty hands on Egerstad's code. It would be so cool to be able to spy on all those foreign guys, eh?

    --
    "I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
  22. Zero Cool would understand. by CleverScreenName · · Score: 1

    HACK THE PLANET!!!

    Yes, I still love that movie.
    Yes, I know it was horrible.

  23. ... not a hacker ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    breaking into shit that you don't own isn't a hacker. he might be a hacker, but breaking the law isn't a "hacker" activity.

    Just like killing someone with a meat clever doesn't represent the chef'ing kind of activity.

  24. Troll or idiot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think both. There are already too many like you at the police. Bah.

  25. A dramatic raid... by east+coast · · Score: 5, Funny

    [knock at the door]

    Police: Open this door! Thou art a felon wanted for many counts of villainy against the citizenry of this fair nation!

    Dan: How now!? Am I to be jailed? What can I do but beg for the mercy of The Crown?!?!

    [Dan weeps loudly]
    [Viola music plays a sad song in the background]
    [Dan slumps over a b0x3n]

    Dan: I am ruined. Farewell, my tools of crime, for you are sure to meet a worse fate than I in our common traitorous endeavors.

    [The door breaks in, an officer enters the room and grabs Dan by the shoulder with nightstick in hand]
    [Fades to black]


    Oh, you mean a different kind of dramatic. Sorry, sorry.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    1. Re:A dramatic raid... by BlueParrot · · Score: 1

      [Viola music plays a sad song in the background]

      Man, I had Secret Garden playing when I read that... the combined effect was quite awesome. Thanks...
    2. Re:A dramatic raid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dan: I am ruined. Farewell, my tools of crime, for you are sure to meet a worse fate than I in our common traitorous endeavors.

      [The door breaks in, an officer enters the room and grabs Dan by the shoulder with nightstick in hand]
      [Fades to black] [Fade in to a small computer shop 1 year later]

      [The evil computer hacker Dan has been safely jailed away. His confiscated computer was auctioned off, purchased by a local elementary school]

      The hired technician inserts the Windows Vista installation CD into the drive and clicks continue...

    3. Re:A dramatic raid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot "forsooth". Try again, and this time in iambic pentameter.

    4. Re:A dramatic raid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well done man!!

    5. Re:A dramatic raid... by idontgno · · Score: 1

      There's a fine line between drama and melodrama.. And you flew right over it without even braking. Well played.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  26. how soon/easily we forget by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    robbIE is likely just another victim of the whoreabull corepirate nazi pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphucking mass hypenosys.

  27. Your good natured intent is clouding your thinking by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Diplomats are often dealing with people seeking asylum for humanitarian reasons. They also deal with local and international law enforcement and sometimes the military. In any one of those cases leaked information could have gotten someone killed. This guy didn't expose the logins and passwords of MySpace accounts. Then there's the consideration that he very well may have violated several privacy/confidentiality laws as well.

    I don't think you realize just how serious what this guy did is.

    --
    Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
  28. Government raids by killerkalamari · · Score: 2, Interesting

    People are always looking to the government to protect them. Who protects you from the government? My biggest fear in my home isn't some criminal breaking in, it's a stupid government raid that possibly gets me or one of my family members killed, or all the programs I've written in my entire life being confiscated. Perhaps some would say I shouldn't be afraid because I'm not hacking or doing anything (that I know of) that's illegal, but I am a programmer, so nevertheless it hangs over my head. I hate those who favor strong and intrusive government and want to "send a message"; it is you who should die, all of you! I won't miss you.

    "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."o7

  29. Re:Your good natured intent is clouding your think by spleen_blender · · Score: 1

    All of the information he gathered was virtually publicly accessible already though! Anyone who DID have malicious intent and the knowhow had the information already.

  30. The solution is simple by Bryansix · · Score: 1

    These kind of Hacks should still be committed to show security flaws or simply when people implement things incorrectly which leads to a flaw in the security. The thing is when the evidence is collected that a security hole exists the Black Hat should anonymously submit that evidence to thousands of websites simultaneously. And they should use Tor. Ya it doesn't prevent traffic from being intercepted but they still can't figure out where it came from. That way the government doesn't have anywhere to direct their misguided raids. In addition the security hole will hopefully be fixed.

  31. Bush Reaction by nfractal · · Score: 1

    He has a definite link to the Islamic fundamentalist groups operating in Iran who were responsible for various US embassy bombings. We need to defend our way of life and of our childrens with all the peoples of the world. Some of the accounts have information containing Weapons of Mass Destruction which Iran as been acquiring which will lead to a third world war. The Swedish security service is our ally towards counter terrorism and we hope they will join the alliance for our War on Terror.

  32. DOH! by lord3nd3r · · Score: 1

    When will people ever learn that IF/When you do a legit hack, you DO NOT talk about it! If you do it for a company (ASK FIRST) (So you dont get sued) and NEVER do government and or police systems.. unless your using tor. errmm nvm xD

    --
    g0t b33r?
  33. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The concept that the police should restrict itself in its use of force to what is absolutely necessary and in its prying to what is relevant to the case is a very important foundation of the justice state.
    The police are not there to punish people. Indeed that is the job of the courts etc. and everything on top of that is therefore totally unjustified. People like Grandparent don't actually care about justice; they just enjoy seeing other people getting a beatdown. Because they assume that naturally it will never be they who get it.

  34. Excellent, truly excellent by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 1

    Funniest post I've seen on Slashdot this year! Truly excellent. Well done!

  35. Hackers won't resist arrest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So they are easier.

    As long as they are "blue collar" white collar workers, they have no money for solicitors, no connections to make trouble and aren't causing what people would expect to be criminal acts so aren't hiding their malfeasance.

    Blue collar crims will shoot you and have money to get out of it. Rich people will sue you and get out of it. The connected will screw your life over and get out of it. So the Joe Hacker is an easy collar. In much the same way as bad parking drivers and people caught in speed traps.

  36. Re:Your good natured intent is clouding your think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Diplomats are often dealing with people seeking asylum for humanitarian reasons. They also deal with local and international law enforcement and sometimes the military. In any one of those cases leaked information could have gotten someone killed.

    Newsflash for ya, If that was the case then these people are already dead. Do you think this guy was the only one who thought of sniffing TOR traffic? Organizations/Governments/Terrorists(have to throw in the terrorist buzz word) are more than likely sniffing their own TOR exit node long before this guy made headlines.

  37. Re:Your good natured intent is clouding your think by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    Which probably made him the most wanted man on (the/this) Earth. Wanted not just by Interpol, or a few DOZEN countries, but maybe a few HUNDRED countries. He should have put asterisks back in the passwords and fuzzed the names. Shouldn't have exposed the email, nor the user contacts in those e-mails.

    However, once the various governments were apprised, they ALL had a DUTY, and a moral obligation to close the holes. Make the users change names and passwords. Lock them out until they reported to the cognizant embassy or "outpost" and recertified credentials to prevent or minimize the risk of unauthorized breach by opportunists or the insertion of unaccounted for persons by the more unscrupulous of nations trying to insert agents, assassins and provocateurs into the network.

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  38. "Cracker" ... "Crack-of-year" ... etc by zabala · · Score: 1

    Semantics for some, a way of life for others!

  39. Security Flaws by ansonmage · · Score: 1

    Leaving your key in the door doesn't make it right for the next person who finds them to just walk into your house. Was it dumb to leave the keys in the door? Undoubtedly. Was it wrong for the intruder to enter unlawfully anyway? Yes. The problem here is that the guy "opened the door" looked around and listened and then went and told people about how the door was unlocked and they could just open it and listen in. Sounds like the problem here isn't that he shouldn't have done it, but more that he shouldn't have opened his mouth about it. PS - Hacking MySpace should be no less of a crime than hacking the embassy. If its ok to exploit MySpace by not the government then we have created a huge double standard and rift in the justice system. Typically, I'd say that knowing how to do something doesn't mean that you should do it, but then again the Hacker's Manifesto does state that it should be hacked simply because its there.

    1. Re:Security Flaws by the_lesser_gatsby · · Score: 1

      People were voluntarily using his computer as a tor exit node. He didn't open their doors, they opened his and dumped their data in. He can sniff whatever he likes on his own computer. No one is forced to use tor.

  40. Insightful my arse! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What idiot modded that remark insightful? It completely ignores the fact that he did try, try, try to get them to react without publishing the information and that he only went ahead with it because nothing was being done.

  41. Re:What a moron! - bad advice by dude-xyz · · Score: 2, Informative

    Saying anything to cops without a lawyer at your side is generally stupid, even when you honestly believe you have not done anything wrong. It is not smart thing to "cooperate." I am a US lawyer, and I am basing this comment on US rights/laws; I don't know the laws in Sweden but I suspect the concepts are similar. In the (US) criminal system you can almost never to forced to answer any interrogation questions, other than your identity. Virtually every lawyer would advise not to volunteer answers that may later be used against you. This advise is true whether you are under arrest (not free to walk away) or not. The only real (non-Gitmo) exceptions to this 'don't ever talk rule' are testimony on the stand in court and before grand juries. Very few people seem to fully understand this right to shut up. The only conversation with cops should be: "I have nothing to say to you [without a lawyer present]." The original post is correct in saying you should never intentionally piss of the cops, except to say you will not talk to them. In the US, this 'non-cooperation' can not be used against you, but anything else you say can be twisted out of context. In the US many, including so called suspected terrorists as well as Scooter Libby, have been convicted of lying to cops (a crime) when they voluntarily answer questions. Even in the (non-Gitmo) military context, people are only required to give name, rank and serial number. Things get crazy in the so called war against terror where different rules apply to non-criminal and non-military cases under George W's watch. At least as of today waterboarding for alleged hackers for info is not routine yet. Unfortunately, in the US the Patriot Act might allow authorities to secretly break in, copy his hard drives, and install a key logger. If this were the US, and it was not, Edgarstad's lawyer could force the government to go forward with a speedy trial before a jury, typically within 30 days, or dismiss the charges. If the government case requires computer forensics and "talking to other countries" then they are unlikely to be able to move fast enough. If the government is really just trying to improve computer security (yea, right) then Edgarstad could be offered complete immunity for his voluntary cooperation, but again this should only be done through a lawyer.

  42. This was NOT a hack. by miffo.swe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This guy is a very good security consultant that has been around for a while. This is not the first leak he has discovered and tried to warn people, Dan discovered that his home DSL was going slow and started sniffing out the traffic from his ISP. He quickly discovered that the ISP sent him traffic from about 4000 other customers on 16 different subnets! He could see everything on the network. This very time he had setup a tor link and started sniffing out the traffic, just as NSA does in the US on their large tor links. What he found was countless passwords and other sensitive stuff floating around. He found large amounts of usernames and password floating by all the time. No doubt this was from a hacker/foreign security intelligence that used tor for anynomity. The fact that most passwords was from governments like Iran, Russia and other countries not in the US "group" suggests this was US spying in progress. The fact that Swedish "Säpo" (intelligence is not the right word for theese people) was pressured into action against something thats not a crime at all in sweden also makes one wonders what is going on. It seems people are dissatisfied that this leak was made public. I doubt the people being hacked was miffed at Dan for showing them that someone was spying on them. Now that they know and secure their communications, maybe with stringent encryption and backdoor free open source, i do now one country that will be angry.

    --
    HTTP/1.1 400
  43. Sweden... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The North Korea of Europe. Truly a grim and oppressive country. So glad I don't live there.

  44. Hey .. I know .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about you dont let your government/agencies use crypt technologies that arent run by themselves. How silly, Im going to trust an encryption method which entails me using random user machines, when my data leaves the node unencrypted. Seriously the accusers should be jailed for being idiots.

  45. It is correct .... by OldHawk777 · · Score: 1

    It is politically correct to not cause a problem, ignorance is bliss.

    It is criminal/troublesome to report problems, but ignorance is bliss and politically correct.

    No faults/problems found/reported in a politically correct blissful world means there is not a problem.

    A world without problems is proof of safety/security and politically marketable to public bliss.

    When a bridge collapses, a city gets drowned, large buildings collapse ... is it due to bliss or problems?

    Send all problem reporters to jail, then we know that bliss is the cause of all catastrophes, because there ain't no GDMF problems.

    Surprise catastrophes (due to bliss) are forgivable, spin-truth political capital for USAll.

    --
    Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
  46. Crackers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We've got some crackers here in Louisiana, but they don't know much 'bout them computers.

  47. What's that they say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Although listening to TOR traffic is hardly exceptional, but the point he proved without malicious intent was.


    The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

    Seriously though, there's nothing exceptional about a criminal. Like it or not, you break the law, that makes you a criminal. There are well known methods of dealing with criminals, which this guy knew and brought on himself.

    Exceptional would have been making his point without breaking the law. This is run of the mill law breaking trying to disguise itself as "security consulting".
  48. Re:What a moron! - bad advice by JustJim0183 · · Score: 1

    I'm not a lawyer but as I read the Patriot Act, it seems to me had he done this in the us and had it been deemed an "act of terrorism" he could be subject to the death penalty.

  49. Grammar Nazi attack! Have great fear! by porpnorber · · Score: 1

    Good grief, man! If b0x3n is now singular, what's the plural? B0x3nZ? B0x3s3n? Or is it now ueberGermanic and something like b03x3n3n? :)

    1. Re:Grammar Nazi attack! Have great fear! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      b0x3n is its own plural, like sheep. Of course, a Grammar Nazi knowing fundamental rules of grammar just wouldn't be right.

    2. Re:Grammar Nazi attack! Have great fear! by east+coast · · Score: 1

      Not a very good grammar Nazi. It's "uber" not "ueber".

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    3. Re:Grammar Nazi attack! Have great fear! by porpnorber · · Score: 1

      Extremely good grammar Nazi. I was spelling it in German. The two little dots above the u can be rendered as a following e when diacritics are not available. Go and look it up.

    4. Re:Grammar Nazi attack! Have great fear! by east+coast · · Score: 1

      Über. Are umlauts such a hard problem? :)

      Seriously, I've never seen about doing umlaut replacements. But then again I've never had a situation where I needed to replace an umlaut.

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    5. Re:Grammar Nazi attack! Have great fear! by porpnorber · · Score: 1

      Used to live in Germany. Didn't always have Unicode. It's actually the official thing to do in that situation. But I still find mousing the thing off the character picker ridiculous. I don't know why we don't have a universal unicode input method on these things - it's not as if we're short of shift keys nowadays (even as an Emacs junkie and a believer in dedicating a shift state to the window manager, I would still happily sacrifice right-Alt and that stupid menu key to the cause - if I could get something for them that I wanted to use).

    6. Re:Grammar Nazi attack! Have great fear! by east+coast · · Score: 1

      Ü - Alt 154 is your friend.

      Ö (so is Alt 153, BTW...)

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    7. Re:Grammar Nazi attack! Have great fear! by porpnorber · · Score: 1

      Ah, you must have one of those huge keyboards with a numeric keypad - and a chart of obscure numeric codes on the wall! ;)

  50. -stad by danEger · · Score: 1

    Is this some sort of a bad joke?

  51. 4chan by tute666 · · Score: 1

    These are the email accounts that were posted on 4chan? By the way, why do embassies use Tor?

  52. Re:What happened? by lawn.ninja · · Score: 1

    You are arguing semantics here boss. No one in the main stream cares to make the distinction and that is where the branding of the term will ultimately come from. You can fight for proper word useage all you want, but I'd like to think there are better things to worry about than a coined term that means little to nothing.

  53. Re:Your good natured intent is clouding your think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Diplomats, governments, militaries kill people. Perhaps what he exposed SAVED a few people from, oh, I dunno, idiot governments in Darfur, or Burma, or North Korea, or...the USA.

    I don't think you realize how governments work...

  54. Spammer? Con artist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One can only hope Mr Egerstad was arrested because of his activities as a suspected spammer and con artist rather than the silly suggestion that this dork has done any work what so ever in the field of computer security.

    See for instance http://gratislotten.se/, one of his many sites.

  55. Swredish papers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interesting I have to read about this in an Australian paper instead of all the swedish papers I read each morning. I havent seen a word about this here so either its been silenced or its just a duck.