Feds Bust Cable Modem Hacker

Several readers noted the indictment of hardware hacker Ryan Harris, known as DerEngel. Harris wrote the 2006 book Hacking the Cable Modem, explaining how to get upgraded speed or even free Internet service by bypassing the firmware locks on Motorola Surfboard modems. He has run a profitable business at tcniso.net since 2003, selling unlocked cable modems. (The site is now offline.) Harris has been charged with conspiracy, aiding and abetting computer intrusion, and wire fraud. Wired quotes Harris's reaction: "I read the indictment — it's complete bull****. I'll tell you right now I'm not going to plead guilty."

Comments

Re:That sucks, sort of.

[mysidia]

So failing to "properly moderate" your forums is a criminal offense now?

Even slashdot has anonymous cowards, and I doubt they'd delete posts discussing such matters, unless ordered to (by DMCA letter or similar), even if the score was -1, same difference....

Re:I wish I saw this earlier

[DJRumpy]

That might have worked, if he wasn't actually selling the hacked modems.

Re:What!?

[wizardforce]

Selling bullets is one thing, selling bullets knowing that it'll end up being used to murder someone specific is quite another. The problem is that it may be difficult to prove the equivalent here. *disclaimer I'm only explaining what I think the GP's position is in regards to aiding and abetting*

Re:What!?

[WilliamX]

A shoplifter is told that the court will look positively on his cooperation after being arested, and then is asked did he intend to steal the item(s) when he entered the store, or did he decide to steal them once inside the store.

He admits he went there to steal the item.

Petting theft just turned into Felony Commercial Burglary (Burglary being defined in California Penal Code as entering a premises with the intent to commit larceny).

Will it get pled down? Now he HAS to plea it down and take whatever they offer to avoid a felony record.

Saw this exact scenario play out when a college student was busted stealing a $20 CD.

Re:What!?

[Moryath]

And that's a great example of why you should never talk to the cops. EVER.

It's not their job to be fair. It's their job to get you to say something incriminating. Functionally, it's the cops' job to "aid and abet" the prosecutors' office in getting innocent people convicted.

Anyone who says different, is a clueless idealistic moron. You have the 5th amendment right to keep your mouth shut for a reason: NEVER say anything to the cops.

Re:What!?

[rhook]

This may come as a shocker but the body armor police use wont stop most rifle rounds. "Cop Killer" bullets are a myth.

Re:What!?

[tftp]

So if I am a gun store owner, and I believe someone is going to murder someone, is it illegal for me to sell them bullets?

IANAL, but your belief alone requires you to do something to prevent the murder. Practically, you should call police and give them the facts. As I understand, it is illegal to know about the future crime and keep that knowledge to yourself.

In other words, if the customer says "Ten 9mm rounds, please, I need to accidentally kill my business partner" you certainly shouldn't sell him what he asks for, even if he is joking. Considering the venue, you may well be expected to do a citizen's arrest (many gun store clerks are armed.)

If someone later (after the murder) can show that I knew about the murderer's intention and I sold the bullets anyway, can I be sent to prison?

Most definitely, IMO, as an accomplice. There was a recent case (a week ago) when, IIRC, three street thugs conspired to kill someone; one obtained the gun, another fired it, and third disposed of the weapon. All three got prison terms.

Re:What!?

[tomhudson]

There is always a pre-sentence report, often a psychological assessment, etc. There is no procedural difference between a case where the defendant pleads guilty and where he pleads not guilty, and the defendant can change his plea at almost any stage of the trial. Occasionally, a judge will refuse to accept a Guilty plea from the defendant, insisting he wait until the evidence has been presented.

Nice try, but not really accurate. In cases of summary convictions, there are no pre-sentencing reports, no psych assessment, etc. Also, there is no right to trial by jury for summary offences.

Canada has plenty of these dual-mode or hybrid offences, where the person can be charged for the same crime either by summary procedure (less serious) or by indictment (more serious).

Here's the Federal Prosecution Service Handbook.

19.2 Crown Elections in Dual Procedure Offences

In dual procedure offences, Crown counsel has the discretion to proceed by summary conviction or indictment. This discretion allows Crown counsel the flexibility of taking the specific circumstances of a case into account to ensure that in each case the interests of justice, including the public's interest in the effective enforcement of the criminal law, are best served.

19.2.1 Statement of Policy

When deciding whether to proceed summarily or by indictment, Crown counsel shall examine the circumstances surrounding the offence and the background of the accused. The following factors are of particular importance:

• whether the facts alleged make the offence a serious one;
• whether the accused has a lengthy criminal record or a record of criminal convictions for similar types of offences;
• the sentence that will be recommended by Crown counsel in the event of a conviction;
• the effect that having to testify at both a preliminary inquiry and a trial may have on victims or witnesses (if procedure by indictment is chosen, this may lead to the preferral of a direct indictment; and
• whether it would not be in the public interest to have a trial by jury.

If the accused is charged with a number of offences arising out of the same transaction, Crown counsel should consider entering elections that avoid a multiplicity of litigation. Such a course may benefit the accused, by reducing his or her court appearances, as well as serving the interests of the administration of justice. This approach will be beneficial not only at the trial level, but also in the event of an appeal.

Where, based on the above criteria, Crown counsel would normally elect to proceed summarily but the limitation period for a summary proceeding has expired, Crown counsel should not elect to proceed by indictment unless:

• the accused contributed significantly to the delay;
• the investigative agency acted with due diligence but the investigation continued beyond the limitation period because of the complexity of the case;
• the particular circumstances of the offence did not come to light until shortly before or at some time after the limitation period expired, and the offence is serious;
• the accused has refused to give consent, pursuant to s. 786 of the Criminal Code, to have the matter proceed by summary conviction; or
• the public interest otherwise warrants prosecution

It's only in trials by indictment that the defendant has the right to choose either a trial by judge and jury, or judge alone, so there are definitely options for how to proceed, for both the prosecution and the defence, and there's just as much bargaining going on as in the US. Bargaining, for example, to being charged via summation rather than indictment, in return for a guilty plea, and a lesser range of penalties (summary convictions are like "punishment lite"). Same as plea bargaining anywhere else.

Re:What's this have to do with my rights online?

[Datamonstar]

RTFA. He ceased criminal activities long ago and now simply sells the unlocked routers. They got him on conspiracy and aiding and abetting computer intrusion and wire fraud because someone bought a router from his group's site and used it to get unlawful access to internet. The biggest piece of evidence beside all that is a post he made on his forum asking for a valid MAC address. Supposedly, just because he (allegedly) asked for the MAC add, he committed all 6 crimes he was convicted of. That's bullshit, he's fighting it and I would too. Definitely a "your rights' issue.

Re:What!?

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Not to my knowledge. If you know someone is planning a crime, then sure, you are obligated not to help them, but in the general case, you have no duty to report it. Here's some random internet discussion on the subject: link link. Nothing I could find mentions mere knowledge of planned felonies - all refs required concealment or aiding in commission of the crime.

Re:What!?

[swillden]

Apparently you've never seen AP or teflon(illgeal in 90% of places) coated rounds.

Teflon has nothing to do with bullets' armor piercing capabilities or lack thereof. The reason some AP bullets are coated in Teflon is because they have very hard jackets and the Teflon reduces wear on the gun barrel.

Teflon coatings are not illegal under federal law; the federal anti-AP ammunition statutes focus on the jacket and core composition, not on coatings. There are a handful of states which ban the coatings.

for awhile the talons were very popular until they were outlawed as well.

The Winchester Black Talons are not and were not armor piercing. They were pretty normal jacketed hollowpoints, coated with Lubalox (not Teflon) which gave them the black color. Black Talons were voluntarily removed from the market by Winchester, but have never been banned in any jurisdiction. Winchester replaced them with the very similar Ranger SXT round, which doesn't include the Lubalox coating. Winchester does use the coating on some rifle rounds.

Re:I wish I saw this earlier

[mcgrew]

For a more accurate analogy however, if your alterations somehow caused you to stop paying taxes for the roads, then yes, that would too be illegal.

There was a guy here in central Illinois last year that was making his own biodeisel out of used cooking oil he collected from local restaraunts. They didn't have to pay for disposal of the oil and he didn't have to buy fuel.

He got in trouble for not paying the state's motor vehicle tax, which is collected at the pump.

So your analogy is 100% correct; it's happened.