Slashdot Mirror
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."
Gun sellers have powerful lobbyists on their payroll guaranteeing that the government will not interfere with their profits.
It's called "padding the charges to try to force a plea deal", and it's one of the reasons our justice system is so fucked up.
Thousands of people plead guilty to shit they didn't do each year, because they're offered the "reasonable" alternative - accept a jail sentence of X amount, OR get 5x the time and financially ruined and never be able to work again because they had the "temerity" to protest their innocence.
Welcome to America. "Justice" means jack shit here.
The act of defrauding the cable provider is illegal but the instructions for the hack that may or may not allow this type of fraud apparently has legal uses as well. Tools are neither good nor evil, the manner in which you use them is what determines the ethics of using those tools. A shovel can help plant a garden and it can also be used for murder, that doesn't mean the shovel is evil, just the use of the shovel for evil purposes.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
Who cares? The powers our government have assumed for themselves in the name of "fighting the War on Terrorism" won't be given up even if they catch "Terrorist #1" Osama.
Osama is more useful to power-hungry US politicians when he is free to roam than dead or captured.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
Yes, but if you provide the tools while actively enabling and encouraging people, then you are aiding and abetting, which is what he was charged with.
What has the DMCA got to do with this case?
Fran
:):):)
1st 1st Poster of the new Millennium!
As it is, when we have thieves in suits on Wall Street bleeding us dry like giant money-sucking leaches, contractors in war zones raping their employees and getting our soldiers killed, terrorists trying to infiltrate our borders and THIS is what federal prosecutors are doing with their time? Some joker modifying cable modems. You gotta be f'ing kidding me.
What makes you think that the government is only targeting these cases and completely ignoring the others you mentioned?
Instructions on how to use (or modify) a tool are instructions on how to use or modify a tool. Nothing more.
"Illegal" (e.g. not-street-legal) modifications to a car? Done for racing, confined to racing tracks, A-OK. Same thing taken to the street? Not ok. How about utilities that can help you repair your own X-box if it has a dead hard drive? Also plausibly able to "softmod" it, but repairing your own things is a legit use. Should it be illegal?
Criminalizing the dissemination of information is ridiculous no matter what.
If they can prove beyond reasonable doubt that you sold bullets and a gun to a person you believed was going to use them to kill someone, then yes, you could be charged with a crime.
Since there are so many legitimate uses for guns, and the gun lobby is so powerful, and it's nearly impossible to prove beyond reasonable doubt that you thought whoever you were selling a gun to was going to use it for non-illegal means, it's very unlikely for this to happen.
Criminalizing the dissemination of information is ridiculous no matter what.
BINGO! As soon as you peel back the line on this one, you open up a grey area of ridiculous criminalization. The modem itself, modified, is like a VCR, a gun, a car, or a goat. Sure, there are illegal things that you can do with all of them, and some of them are really best used for illegal purposes (hint... not the goat). Still, that shouldn't make the provision of these things illegal. It's information or a tool. It's intent agnostic.
Now, the instruction can indeed constitute participation in a crime, but telling someone to go do something is way different than telling someone how to go do something.
Example:
Hey, Joey, go kill that guy.
or
Hey, Joey, if you shoot someone in the face, they will probably die.
Emmanuel Goldstein would agree
He was innocent of what he was accused of. Being charged with a crime that the police and prosecutors know you did not commit is being charged with a crime that you are innocent of.
No, if he did in reality go there with the intention of stealing the $20 CD, in that state it would in fact be "Felony Commercial Burglary (Burglary being defined in California Penal Code as entering a premises with the intent to commit larceny)". The police simply dropped it to a smaller petty theft (at the same time making it stick without a costly court case) as it was indeed a $20 CD.
I am probably in a minority here, but I think the police acted in the right way, the person got what they should have gotten. The punishment for petty theft for committing petty theft.
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
Modifying equipment to get a higher level of service than was paid for is, in fact, stealing. Morally and legally.
Uh, no. Modifying equipment is not stealing, especially when its your own damn property.
Using that equipment to steal is stealing.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
More accurately:
Car analogy.
You go to the gas station. You go inside and pay for $20 in gas. You go back to the pump, and modify it to give you $40 in gas instead.
Utility analogy.
The water company installs a meter at your house, to keep track of the water you use and charge you for it. You modify the meter to only report half of what you use.
Really, if you're going to use bad analogies, at least try to make them remotely accurate.
I agree with the spirit of what you say, but I'm blown back by what you actually said.
It's bad for civilians to prepare themselves to kill cops.
If cops prepare to kill civilians, well, that's ok.
Modding me -1 troll doesn't make me wrong.
Simple - he's then in a position to prove his claim that he's a legitimate supplier of legitimate goods, as acknowledged by experts in the industry purchasing and using his equipment.
Example:
Your client is arrested and charged with being in the possession of tools to facilitate crime, specifically a pry bar, which is used by burglars, and a body dent puller, which is used by car thieves to pop car locks. Also, a mask with filters, so he's also suspected of terrorism.
Your client then produces multiple invoices showing that he owns and runs a legitimate automotive garage, and those are just common tools of the trade - and the mask is OSHA-mandated safety equipment for anyone using a paint booth.
Heck, in Texas it's illegal to walk around with a pair of wire cutters in your back pocket - "might be used for cattle rustling." So what are they going to do - arrest electricians on house calls? They're in violation of the law, but the application of the law doesn't make sense in that context. Electricians need wire cutters.
In this case, though, he also posted a notice asking for a MAC address for a specific network. The operator of a network buying test equipment would already have these. That's an indication he's guilty, at the very least, in one specific case. He'll be smart to squawk loudly as a tactic to get a plea bargain, and that's what he's doing.
Ok for one, the FBI is not the agency that would be going after Osama. The FBI is the federal government's primary police force. As a police force, they are concerned with domestic matters. They deal with things inside the US. They do not chase people in other countries, they don't have any jurisdiction there. To the extent they operate at all in foreign countries, it is as legal attaches and such to give advice and support to local law enforcement.
Second, while this may be an alien concept to single-minded geeks, people and most especially organizations/agencies can and do work on more than one thing at one. Just because a group is working on X does not mean they cannot also be working on Y. You want this, particularly in the case of law enforcement. I mean my local police force has unsolved murders, a couple quite old. However I do not want them devoting 100% of their assets to that. I am glad they also spend time looking at current burglaries, assaults, and even simple things like directing traffic when a traffic light breaks. Just because there's an open murder case doesn't mean I want them ignoring all their other duties.
Finally, it may amaze you to learn this, but there are plenty of places hostile to America that someone might hide. When the people there don't like the US, and when it is completely and totally outside of the US's jurisdiction, it makes it real hard to do anything there. It isn't as though Bin Laden (if he's even still alive, guy may well have died of kidney failure) is sitting in a house in New York. He's hiding in a Muslim area in a country that doesn't much care for the US, and probably who's central government doesn't have good control of things. Can't just walk over there with an arrest warrant.
If anyone starts looking for these, keep in mind that there are two types of license-plate obscuring devices: those that are illegal, and those that don't work.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel