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."
Now when are they going to get around to catching Osama?
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
I didn't RTFA. If I read the summary right, ya may be he can be charged with DMCA, Copyright violation or those stuff .But "conspiracy, aiding and abetting computer intrusion, and wire fraud"? WTF is that!
It's like charging gunmaker with murder.
Welcome to the DMCA, the same nonsense that blocks you from selling mod chips. Did you really expect to "circumvent" the locks that cable companies put in place and nothing was going to happen?
This is why we've been complaining about the DMCA since '98, and why Alan Cox won't set foot in this country. Heck, I'm suprised it's legal to hook up our own equipment to the cable networks at all. Did you get that PC from comcast? No?
I put on my robe and wizard hat..
Probably as soon as he tries to steal broadband lol. That or if he changes his name to Osama Bin Hackin.
Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
Gun sellers have powerful lobbyists on their payroll guaranteeing that the government will not interfere with their profits.
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....
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
That might have worked, if he wasn't actually selling the hacked modems.
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?
I never really understand the argument where there are more important things for such and such to be doing. There what tens of thousands of federal prosecutors in this country? More workers than work if you ask me... hmm... sounds like an economical fact.
I looked over the article, and now I'm curious. The Slashdot crowd usually sides with the techie on incidents like this, but is it really justified here? The popular analogy here is that it's akin to charging gun manufacturers with murder. Guns have legitimate uses, such as hunting, or protection. What legitimate use does a modem hacked/modified to access an ISP's services without permission have? A better analogy here would be a gun manufacturer who sells a gun, a kit to turn the gun into an automatic weapon, and detailed instructions on how to get past the security of a specific bank. You can argue that the gun wasn't sold with the intent to facilitate a robbery, but you can't do it with a straight face.
Of course, I'm open-minded, so someone prove me wrong - tell me what legitimate uses these modified modems have. (Caveat: the use Harris suggested in the article won't fly, unless you can give some very good reasons as to why an ISP wouldn't simply use their own diagnostic gear.)
He says that the telcos bought some of his hacked modems to use as test/diagnostic equipment. If he has invoices and receipts, then he may have a legit defense.
Why would they (service personnel) want hacked modems? Maybe to be able to alter the MAC on the test machine at will to clone a client's modesm's MAC address so they can determine that the clients' modems' MAC address is routable from the customer's location, and that maybe the clients' modem is defective after all ...
Completely irrelevant examples. The car was capable of it, and you are not stealing anything by modifying it. This is so obviously not on point, it is almost silly. Utility example is the same. As long as you are paying for what you use, there is no stealing of water resulting from you doing your own work. You really need to stay on point.
Emmanuel Goldstein would agree
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.
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.
The eternal struggle of good vs. evil begins within one's self.
Because they can fearmonger alongside claiming these powers.
Do you hear fearmongering about Saddam anymore? Nope, because he's dead. Saddam's execution was used for a short term goal... the elections which took place just days after his death.
The OP asked why they haven't caught Osama, and I'm just asserting that perhaps it is not in the government's interest to do so.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
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.
Isn't it obvious? Convert them to Spam. Soylent Green forever.
Wow! Someone found a way to explain this very simple concept without using an unnecessarily complicated analogy involving cars.
Bravo
Required reading for internet skeptics
That is the worst car analogy ever!
I want to shoot the messenger!
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
It's also illegal to tint your car windows too darkly as someone could have a gun and the police wouldn't be able to see it. I've seen people get fines for their windows, I've never seen a tinting shop get in trouble.
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.
Just last week, I had my trial before a judge for a very borderline DWI where I had blown a .08. To describe the background, after being arrested and being brought to the station, over one year ago, the officers asked if I would agree to answer questions. I told them I would not do so without an attorney present. They asked two more times, and made it sound as if I was about to get in huge trouble if I had the audacity to invoke my rights. I denied to answer questions each of those times. What is interesting is that the fact I was alert enough to both understand my rights, and to practice them, was the final straw and indicator to the judge that I was not both physically and mentally impaired. I was found not guilty.
Reply to That ||
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.
Free Martian Whores!
link to said guy with said biodiesel and said jailable offense?
I doubt making your own biodiesel and using it is the offence. The offence is not paying a tax you are legally required to pay. In the UK you can run your car on biodiesel if you like, but that doesn't let you avoid paying tax - you have to pay the tax directly rather than it implicitly being included in the fuel price. Think of it as the difference between being employed or self employed - if you are employed then you pay your income tax by PAYE; if you are self employed you don't do PAYE, but this doesn't magically get you out of paying tax, you still have to pay it to the inland revenue at the end of the year.
http://blog.nexusuk.org