Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Prison Terms For Spammer Ralsky, Scientology DoS Attacker

Posted by timothy on from the at-least-ralksy's-is-longer dept.

tsu doh nimh writes "Alan Ralsky, the 64-year-old dubbed the 'Godfather of Spam,' was sentenced to 51 months in prison on Monday, the Washington Post's Security Fix blog reports. According to anti-spam group Spamhaus.org, Ralsky has been spamming since at least 1997, using dozens of aliases and tens of thousands of 'zombies' or hacked PCs to relay junk e-mail. Also sentenced — to 40 months in jail — was Ralsky's 48-year-old son-in-law, Scott K. Bradley, and two other men named last year in a 41-count indictment for wire fraud, mail fraud, money laundering and violations of the CAN-SPAM Act." And eldavojohn writes "19-year-old Dmitriy Guzner, Anonymous member and Scientology DDoS attacker, received one year and one day in jail for his admitted crime. His sentence could have been a maximum ten years. According to the Church of Scientology, Anonymous has harassed and attacked them with '8,139 threatening phone calls, 3.6 million e-mails, 141 million hits on its website, ten acts of vandalism against its property, 22 bomb threats, and eight death threats against Church leaders.'"

14 of 328 comments (clear)

  1. Church of Scientology by Paranatural · · Score: 5, Funny

    Scientology members complaining about being harassed is like Mormons bitching about missionaries knocking on their doors.

    1. Re:Church of Scientology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I was going to reply to this, but I'm going to have to have my lawyer check the gag order first.

    2. Re:Church of Scientology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Spamming doesn't ruin lives.

    3. Re:Church of Scientology by bmajik · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When was the last time you were harassed by a Scientology member?

      When I woke up today and used the internet.

      Scientology was the first organization I am aware of that successfully forced an internet anonymous email service to dig up and disclose information about its clients. All over copyright claims. I am referring to anon.penet.fi, the famous anonymous remailer we all used in the 90s.

      In the early days when nobody cared about what "we" did with the internet, we knew that for every asshole that was up to serious evil, there were 10 smart guys who didn't care what your deal was, but hated assholes and could route around them. There were jackasses, but technology always beats jackasses.

      Then the law came, and all of that got a lot harder.

      Today we have the ability to make "highly" anonymous network connections but we rely on a small group of very VERY dedicated people to make that possible.. [people with the wherewithal to run TOR exit nodes, for instance].

      Those entities [be they CoS or rotten governments] who want to destroy free speech must not be tolerated by us.

      I remember my senior year of college when I got a takedown-letter about hosting DeCSS. And you know what? I folded, because I had a good job lined up that required I _not_ be a felon. Freedom of speech lost a little bit and I helped give it away, because a warm bed and a normal life are more convenient than principles and freedom.

      Our enemies know that, and they attack the weakest of us not to get rid of one or two, but because of the chilling effect it has on the rest of us. No one can escape the law forever, and thus the law, which is supposed to protect the freedom of one man from the encroachments of another, is used as their tool for enslaving us to their desires.

      I'm a fallible man and most of us are. That doesn't mean we don't deserve to hate the entites that continue to attack us by perverting the institutions we designed to protect ourselves.

      I congratulate the "moralfags" [as they are called within anonymous] who are fighting back. Sometimes, it comes at a high cost, like with this guy.

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    4. Re:Church of Scientology by digitig · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It wasn't the CoS that was on trial. I've been on a jury that felt that the "victim" of a crime should have got time too, but that didn't change our conviction that the accused had committed the crime so we had to return a guilty verdict.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    5. Re:Church of Scientology by bmajik · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Correct.

      And because I've never died, I also do not carry life insurance of any kind.
      Because I've never been raped, I don't pay attention to my surroundings or the people nearby.
      Because I've never been hit by another car, I don't wear a seatbelt.

      Of course, everything I said above is false.

      Even though none of those things have happened to me, they've happened to other people who _are like me_. And as a result, I've modified my behavior and in some cases suffered a monetary loss.

      This is what is known as a "chilling effect". A great tragedy befalls a handful of individuals, but all individuals realize it could have just as easily have been them. This causes massive behavioral change on a wide scale.

      This is exactly the pscyhology used by terrorism, infact. The goal of terrorists isn't to kill all people or even certain people -- it's to kill enough people to effect behaviorial change on a large popupation.

      The goal of Scientology [and the RIAA, and other agents of censorship that have the power of the state behind them] is similar. They know they can't get everyone or even most people. But they don't have to -- getting a few people now and then will persuade many others into changing their behavior.

      I haven't done a detailed study, but everytime there is a CoS article on slashdot, a LOT of the comments are posted by Anonymous Coward. Why is that? Why are people unafraid to openly criticize the catholic church -- often with blatantly vulgar remarks, and yet so few are willing to do the same against the CoS?

      Fear. Fear is the difference. If the CoS wants to rule its own members via fear, that is lamentable and a great reason not to associate with the CoS. But the CoS wants to rule non-members and specifically CoS antagonists via Fear as well.

      I don't think it is unreasonable to despise an organization that has already engaged in activities designed to control me via Fear.

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    6. Re:Church of Scientology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      When was the last time you were harassed by a Scientology member?

      When my husband divorced me after the center discovered that while he was a Scientologist, I wasn't. You see, they don't allow you to befriend (unless you're trying to recruit), much less marry, non-Scientologists. This was a number of years ago before most people, including me, knew what a fraud and cult this "religion" is.

      They will convince the convert that anything bad that happens to him is because they're not being a good scientologist. My husband was just laid off during the 80's downturn in oil. Although he did get another job right away, it was obvious they impressed on him that being with me was causing all these bad things to happen. Our marriage had been happy until this happened.

      One reason Travolta kept refusing to admit his son was autistic, is because (any mental illness or perceived by the church as mental illness) is believed to be caused by their contact with "non-clear" (non-Scientologists). Which means they often blame mental illness on the family.

  2. Ralsky's the guy that Slashdot spammed... by douglips · · Score: 5, Informative

    He took it right in the ass. It was beautiful.

    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/06/1554227

    --
    My amazing wife - Artist, Author, Philosopher - Laurie M
  3. Scientology is not a religion! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...it's a tax evasion scheme.

    1. Re:Scientology is not a religion! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      .... it's a tax evasion scheme.

      If you had phrased that in the form of a statement backed by references, you might not have been modded flamebait:

      "Didn't France convict the CoS of fraud? ( http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/27/france.scientology.fraud/index.html )"

      or

      "Arnaldo Lerma tells us that, 'when I asked why Scientology was now being called a church, I was told that it was for tax purposes.' ( http://www.lermanet.com/LRonHubbard2.htm )"

      Something like that might have gotten the flamebait mods countered by positive ones... even if it (and this post) are likely somewhat off-topic for this particular article.

  4. scientology by Dan667 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    is not a church.

  5. Dmitriy Guzner: by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Informative

    secularist martyr

    you don't fight vile "religions" that zombify and enslave the weak with kind words and cupcakes

    this is the way the mafia known as the church of scientology plays:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Snow_White

    turn around is fair play

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  6. Re:scientology by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 5, Informative

    They are a cult.

    People are put in physically or emotionally distressing situations;
    Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation, which is repeatedly emphasized;
    They receive unconditional love, acceptance, and attention from a charismatic leader;
    They get a new identity based on the group;
    They are subject to entrapment (isolation from friends, relatives, and the mainstream culture) and their access to information is severely controlled.

    From everything I've read about and seen of Scientolgists and Scientology, they do all of those things.

    Contrast that to say...Judaism or Islam, theres a big difference.

  7. Anonymous is winning by AnonymousX · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Anonymous has done a lot since the early days of prank calls and whatnot. The legal protests as well as other actions by Anonymous (also legal) have delivered a crushing and unprecedented blow to Scientology. Anon has probably done more to fuck them over than even the FBI did at the end of the 1970's. Now because of Anon, there is massive negative media coverage of the scilons. Hollywood is rebelling against them and more and more celebs are walking away or saying no. And on top of all that, now the Australian government is taking a hard look at Scientology as a criminal organization with a Senator actually denouncing them in open Parmiment. Anonymous has enabled many ex-scientologists to speak out as well as family of those still inside to seek communication with their loved ones without fear of reprisal. Anonymous enabled this by breaking the back of Scientology's Office of Special Affairs and has them so tied up, they can't prioritize which targets to go after and have lost their effectiveness almost entirely. After nearly 2 years of this, only one conviction against an anon and for a lowly DDOS attack that happened in the early few weeks of the movement is a testament to how good Anonymous is at staying within the law. Sure it may cut out some form of lulz, but we have found that action against the Scientologists that hurts them but leaves us legally untouchable generates way more lulz because it leaves them no lawful recourse against us.