Slashdot Mirror
Former Student Gets 30 Months For Political DDoS Attacks
wiredmikey writes "A former University of Akron student was sentenced Friday to 30 months in prison, followed by 3 years of supervised release for conducting denial of service attacks on the sites of several prominent conservative figures as well as infecting several systems with botnet software. Mitchell L. Frost, age 23, of Bellevue, Ohio admitted that between August 2006 and March 2007, he initiated denial of service attacks on web servers hosting the sites of political commentators, including Bill O'Reilly, Rudy Giuliani, Ann Coulter, and others."
Obviously, freedom of speech isn't something this little douchenozzle cares about. Like legions of leftards before him, he's perfectly happy breaking the law to try to gag people he doesn't agree with.
Thirty months isn't enough.
Good. Don't justify their fears by acting like a thug.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
That's seriously warped. Yes, what he did was wrong, but it's not like he permanently shut down the Internet.
30 months? Two and a half years? Damn, he should have just raped someone instead, he probably would have gotten less time and had a lot more fun in the process. I swear, I'm going to start voting against any politician that runs on being "tough on crime." It seems plenty tough enough as it is.
Two and a half years of someone's life, that's the price we demand now for some minor inconvenience? Damn, if I were his lawyer, I'd be tempted to appeal that for violation of the Eighth Amendment.
Is the punishment comparable to what other people convicted of the same crime get?
-- Cheers!
Meanwhile, Johannes Mehserle, a former BART police officer, shoots and kills an unarmed, restrained man while in custody in view of numerous eyewitnesses, and gets two years in prison minus time already served. Even if we take the defense's word on the matter and accept that it was completely accidental, does it really make sense to punish one person so much more severely for a crime that did not result in anyone's death?
Yes, I am well aware that in the US, those in positions of power--whether through political or financial means--are treated with leniency, and the unwashed masses suffer.
Freedom is speech is for all Americans - not just for the ones I or you agree with. Unfortunately, many sanctimonious politicians and college students don't believe in that as displayed by this student. Akron U is just down the road from me, hope this is not the education their spooning out.
-------- Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most. --Ozzy
You do realize you just called raping someone fun?
He allegedly "admitted" to what looks like ten counts or more, but since his special assessement was $200, he was only convicted of a single felony count. So, then, why ever would he have admitted anything else? That would be allocution, relevant conduct and further admitted behavior. When I plead out in February 2007, I admitted guilt on one count and all others were dismissed. I denied them (they were indeed false) and no one admits other behavior and gets done for one count.
According to the sentencing table, assuming this is his first offense, his offense was Level 22. He got a standard three-point reduction for admission of guilt and the judge gave him the low end of Level 19. He will do 87.5% of it, (no parole in feds) a little more than 26 months. He'll go to halfway house in 23.
But he will not go to a Camp. His relevant conduct will affect his custody, and he will probably go to a Low (basically a Medium with cubicles instead of cells), perhaps even FCI Elkton in Ohio where I was. Not fun.
My suspicion is whether he really admitted all those other counts, or this is journalistic excess.
"The pie shall be cut in half and each man shall receive.....death. I'll eat the pie."
Until it isn't!! Similar to the idiots who steal campaign signs... http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=steals+campaign+signs&aq=f
Or killed an (unarmed) black man
Why not just put 27... I can understand 27. Sure it's close to 30, but it isn't 30. Why round a number everyone can comprehend?
More fun than DDoSing a server? I believe the rapists would agree with that, yes.
Welcome kid, to the socially accepted and socially encouraged rape rooms of the new leaders of Iraq. Don't fuck with the republicans, because they will fuck you, and fuck you hard.
If he would have gotten less or even nothing when he would have chosen another side of the political spectrum - if there is such a thing on US news media?
Yeah. I saw guys in the feds who were doing 20 years because someone else committed a crime and they knew about it. I know a limo driver now at Elkton who picked up a fare at JFK, the DEA pulled them over and found the fare's bags stuffed with cocaine and meth. The driver knew nothing about it, denied all knowledge, and went to trial with a public defender. He got 37 years and lost his appeal, and does not have the money for collateral attack. Did you know that after one appeal, you must now use civil remedies, like 28USC 2241 and 2255, and you are NOT entitled to counsel for them?
I did five years for what most would call, at best, a silly prank that hurt no one and caused neither property or financial loss.
"The pie shall be cut in half and each man shall receive.....death. I'll eat the pie."
Oh cry more. How about the assholes who keyed my car for having a pro-choice bumper sticker?
Both sides of the political divide in the US have members who are desperate to win no matter what it takes - it's not surprising at all that people resort to dirty tricks, on both side. I'd also expect the confirmation bias to lead to differing perceptions - conservatives will believe it's mostly liberals who would resort to criminal activity to disrupt an opponents campaign, while liberals will believe exactly the same about conservatives. It's just another example of how US politics are less like a serious debate than some form of team sport.
because political operatives for the GOP have basically skirted the law for decades pulling shit like this and the DOS attacks on democratic offices and phone systems.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
that's just the point: the liberal had a lousy lawyer.
So if I am to understand he acted like an obnoxious, blowhard who didn't allow those he opposes to have a say, and is no longer allowed to say his point of view. ....So how is he different from those he attacked?
"A former University of Akron student was sentenced Friday to 30 months in prison, followed by 3 years of supervised release, and an almost certainly non-lethal tazing : ). Risking no proper job, no mortgage ever. That'll teach him not to fuck with several prominent conservative figures".
Although I think I understand the gist of your post, florid as it might be, and agree freedom of speech must cut both ways, I don't think the thirty months is all the trouble he's in.
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
I think he doesn't mean fun for the victim, but for the raper. Raping is one of the only ways to have sex with good looking women when you're a geek, the other one is being rich.
Anyone referring to himself or herself as an "American" is basically obliged by the very definition of the term "American" to uphold a similar standard, even when completely private dealings are involved. That's just part of being American.
So even though Constitution regulates only the government, it still sets out a basic set of values that all Americans should believe in and practice to the greatest extent possible. One of those is freedom of expression, and any American who doesn't do whatever they can to grant that freedom when dealing with other private citizens is no longer American.
He allegedly "admitted" to what looks like ten counts or more, but since his special assessement was $200, he was only convicted of a single felony count. So, then, why ever would he have admitted anything else? That would be allocution, relevant conduct and further admitted behavior. When I plead out in February 2007, I admitted guilt on one count and all others were dismissed. I denied them (they were indeed false) and no one admits other behavior and gets done for one count.
According to the sentencing table, assuming this is his first offense, his offense was Level 22. He got a standard three-point reduction for admission of guilt and the judge gave him the low end of Level 19. He will do 87.5% of it, (no parole in feds) a little more than 26 months. He'll go to halfway house in 23.
But he will not go to a Camp. His relevant conduct will affect his custody, and he will probably go to a Low (basically a Medium with cubicles instead of cells), perhaps even FCI Elkton in Ohio where I was. Not fun.
My suspicion is whether he really admitted all those other counts, or this is journalistic excess.
Sorry, link is http://goo.gl/CoIcB
"The pie shall be cut in half and each man shall receive.....death. I'll eat the pie."
That's seriously warped. Yes, what he did was wrong, but it's not like he permanently shut down the Internet.
30 months? Two and a half years?
Well... the American justice system is famous for draconian punishments. Is anybody surprised?
Because NOTHING says "fair and open discourse" like blowing people whose opinions you dislike off the net in a great gale of "Shut The Fuck Up".
I'm not saying I agree with some of these people he DOS'ed, hell, some of them I dislike INTENSELY. But these are the actions of someone who has so little confidence in their own point of view that they have to try and make sure theirs is the ONLY one available.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Terrorism and silencing free speech is the cornerstone of any liberal douchebag. Obama knows this. The Fairness Doctrine knows this. And the muslims and communists that love them know this.
Cheer up! I'm sure he's a hero in Vermont and California.
Somehow I doubt they told you why they keyed your car, and you just decided it was because they didn't like your bumper sticker.
WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU USING A URL SHORTENER? WE DON'T USE URL SHORTENERS HERE, THIS ISN'T GODDAMN TWITTER!
It looks like you have something interesting to say, but when you start using URL shorteners, it makes me question your sanity.
+1 Sad
That's what you get for killing someone in Denmark.
True story.
I'm really curious (and I'm sure others reading this are as well): what did you do to get 5 years without causing any damage?
After all, he was only doing electronically what O'Reilly et al. do acoustically, namely shouting loudly and continuously so no one else can get a word in. I would even say that shouting obnoxiously is the American Way (TM)
Simple solution: Don't be an idiot and commit silly pranks. When you have no respect for others, how can you expect them to respect you?
That's seriously warped. Yes, what he did was wrong, but it's not like he permanently shut down the Internet.
30 months? Two and a half years? Damn, he should have just raped someone instead, he probably would have gotten less time and had a lot more fun in the process. I swear, I'm going to start voting against any politician that runs on being "tough on crime." It seems plenty tough enough as it is.
Two and a half years of someone's life, that's the price we demand now for some minor inconvenience? Damn, if I were his lawyer, I'd be tempted to appeal that for violation of the Eighth Amendment.
I delivered a conciliatory note to an ex-girlfriend and spent almost a year in a maximum prison for "stalking." People were in there telling me about all the crack they dealt or how many people they murdered and when my turn came around, I get to tell how I delivered a make-up note to someone's house. Our government is crazy and only rich people have enough money to buy justice.
Ok. There's a big, big difference between "disrespecting" people by executing a prank and being "disrespected" by being sentenced to 30 months to five years in prison.
I have taken classes in both the electrical engineering and computer science deparrtments of this university, and I find it really hard to believe that some tabloid would imply that a student from one of these programs would have the knowhow to pull something like this off. I'm sick and tired of small time tabloids, such as "Security Week" or the "US Department of Justice" ruining the reputation of my alma mater like this.
smell...
--
Lol, i'm sure that was the reason.
It couldn't be because some asshole just wanted to key a cars, like some jerk did to every single car on my street a few years ago.
"Damn, he should have just raped someone instead, he probably would have gotten less time and had a lot more fun in the process."
What kind of human being are you that you would consider rape fun?
That's seriously warped. Yes, what he did was wrong, but it's not like he permanently shut down the Internet.
30 months? Two and a half years?
Well... the American justice system is famous for draconian punishments. Is anybody surprised?
We gave up on trying to rehabilitate anyone a long time ago. Concidentally this happened right about when private prison contractors became a big business and used their money and influence to lobby for harsher mandatory minimum sentences. They especially like to do this for victimless crimes involving only consenting adults, such as drug offenses.
Nowadays we take nonviolent criminals, mostly drug offenders, and throw them in the same facilities as those that house robbers, rapists, and murderers so they can learn how to be hardened criminals. Oh, we also have extensive criminal records so that even after release, former convicts can continue to pay a debt to society, for life, in the form of being denied most or all non-menial jobs. We know that poverty and crime go together, and if this entices them to turn again to crime to make ends meet it just means more job security for private prison contractors, lawyers, politicians, and more justification for increasingly paramilitary police forces.
br. No doubt that the new area of expansion for this brand of fascism is computer crime. That should also help to "justify" all the network surveillance powers it would take to make those laws more enforcable. After all, you don't want to be soft on crime. You especially don't want to think that maybe all of those politicians don't really have your best interests at heart, do you?
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Let's be realistic - he committed theft, probably in thousands of dollars. He then maliciously prepared systems to later blackmail their owners. The Internet is not just porn - there is a lot of money transferring hands, even if it is only advertising dollars. If you would choose rape over theft because you'd get less time, that make you warped - not the system.
i understand your point. however, you can not equate the two crimes and the sentences imposed in each. one was completely premeditated and violated the rights of many people. freedom of speech, freedom of thought and so on. the other crime was not premeditated(if you believe the defense. side-note: they couldn't have argued it was a mistake if we stopped using these less then lethal force toys.) and robbed relatively speaking, fewer people of their rights. so yes, one did involve the killing of an individual. however, the malicious intent in each case is disproportionate.
I know a limo driver now at Elkton who picked up a fare at JFK, the DEA pulled them over and found the fare's bags stuffed with cocaine and meth. The driver knew nothing about it, denied all knowledge, and went to trial with a public defender. He got 37 years and lost his appeal, and does not have the money for collateral attack.
This one sounds a little bit hard to believe. Are you sure you were told *both* sides of the case?
Our definitions of pranks must be different, a DDOS attack sounds as much like a prank as breaking into a jewelry shop and breaking all the glass display cases.
Sure, you may not have stolen anything, but it's hardly a prank.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
I did five years for what most would call, at best, a silly prank that hurt no one and caused neither property or financial loss.
Penalties account for potential damage, not just actual damages. If you try and smuggle a bomb onto a plane and get caught, you can't say no hurt, no foul.
It is my observation after being on Slashdot for a very long time that if this guy had gotten 30 years for a DDoS on Wikileaks you'd have been dancing in the streets for joy - I wish the collective "we" here on Slashdot were capable of a little more objectivity, the guy committed crimes, he was found guilty, he got time - yes he committed his crimes against conservatives, and maybe he even thought it was noble, but there are other ways to protest against other peoples views that don't involve criminal activities...
I delivered a make-up note to an ex-girlfriend and spent almost a year in a maximum prison for "stalking." People were in there telling me about all the crack they dealt or how many people they murdered and when my turn came around, I get to tell how I delivered a conciliatory note to a girl's house. Our government is crazy and only rich people have enough money to buy justice.
If it were a NON-POLITICAL DOS/bot attack, would anyone on Slashdot give a rat's ass if he went down for MORE than thirty months?
Yeah, since manslaughter doesn't get you more than two years these days.* And a hit and run might not even be something a DA wants to pursue vigorously. **
But you wanna see the system freak out? Show the people with money and clout that the system has holes, that there are people who can do things with technology that they don't understand.
OK, it's really not just a tech thing. Both our statutory punishments and our sentencing is messed up in this country. Unfortunately, it's in no small part because we're quite simply very very stupid about the issue politically: we like to vote for people who are "tough on crime," so I don't expect a lot of change.
* May not apply if you're not a police officer.
** May not apply if you're not wealthy.
Tweet, tweet.
It sounds nothing like physical damage. At all.
I know the majority here is bleeding sympathy for this clown, but he deserves the sentence in my opinion. DDoS-ing high-profile websites is a stupid/pointless activity and getting caught or admitting it is even more stupid. Look, people in the U.S. have the protected RIGHT to say and write their opinions no matter how left, right, or radical they may be. DDoS-ing someone's website is blocking freedom of the press just like book burning is. Most 23-year-old liberals think they have the *audacity* to silence people who don't agree with their brainwash-induced political views, but it's a violation of one of our fundamental freedoms in the U.S to prevent people from expressing themselves through speech or the media. Maybe having no freedom for a few years will teach this cat, and anyone dumb enough to follow in his footsteps, a valuable lesson about the true value of liberty and democracy.
2) well , prove it
Tough on crime has basically always meant unfair on crime, which is against the constitution. The cruel part of 'cruel and unusual punishment' still applies even if it no longer becomes unusual.
There is no -1 Disagree.
New Hampshire Senate Election Phone Jamming Scandal. There's a book by the perp.
Tweet, tweet.
How the fuck could this possibly be construed as flamebait? The guy is pointing out that this kid did more than your typical DDoS attack, and rightly claims that the Slashdot headline is misleading. He didn't even use combative language; apparently the groupthink around here is stronger than ever. Unlike the parent post, this post IS flamebait. Pull your heads out of your asses and use your fucking brains, people.
Free speech allows him to write his own website, it doesn't allow him to break theirs.
Couldn't you argue his packets are simply speech? He's merely broadcasting a specific message to the network.
What's the difference between this and getting a million of your like-minded peers to call/fax complaints to a specific number?
(I'm playing a little bit of devil's advocate, but I'm given to understand there are cases that blur this line...)
Tweet, tweet.
Woo-hoo ...Akron's back on the map for 3 minutes :)
Here's how it works. There are three classes of people in American society. The first class is the people who run the large institutions: the politicians in government, and the executives of corporations. The second class is the people who protect these institutions: police, lawyers, the media, etc. The third class is everyone else. To calculate a criminal sentence, just use the following formula:
adjusted sentence = original sentence * 10^(class of perpetrator - class of victim)
If you kill someone of your own class, you might get 20 years in prison. But since the BART cop was in the second class, while Grant was in the third, this was dropped down to 2 years. Here, it's the reverse: the student targeted conservative pundits (second class) so instead of 3 months he gets 30.
I wish I could put this on a billboard in every major city.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
droopus has been commenting on his prison sentence for some time. He won't fess up to exactly what he did but from previous posts it appears he blew up some federal property with explosives. Whatever the case there is one thing you can count on, he will not tell you the whole story.
How in the heck did this get "5 insightful"? Are the moderators on Meth or what?
AccountKiller
avoid at all costs -- yes, I love headlines
But wouldn't that be property loss?
I find this very easy to believe. I take it you are a smart person, at least I'll presume so given you comment on Slashdot forums. Given that, I'm somewhat disappointed that you don't believe that this could happen.
Please Google "war on drugs" and you'll find plenty of horror stories such as this.
Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
There's a a big difference between a prank and a DDOS attack. Something that a lot of script kiddies need to realise.
They can cost a huge amount of money for the victim and they have a genuine intimidation effect.
In my opinion, sentencing someone who breaks into a jewelry store, breaks all the display glass cases and steals nothing for 30 months is idiotic. I would expect them to have to pay for all the damage, and get 2 months or community work as a warning. Especially with all the jails crowded as they are.
AccountKiller
Our definitions of pranks must be different, a DDOS attack sounds as much like a prank as breaking into a jewelry shop and breaking all the glass display cases.
Sure, you may not have stolen anything, but it's hardly a prank.
If you would appreciate a different perspective, find some older (i.e. elderly) people and ask them about how police officers used to be.
In most places, the local cops acted more like neighbors. People knew who they were and it was okay to walk up to them and talk to them like any other human being doing any other job. They could lean on you really, really hard if you showed true maliciousness. Yet, most things that you'd call "childish pranks" were not dealt with so harshly.
For example, I have an older relative who grew up in the 50s. When they were teenagers and up to mischief, sometimes they'd actually throw eggs at police cars and do things like that. When they finally got caught, they were chewed out by the officer and were forced to clean up the car until it looked better than brand-new (maybe even with a toothbrush). They were then driven to their parents' and the parents were told what happened. Then they were in real trouble. It worked because after that they didn't do it again.
What happened was that growing up, they actually respected the police officers who served their community. They realized that they were given a break and allowed to grow out of their childishness. The cops were human beings, neighbors, maybe even friends. They were not trying to nail you as much as possible for every little thing. They were not thugs. Regular law-abiding people weren't afraid of them and in fact were generally glad to have them around.
These days, if some teenage kid threw eggs at a cop car I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he was tazed, arrested, charged with assaulting a police officer, tried as an adult, and given a criminal record that would haunt him the rest of his life. Some people really wonder why young adults today have little or no respect for authority. Somewhere along the lines the human element disappeared and now it's all about screwing you as hard as possible and with as little lube as possible. It's lost most of its respectability. I think this began in the 80s with a movement called "proactive policing" but its roots likely go deeper than that.
One way or another, we lost something valuable and irreplacable.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
His purposeful lack of providing the details of what he supposedly did to get 5 years in the slammer just show that he is either making it up, or that he did something which DID cause someone harm in some way.
Your post is unfairly modded as Flamebait. However, I disagree with you that he put so much risk to others that it deserves 2 and a half years of prison time and probably has ruined or seriously debilitated the rest of his life. He did not INTEND to cost anyone their grade or opportunities. Imagine if someone ran into a wire and cut the school system's network, causing the equivalent amount of damage and time off-line. Do you think that deserves 2 and a half years?
I am not excusing the student's actions, I am saying that the accidental collateral damage should not make a person spend 2 and a half years in prison.
Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
This is outrageous. It does not require 30 years on the bench to comprehend the pure absurdity of this. People who commit real crimes such as manslaughter, murder, rape serve less time. The schemers on wall street who crashed our economy have caused incredible misery for millions of people, yet they walk free.
"...as well as infecting several systems with botnet zombies."
"...he used the University’s computer network to access IRC channels infected several systems located in the United States and in other countries with botnet zombies."
This is "securityweek.com"?
OMFG
Let's be honest, this isn't something someone is going to do on accident. You're not going to set up a botnet and DDOS a major website by running Limewire in the background.
This guy here was purposely trying to hurt someone. He deserves to sit in jail, and take some time to reassess his life. Two years isn't really that long.
Qxe4
I'm curious if this could be used as precedent when it comes to penalties for taking someone's website down with a false DMCA claim.
better things then putting him in a state hotel with free food and health care for 30 months. Why not make fix the University systems for free as that costs way less.
I hear in 2001 is costs about $22,632 year to lock some up so that is lot to have to pay for some like this.
How many years would you want someone to get for taking away your first amendment rights?
(New Zealand here) In the news a couple years ago was a prank gone wrong. A case of a guy lit his friends hawaiian grass skirt as he sat on a portable toilet at an xmas party. he put his lighter under the gap at the bottom of the door. The intention was like a movie scene - guy runs around with a bit of smoke coming form the skirt and the couple small flame are patted out and all laugh heartily.
Unfortunately, the guy was incinerated, and died. The offender recieved 2 years jail, and 9 months concurrent for the serious injuries to a woman who tried to extinguish the flames. Story here
Former Child is Mocked for Retarded Headline
How about the asshole who killed a perfectly healthy child because shitheads like you are pro-choice?
>For example, I have an older relative who grew up in the 50s. When they were teenagers and up to mischief, sometimes they'd actually throw >eggs at police cars and do things like that. When they finally got caught, they were chewed out by the officer and were forced to clean up the >car until it looked better than brand-new (maybe even with a toothbrush). They were then driven to their parents' and the parents were told what >happened. Then they were in real trouble. It worked because after that they didn't do it again.
This could never happen today. The cops would be sued for using slave labor to clean the police cars. The only recourse the cops have is the law. They are not allowed to interpret the law. Common sense fails, and lawyers prevail.
-Obedience to the law is obedience to the will of a tyrant.
If the punishment were easy, parties on both sides wouldn't hesistate to use this tactic on a regular basis. They'd spend a night in jail, pick up some trash by the side of the highway, and then return to party HQ with a pat on the back and a hearty, "congratulations, you took your first pinch like a man". Thirty months in the pokey helps take that option away, although some hardcore operatives might still do it. In cases where the organization routinely funded it, you'd bring in RICO laws of course. It might be possible to RICO some community org, or even a labor union. Prosecuting a major party under RICO? Let's not go there.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Lengthy prison sentences are a product of, not only politicians and the War on Crime, but corporate ownership of jails. There is a financial and electoral incentive for putting people in jail. The growth of the prison population has grown dramatically in the last 50 years as a result of the commercialization of the penal system.
I find this very easy to believe
It's a story told on the Internet by a person who alleges to have been a prisoner, and to have been told the story by another prisoner. It must be true!
That said, there are *many* reliable accounts of abuse in the "war on drugs". I'm just pointing out a humorous aspect of any debate regarding the veracity of this particular story. And yes, I realize "must be true" is not the same thing as "easy to believe" and am taking just a bit of license here to get a chuckle.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Hey this guy infected computers, thus causing damage. Was it politically motivated? Hmmm. Maybe. Sounds to more like he is a prick looking for an cheap excuse to excert some kind of power over others, taking the legitimation for that purely from himself. Like many others seem to do in the USA when it comes to damage political opponents, just they have better lawyers and know the red line better.
Which brings us to the question: if i do not hack servers but pay for servers to make the DDOS, can the DDOS then be considered free speech?
Calling it some minor inconvenience is like claiming that rape is just the rubbing of some woman's skin against her will. Sorry, you can't spin it that way. He violated the rights of others and he needs to pay for it.
He can go suck a cock in jail while he thinks about what he did.
This nation is going to shit because of all of the greed, irresponsibility, abject ignorance, and corruption - and people on the sidelines are whining because the criminals are being punished too harshly. We're so fucked.
Why are you letting these clowns ruin our country?
That's destruction of property and clearly a crime, but pray tell - how do you know their reasons for keying your car? Did they leave you a note?
Please god, if you are good, let me not die in a fire in a portable toilet.
Haida Manga
that's the price we demand now for some minor inconvenience
I help clients with web sites that, if successfully DDoS'ed at the wrong time of the year, could go out of business. Businesses who are in the middle of a crucual product launch, or who must refund huge amounts of subscriptions because of being unavailable during a critical time. Black Friday shopping spikes, that sort of thing. Burning down those sites is just as bad as burning down their warehouse.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNcyAEtXjyI&feature=related
It should have been one year for each computer he took control of in order to perpetrate the crime. Then he should have had 30 months added on top of that. I figure 100,002.5 years would be appropriate!!!
Someone compared this to hate crimes. He used that as a reason to oppose it but it actually makes a good reason to support it. If you beat someone up because they're the wrong skin color, it intimidates a whole lot of people to a much greater degree than beathing someone up to take their money. The same is true for DDOSing someone for political reasons--it threatens society in general in ways that DDOSing someone by accidenally cutting their wire does not.
He deserves everything (and likely more) than he gets!
Yeah, since manslaughter doesn't get you more than two years these days. And a hit and run might not even be something a DA wants to pursue vigorously.
The charges in this case went beyond denial of service and were prosecuted under federal law.
The case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert W. Kern, Cybercrime Coordinator for the Cleveland U.S. Attorney's Office, following an investigation by the Akron Office of the United States Secret Service, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the University of Akron Police Department. Former Student Gets 30 Months in Prison for DDoSing Conservative Figures and Using Botnets, 30-Month Sentence For Bot Nets Used To Obtain Information From Other Computer Systems
In the American federal system, crimes of violence are almost always prosecuted under state law. If you have any complaints about sentencing, take them to your state assemblyman or senator.
The consequences for conviction on a charge of vehicular homicide vary wildly from state to state.
In Iowa, there is no probation and the mandatory sentence is twenty five years. In Tennessee the average jail time is 29 days. Vehicular Manslaughter
Failing to pursue the felony charge can make very big headlines in unexpected places: Morgan Stanley financial adviser escapes felony charges for hit-and-run 'because it could jeopardies his job', Alleged hit-and-run driver may not face felony
they use a filibuster, or add unfavorable items to a bill they want to kill, or ...
or something?
What pisses me off is that the MPAA and others can DDoS servers on a daily basis and not get in any trouble, but should a young man do it to Republicans, there is hell to pay. Talk about a double standard. Of course, seeing as how the MPAA bankrolls most of the republican's salaries and election funding, we shouldn't be surprised.
DNA -- National Dyslexic Association
30 months? Two and a half years? Damn, he should have just raped someone instead, he probably would have gotten less time and had a lot more fun in the process. I swear, I'm going to start voting against any politician that runs on being "tough on crime." It seems plenty tough enough as it is.
Talk of rape as fun is stereotypically male and adolescent -
and - equally sterotypically - it always seems to come as a shock to a geek when one of his own is expected to do hard time.
That said:
You do not want to be prosecuted under federal law for a violent crime - for any crime, really.
From Oct 1, 1994 to October 30, 1994 there were 91 sentences in sexual assault cases prosecuted under federal law.
The median sentence for sexual offenses of all types was eight years and for criminal sexual abuse fourteen years. You could realistically expect to do almost all of that time behind bars. Analysis Of Penalties For Federal Rape Cases
How do you know that's why they did it?
I can't decide if that should be modded "funny" or "insightful".
Unless its a filibuster DDOS attack - those are ok.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
That is a great point. DDoSing for political reasons makes it a more important crime, but I still maintain that the fact that the internet was slower so someone might have gotten a worse grade is not worth the extra prison time.
Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
Whatever asshole, everybody in jail is innocent. Including you. I love that you got modded up. Shows how stupid most slashdot moderators are.
except thos who still are students, and infants ?
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
Really?
I've got a PDF I'd like you to open if you run windows that says otherwise. I'm pretty sure it would let you run a botnet out of your home and you'd never know. Or at least, all the relevant connections to the master servers would.
We live in a nation where the FBI has testified in the past DECADE that there exists no known technology that would permit an individual to "remotely drive" a computer, and that it is nonsense that a person would have software that would let someone else see their desktop if they weren't on the same network.
The testimony was not only admitted as evidence, but counter was rejected. Case happened in CA.
Yeah, you *can* build a botnet off your computer and not even know it. It isn't how botnets are formed...but it's possible. DDOS a website? Hell...nearly 15 years ago I took part in something where all you had to do was OPEN MY AOL PROFILE and you'd take part in DOSsing a website. And I was on AOL--that should tell you what my tech knowledge was. But an href in a frame with the right escape sequence was good enough.
Two years is plenty past long enough. It's probably 4% of the time left in his life. It's more time than people get for rape, murder, armed robbery over recent history. Longer than people get who embezzle tens of millions of dollars.
Its really depressing how far right some of the posts here are. I always thought nerds were smart :(
that the people he ddosed are ones that would end freedom of speech online and offline, as soon as they got enough power to do it. actually, even though they dont have the power to do it now, they are trying with anti net neutrality moves, acta, dmca and whatnot.
freedom of speech is a reality and an objective only for people who pursue freedom. the conservative/right wing pursues it only as long as it fulfills their goals.
Read radical news here
I've removed campaign signs from my yard. They were placed there without my approval. Did I "steal" them?
I agree that the "left" has a warped sense of fairness. Freedom of speech is only allowed if you say things that they like. Idiots. Unpopular speech needs to be protected more than any other type. Even Bill O.'s crap-spouting needs to be protected.
BTW, I'm a conservative and dislike most of what both the democrats and republicans spew these days. The parties need to be outlawed and people need to run on ideas again. Less government and less taxation. If they don't take our money, then government will be forced to shrink and stupid programs and graph will be forced to end.
Here is a news flash, criminals do NOT get to determine their own sentence. We, the rest of society do and as a group we don't want any misbehaving.
And it is a rare criminal to fully accept what he did was wrong and how much damage it cost. Oh but I only raped her for a bit of fun, she knew that when I knocked her teeth out that I was only playing.
You see, complaining that your punishment is so harsh and hurts you so much is kinda missing the point that the majority (and they get to do the telling) WANT punishment to be harsh and hurt criminals so much.
And since you are completly unwilling to tell us WHAT you did that you claim was a prank, I think you KNOW that most would NOT call it a silly prank.
Or are you afraid you got pounded in the ass for five years for blowing up a mail box? No damage? What about the mail that was inside? Oh but that doesn't matter that someone doesn't get a notice of a death so they can attend the funeral. Just as long as you had a bit of fun.
Enjoy your criminal record.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
We live on this planet with billions of people. That is a lot. If you want you could say we live as ants heaped together. But ants got a very strict system by nature. We do not. So we have to make our own. These rules of the system are not so much about some idyllic Utopian future but about keeping the whole mess from collapsing into utter anarchy. And no, there are no true anarchists because they could never organize or agree on anything. How can you have an anarchy movement? It would dissipate immediately.
And so we have laws. Silly laws which are often meant simply to keep things flowing. And this can get very silly indeed. What does a green light mean? That you can drive? WRONG, you MUST drive, to NOT drive at a green light is a traffic offence, for which you can be punished.
The highway got even more rules, unclear rules about speed. The max speed is indicated by signs on the road right? WRONG, the max speed is determined by the traffic around you regardless of any sign, it is the ABSOLUTE max speed that is indicated on signs. if you plow into a traffic jam, you can't say "but the sign told me to go this speed". Most of this stuff is pretty straightforward and MOST of us get these laws without actually having to have read them because they are common sense and basic courtesy. But the number of traffic fines also indicates that a lot of people do NOT get it.
This article shows that many people do NOT get "freedom of speech". Freedom of speech is not a blanket excuse to do anything you want. You cannot simply stand on highway shouting your political opinions without getting hauled off to prison. NOT for your opinions but for disrupting traffic. Neither does society and its rules want endless shouting matches. You can say what you want, but do it where someone who doesn't want to hear, doesn't have to hear. You can picket a building, but can't enter it or obstruct its entrance (strikes have exceptions in some countries because the people doing the picketing are associated with the building).
This guy used his "free speech" to try to block someone elses free speech. This would have been like taking a fog horn and blasting out the speech of your opponent. That isn't how the system works. Basically this guy doesn't believe in freedom of speech or democracy and wants to use force to silence his opponents, NOT debate and elections. That cannot be allowed. This is no different from any of the other tools oppressors have used to silence opposition. In a democracy ALL voices should be heard, even the ones you don't agree with.
So he is caught and sentenced. And in that sentence is not just the techinal act of starting a DDOS attack which is a criminal act in itself because it disrupts someone elses chance of communicating and NO it is NOT you who gets to determine who has the right to use the internet at this moment, but also that with this attack he wanted to silence his opponents.
This guy is either very disturbed or a serious danger to democracy. NOT because of the effect of his own attack, but because it might trigger an escalation. What if now the other side does a DDOS attack as well? And then someone else retaliates again? before you know it we accept that all sites with a political opinion can be knocked out. Ah, but you can protect against DDOS. Ah yes, the standard defence of the rich white slashdotter. So only people who can afford to withstand an attack can have their say? How is this different then having the right to strike, as long as you can survive the beating by the bosses gang?
No, this guy must be punished. He is a danger to the democratic process and that process is already in enough trouble as it is.
Yes, boys and girls, there is a difference between defacing a commercial ad and a political one. And you better think about this before you make an attack on someone else free speech.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
It makes it look like whoever wrote that headline wants to smear the university by association.
One thing I've learned about hardened criminals is that you will NEVER get the truth. Everyone in jail/prison will swear to their grave they were just there and didn't have any knowledge of wrong-doing. 99.99% of people doing time are habitual liars and absolutely incapable of speaking or acknowledging the truth. You either did five years without learning this lesson or you are one of them. I'm guessing it's the latter (no offense :D ).
Because a friend of mine went to Federal big house in West Virginia for growing pot and got out early because of parole.
A DOS attack doesn't hurt anyone. How does a non violent crime like this deserve anything more than community service?
... he had to go to prison for his crimes, because he had already maxed out his public service account.
I see him more as a patriot then as anything the authorities may paint him as.
Ahh well Ann Coulter and her ilk are the downside of free speech.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Yeah, right, sure.
I had the misfortune of having to work in a prison for six years and I heard story after story just like this. "It was all a joke, and somebody called the cops". "I was just walking to the police station to turn in the bag of dope I found lying in the street when I got arrested". And on, and on, and on...
It's all bullshit.
I'd go and look in the inmate's jacket to see if their story had any validity and you know what I found *every single time*: The inmate in question had been in and out of trouble with the law since they were young - like 10 or 12 years old. This wasn't their first offense by far, and even if the circumstances matched (somewhat) with what the inmate had told me, it turned out there was *a lot* more to the story than what they had bothered mentioning.
You know what the big difference is between a convicted criminal and a regular guy? It isn't that they got caught, it's that the con kept doing stupid, hurtful things over and over again until it finally caught up with them.
Unless you want to end up back inside again, I'd suggest you stop minimizing your deed, and accept responsibility for your behavior. I'd suggest you be honest with yourself and admit that there were many, many other things you did and got away with.
Always keep in mind one thing: Think of how hard it is to get 12 random strangers to agree on anything. It isn't easy to get convicted.
A tactic used against the people we're freeing the shit out of over in the M.E. Blocking information, planting false information in local papers to drum up support for the occupiers...
He learned it by watching you, government! He learned it by watching you!
Blar.
You're comparing apples and oranges though with regard to intent and remorse which always have a lot to do with sentencing.
The jerk in the article spent many months building his botnet and committing other crimes in the process. The guy in your story did a stupid thing on the spur of the moment while drunk, killed his own friend, and shows remorse. A huge difference in intent and remorse.
You know the NZ guy isn't going to go around doing the same thing over and over again. For him the fact that his friend died is deterrence enough, and is probably punishment enough as living with the consequences of his actions is going to be very tough. The jerk in the article? There is no evidence he wouldn't do the same thing all over again, and he showed malicious intent in committing his crimes as they occurred over an extended period of time.
I have no problem with the seeming disparity in sentences in the two cases.
"while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
Lol, $10k in damages to Akron Uni's servers? Hell no, I used to work there. Security nightmare, tbh. Nice people though. I think they're still using LEAP for their university wireless network. It's great to yank passwords on the fly out of the air. I even wrote a paper when I was there 3 years ago on the insecurity of their wireless, but I hear nothing's been changed to this day.
trevorj
Seriously, how do you get away with saying that a simple DOS attack is worth two and a half YEARS in prison? How does an alleged (read: stretched truth) $15k of damages equal to 2 and a half years of this poor guy's life?
trevorj
Most Americans are now infected with a passion for punishment. Particularly if you don't fit into all of the establishment's categories for being a successful "All-American" type.
How does someone who obviously didn't read the article ,get a 5????????. Identity theft a minor inconvenience? Stolen CC a minor inconvenience? Ya he got and deserves the 2 1/2 years that he might only spend 6 actual months with good behaver.
Jack of all trades,master of none
No physical property damage. backups are expected practice. Only repair TIME, loss of service, and some theft of bandwidth.
The rest of the world couldn't give a flying fuck about a few American TV pundits' websites getting hacked/DDoSed.
How can someone that smart be that stupid?!
Yes, I know it's a stupid question in itself. Every day we see smart people do incredible stupid things, especially in the area of politics, and this is no exception.
Going to great length in an attempt to prevent someone from expressing an opinion you disagree with is both stupid, useless and very pointless. It's also dumb and counter-productive. You gain the most from engaging in a discussion with you opponent and winning the arguments, and you lose everything by removing the opponent from the discussion.
Remember Voltaires famous quote: "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
That's important. It's the very foundation of the democracy.
Sure, some people babble and bring only empty words and inflated egos to discussions, but let them reveal themselves as hollow windbags instead of oppressing them and making them a martyr for their cause. If they have nothing, it will be revealed. The classic Lincoln quote also apples: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.".
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
I'd like to preserve your sig (as I currently see it) alongside your post:
No. This punk is nothing more than a digital brownshirt, trying to silence those who he disagrees with.
Sorry, but silencing others is NOT protected as free speech.
--
Simply disagreeing with a comment is not a valid reason to mark it down.
--CmdrTaco
Quite fitting :-)
Damn, he should have just raped someone instead, he probably would have gotten less time and had a lot more fun in the process.
That's a repulsive thing to say. You deserve 6 months in the clink just for saying that.
Dems were voted out mainly because of the economy sucking. If you notice, nearly all the Dems voted out were "Blue Dogs" and most of THEM only got elected 2 years ago. 95% of "progressive" Dems got re-elected and my own state swung to a Democrat Gov after decades of Republicans.
So let us see the Republicans fix the economy already! They started complaining about 6 months into Obama's Presidency. The GOP better get set to compromise by Summer 2011 or they're going to flop.
Blar.
I wonder how much of our perceived image of the police comes from larger urban areas. I'm guessing that the higher the crime rate, the more militant and rigid the police become. Smaller towns, with less crime, no gangs, etc.., probably have much nicer police.
It also seems like police have lost the ability to use their own judgement in many situations. One that comes to mind is that it is mandatory for police to take someone to jail if there is any domestic violence. Just from watching the show "cops" from time to time, I've seen the man or woman taking into jail and charged with assault for some pretty minor stuff, even accidental, like opening a door and hitting someone with it, not realizing they were on the other side.
I can see how such a rule came about. Most likely many police would arrive at a house and the beaten spouse would refuse to talk or press charges. It makes sense in that situation to take the husband away regardless of what the wife wants. But it does lead to charges being applied when previously the police many have not bothered, as the incident was very minor.
And the video cams in all police cars I'm sure both prevents police abuse, but also makes cops less hesitant to let people off. I'm guessing that their supervisors review the tapes from time to time. If they see an officer letting people go when a crime was committed, the officer may get in trouble (complete guess hehe).
I know from working for a hospital, that lawsuits over time certainly don't encourage flexibility. With each lawsuit, the rules become more and more stringent. I imagine that police departments are the same way.
I am not sure what the answer is, but I do concur that police have become more stringent over time.
Why your post is not modded to 5+ is crazy. Sanity and reminders we used to have it are important.
That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. As long as we are talking about adults here, if a woman wants to remain with a proven abuser and doesn't want to use the legal remedies available to her, she has that right. It's foolish and self-destructive and it's bad decision-making, but she has that right. It is her life.
Besides, change the law so that applying charges is mandatory and it will only have one effect: the woman who doesn't want to press charges just won't call the police in the first place. If neighbors call, she'll refuse to cooperate. You can't help people who don't want to help themselves. The only thing that can be reasonably done is to make sure that when she realizes that being attracted to abusers ("bad boys" etc) and staying with them is pathological, the police work to ensure her physical safety and punish crimes against her while she works to get out of that situation.
It is not the proper role of the state and its police power to make sure that adults exercise good decision-making. Not only do I want them out of that business, they never should have entered into it in the first place.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
It is not the proper role of the state and its police power to make sure that adults exercise good decision-making
In the case of government, it is part of their role to promote general welfare. In the case of police, it is to serve and protect, and part of that is definitely preventing crime.
I'm pretty sure I remember stats when the domestic abuse laws were being put in place, that if the abuser was not removed, that over time the abuse got worse, and many women would end up dead.
If you have statistics saying "removing an abuser early prevents a large number of women from being beaten to death" I'm pretty sure that falls under "general wellfare" and/or serving and protecting by preventing crime. And while the wife may have a choice to leave (we'll skip all the mental reasons why often a spouse is conditioned to accept abuse and it is closer to a mental disorder than a choice...) the kids do not. The police are protecting the kids as much as they are the wife, and possible preventing a cycle of violence, whereby the kids would have grown up to beat their partners.
The author went to prison, but you asked him (as he's been asked in interviews) he'd tell you he's not the only person who's ever, ahem, skirted the law.
Tweet, tweet.