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."
Good. Don't justify their fears by acting like a thug.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
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
"protected free speech"
I find it odd how the constitution seems to mention nothing about unprotected speech and yet people act as if this is normal. Actually, no, that's not odd. That's just the ancient tradition of government corruption kicking in.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
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!!!
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?
Ignore the political aspect, and he's just a vandal.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Are you serious? Free speech allows him to write his own website, it doesn't allow him to break theirs. Whether or not actual damages were inflicted is a different issue, much like "Attempted Murder" is just as much a crime as "Murder". The difference is in the punishment.
It pains me to see people honestly think that limiting other peoples speech is protected as free speech.
The above is not a subtle point at all. "sit ins" are by and large not legal at all. Think Abortion center protests. You can protest them, but you can't be a public disturbance, you can't be on their property, and you can't block people from access to the clinic. This is just what he did, he (attempted a) block of the websites, because he didn't agree with them. Instead of using his right to free speech to debate them, he decided to put his political feelings above others rights (free speech, right to assemble(people reading the sites), etc...)
Does the punishment fit the crime? maybe, maybe not, but this wasn't a protest, this wasn't a comment on some forum, This was a premeditated multivector attack on both the rights and the property of others. Just because he failed at it, or did it with a computer doesn't make it less wrong or illegal.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Any right-winger using a DDOS attack on liberal sites should do time, too.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Where's the line between a DDoS against a political site and "protected free speech"?
I'd say the line is the use of other people's property without their consent. This is the same issue as spamming. His right to express himself doesn't include a right to use anyone else's property to do so.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
I suppose it's possible, but one's morals get strained when the choice is 30 months versus 35 years. Counts are cumulative in feds, so go down the table twenty levels and tell me about "facing punishment for your actions." Shouldn't that punishment be just and fair?
"The pie shall be cut in half and each man shall receive.....death. I'll eat the pie."
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.
Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech...
As far as I can see, the Bill of Rights adds no qualifiers to speech. Am I missing something?
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
Civil disobedience is one thing, vandalism another. No-one should have the right to ddos another.
a DDoS is not speech any more than a punch to the face is speech, you are not sayin or expressing anything, you are using an automated means to disable computer systems and or networks
it's not a subtle point at all,
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
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"?
See also Republicans, and Teabaggers responses to their own being raging assholes.
Ok Nancy, we get it. You're upset you lost the house. Now quit calling people teabaggers and assholes.
There's no place like
Please god, if you are good, let me not die in a fire in a portable toilet.
Haida Manga
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.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
I would go a bit further...
His right to express himself doesn't include a right to silence others.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
Unless its a filibuster DDOS attack - those are ok.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Sit-ins are extensively used today all over the world, but curiously almost exclusively by the "left" of the respective country.
But the fact that they are so heavily used everywhere by people who proclaim themselves to be people's or peace activists doesn't exactly make it any more peaceful or respectable.
Sit-ins are peaceful only in a way that it doesn't punch people in the face. Other than that, they're more often than not illegal, that is, trampling someones right to move or use their property, not only the owner of the place they're sitting-in on, but also all the people around them.
In my opinion, it is a key trademark of the political left of any country in the Western hemisphere: they regard their goals as so important and their mind as so pure, that they habitually see themselves in any case above all their political opponents and their interests and opinions - but usually also above issues like the law, that is more often than not regarded as "protecting the enemy" instead of protecting everyone's freedom. It is this mindset that results in seeing all (their own) actions as "peaceful" as long as no one is punched to the face, no matter what other laws and freedoms they may have crossed. On the other hand, the Left - here in Europe - are the political faction most likely to commit violence, if that is of course "justified" in their own opinions.
Athens: have the lowest pension age of the entire western world, the most state officials per inhabitant and for many industries ridiculously low income taxes. Have the state increase the pension age, riot for months, destroy billions in infrastructure, send package bombs to everywhere in Europe
France: work in a factory, if 20% of employees must be let off in the worldwide crisis, kidnap and/or murder the boss that is still providing a job and income to the remaining 80%.
Germany: prevent any conservative or right-leaning party from ever be able to hold a congress, demonstration or election campaign, no matter what constitution and laws say about it. Beat people from conservative and right-wing parties (see ProKöln and others) to a pulp. People of conservative and right-wing opinions brought it on themselves, right?
Well, then you should realize that there are more elements in parallel than what you listed. Add also all the anti-religion and anti-God rhetoric and the "reason is all we need" kind of logic that is also prevalent today. Then look at the outcome. After the mob slaughtered all their bosses they turned on each other and slaughtered each other because each of the factions in the mob thought the other factions weren't politically correct.
History shows us that if we fail to learn from it we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes today that others in the same political/emotional environment made in the past. Take a look around you and see how often those who claim reason is everything and that religion is stupidity degenerate into nothing more than emotional rantings against those who disagree with them and those in charge of the government. The climate today is the same as it was back then, and it was the "smart" people in the French revolution that were the cruelest and most inhumane to their fellow man. They were the people who slaughtered anyone who disagreed with them....
"while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville