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."
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.
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.
Good. Don't justify their fears by acting like a thug.
That's two and a half years. Yes, he deserves to be punished, but it strikes me that he's not the one acting like a thug here, and I don't give a damn whether he's a rabid lefty, righty, or indy. If I heard that someone had gotten two and half years for taking down Reid'a, Pelosi's, and Michael Moore's sites, I still boggle in disbelief that someone got two and a half years.
Seriously. Damn!
As another lefty, I agree in principle - some people are really assholes (Coulter would qualify for sure), but that doesn't mean that they do not have the right to demonstrate that to the world through unimpeded speech. Those who do not enjoy it have the freedom to not listen.
That said, I wonder about the length of sentence. 30 months sounds way too much to me for this kind of crime. In fact, any prison term sounds harsh - unless I'm missing something about what he did, it looks like the kind of thing that is best punished by a hefty fine and some community service.
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."
I'm curious as to what sort of sentence you would get for cutting off someone's power or whatever comm line they use (be it coaxial, fiber, telephone, etc.). If I cut your server's link to the web, would I get off easier than attempting to saturate that link?
SSC
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.
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."
People fear hackers. The point isn't to compensate Reid, or Pelosi, or Ann Coulter, it's to stop people from doing this kind of thing. Based on your reaction, if every hacker reacted the way you are, then it's working. Certainly I would not be willing to do a DDOS of some site. No reasonable person would risk that kind of sentence for what is essentially a prank.
Let's be honest here, this wasn't some guy who for lulz ran an exploit he found on a website. The guy went to the effort to build up a botnet and use it. He was working on this maliciousness for a long time. Two and a half years doesn't really sound that long, to me.
Kevin Mitnick got five, and his crimes weren't malicious.
Qxe4
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.
Civil disobedience is one thing, vandalism another. No-one should have the right to ddos another.
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.
Unless its a filibuster DDOS attack - those are ok.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news