Slashdot Mirror
Palin E-Mail Snoop Gets Year In Prison
netbuzz writes "David Kernell, whose prying into Sarah Palin's personal e-mail account caused an uproar two months before the 2008 presidential election, was today sentenced to a year and a day by a judge in Knoxville, Tenn. Kernell was convicted of misdemeanor computer fraud and felony obstruction of justice back in April. His attorney had argued for probation on the grounds that what Kernell did amounted to a prank that spun out of control."
It was guessing the answer to her Security Question that was publicly available on the internet. If that's "hacking" then I'm fucking Kevin Mitnick.
What is the point of adding a day onto the sentence?
Then I wonder what punishment the guy who uncovered this has waiting for him.
Worse than regular fraud, because I don't understand computers.
he got sentenced to a year and a day in a halfway house, not a prison.
Theres a difference.
I am pretty sure the actual sentence was 1 year 1 day in custody; to be served at a halfway house.
The local source - http://www.newschannel5.com/Global/story.asp?S=13490313&Call=Email&Format=HTML
He committed a crime, so he goes to jail. What damage is it you want to mitigate here?
Let's face it; he hacked the email account of a Vice Presidential candidate. Regardless of how one feels about Sarah Palin (I can't stand her myself...the things she says makes me want to slam my head in a file cabinet drawer) it's not rocket science to recognize that what he did is a bit more severe (and consequence-prone) than going after your typical person. He should consider himself lucky that he only got a year, really...I figured they'd do much worse.
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
How Mark Zuckerberg Hacked Into Rival ConnectU In 2004
...At one point, Mark appears to have exploited a flaw in ConnectU's account verification process to create a fake Cameron Winklevoss account with a fake Harvard.edu email address.
Mar. 5, 2010
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-mark-zuckerberg-hacked-connectu-2010-3
In this new, fake profile, he listed Cameron's height as 7'4", his hair color as "Ayran Blond," and his eye color as "Sky Blue." He listed Cameron's "language" as "WASP-y."
Next, Mark appears to have logged into the accounts of some ConnectU users and changed their privacy settings to invisible. The idea here was apparently to make it harder for people to find friends on ConnectU, thus reducing its utility. Eventually, Mark appears to have gone a step further, deactivating about 20 ConnectU accounts entirely...
... was not being in the Federal government. If he had been, his actions would've been deemed legal.
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
So this kid gets a year in prison... but most cases like this will not even get a return call from the police. I guess it is not just 'how much justice can you afford' but 'how much your victim can afford'.
Rich banker gets to escape felony hit and run charges, because the judge felt "a felony charge would hurt his ability to make shit tons of money"
http://dailybail.com/home/outrage-morgan-stanley-banker-escapes-felony-charges-for-hit.html
That's a long time for making such a small mistake... There's got to be some sort of easily phrased lesson to be learned here. "If you're going to anger politically powerful people, do it anonymously" ? He should have sent all the data he found to wiki leaks then burned his computer.
check out the Mp3 Garbler I built!
In related news, Sarah Palin is still on the loose, endangering all sanity as we know it.
Would he have received the same sentence if he had hacked the email of a random neighbour?
No. You are intentionally putting her in danger and we know it. The kitchen has the highest number of flaming hot stoves in the house, for hell's sake.
In soviet Russia, God creates you!
if it were you or I?
I refuse to take sides on a political debate, but just because someone is a big figure in politics doesn't mean they should get special treatment. I guess that's why they have their lobbyist groups though.
Heh. And I bet you'll think it's a partisan conspiracy when that comment gets modded down.
It's possible to make even a fairly partisan point without it being flamebait. Your comment doesn't achieve that possibility.
This guy just got lucky and guessed a password. But he acted against a conservative in Tennessee, so he got a year in prison. James O'Keefe actually tried to physically bug the telephone of a sitting U.S. Senator. But O'Keefe acted against a liberal in Louisiana, so he walked with probation.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
while every commentator on this site would howl for the death penalty if the son of a Republican congressman had done the same to Dear Leader?
You don't know that for sure.
And I guess we won't know until they try it and get caught.
What punishment would the guilty person get? I'll bet you London to brick it wouldn't even get to court.
One law for the power elite, and the rest of us can bugger off.
That's true, and so is the paranoid delusion that the community is biased against you.
You're just wrong, is all.
Nonsense, almost everyone on Slashdot can find faults in every other person, including their 'Dear Leader'...
I don't think you know Slashdot very well at all. It is primarily a Libertarian site. I don't think they would react any different if someone hacked in to some Democrat governor's site.
Yeah, violating someone's privacy is wrong. But does it deserve a year in prison? That is what people are objecting to...the overly harsh penalties assigned to crimes regarding computers. The less famous/rich you are the higher the chance you will serve a more severe sentence.
And seriously, try not to be such a partisan douche in the future.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
HP Pretexting Charges Dismissed: "Charges against defendants in the Hewlett-Packard pretexting case have been dismissed."
He wasn't using a VPN, he was just using a web based proxy.
Heh. And I bet you'll think it's a partisan conspiracy when that comment gets modded down.
No, he'd think it was Slashdot, which has steadily slid away from libertarian roots that would have applauded someone revealing personal emails from ANYONE being charged with an offense.
Though I'll bet you think it was a conservative conspiracy that has modded his statement up...
When conspiracies come up it's pretty much always liberals claiming there's a conspiracy at hand. As an example, Birthers (wrongly) think Obama doesn't have a valid certificate, but do not think there's a massive cover-up. Truthers (wrongly) think there's a vast conspiracy that sought to kill people for some perceived benefit of the government.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Really? His "only crime was his political alignment?" Do you actually believe that? I'm personally glad we have laws that make it punishable to access other peoples accounts and spread their private information without permission. Right to privacy and all that.
Incidentally I'm not sure if you're missing the details or not, but the felony was obstruction of justice -- attempting to hide and destroy evidence (and so on). Had he not done that, he would have been fine (well not fine, he was still hit with a misdemeanor, but less of a big deal than a felony!)
I haven't followed O'Keefe closely at all -- what did he do that warrants a felony?
It's possible on Slashdot, but less likely.
Try an experiment. Create a new account and make some stupidass post in the first remotely political article that is either anti-republican or anti-democrat. See what happens!
Though I'll bet you think it was a conservative conspiracy that has modded his statement up...
It's sitting at 2: Flamebait right now, so... no.
As an example, Birthers (wrongly) think Obama doesn't have a valid certificate, but do not think there's a massive cover-up.
Really? Where are you finding your Birthers, and how can I get the ones I know to be that sane?
So are you claiming he didn't illegally access her account? This isn't a political thing, he clearly broke the law.
If he accessed your account, my account or Barack Obama's account, it'd still be a crime.
Try an experiment. Create a new account and make some stupidass post in the first remotely political article that is either anti-republican or anti-democrat. See what happens!
Well, my point is, if you make that post and it's not a stupidass post, i.e. you're backing up your position with facts and you're not just regurgitating talking points, it probably won't end up mod-bombed no matter what position it takes. It might get slapped with a negative mod or three, but in the long run it will end up at least where it started and probably higher.
you'd want to slam her head in a file cabinet drawer, not your own. :)
So I ask again, why do conservatives insist on using his middle name when neither he, nor most others refer to him in that manner?
Because it makes him sound scarier and less "mainstream America."
Er, I hope that wasn't a rhetorical question.
It's sitting at 2: Flamebait right now, so... no.
Well, as I said, this is Slashdot. It was at +4 at the time I posted. I don't think of the rapid decline as conspiracy, as much as a much of people who like to censor what conservatives have to say. Not that they are organized in any way, just as I said that there are a large number on Slashdot.
Really? Where are you finding your Birthers, and how can I get the ones I know to be that sane?
Go read what they have to say. They pretty much are all arguing what amounts to a minute point of law around the validity of the certificate, as I said I think they are mistaken and pretty stupid for even pushing the matter anyway, when even if they had a point about one document there are so many other factors that would make it OK for him to be president. You can find a range of sanity levels on the Birther thing, whereas any Truther is pretty much for sure going to be well off the deep end in all sorts of other matters.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The real joke is that this kid wasn't some computer genius on the contrary it was Sarah Palin's stupidity that should be sentenced to a year.
Her password question: What high school did you attend?
Answer: Wascilla High.
Palin is an idiot.
Yes, but if he accessed your account or my account no one would care. If he accessed Obama's account most people taking sides would flip their position.
Obama is also in favor of increased wiretapping and specifically Internet wiretaps. Would it then be okay to break into Obama's accounts?
No, if he accessed my account or your account and proved we were engaging in significant unlawful behavior, he'd probably be praised. If he did that to Obama, there'd be Tea Party protests demanding he be pardoned outright for proving that Obama is corrupt and trying to avoid legally mandated oversight.
Note he only got a misdemeanor, a slap on the wrist, for the actual computer fraud.
The government does not take obstruction of justice lightly and tends to give stiff sentences for it.
Aside from that, yes, an attack on an account for political gain to influence an election would reasonably bring a more severe punishment than simply doing it to see if you can. This wasn't just some kid. His dad is a powerful Democratic state legislator and was then a member of Obama's Tennessee campaign. I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't doing dad's bidding, and is taking the fall to avoid ruining dad's career. Expect to see the payoff after this clears up, likely a well-paid position in a Democratic campaign in 2012.
Personally, I think he deserves extra time just for being stupid by using a single proxy that had a policy of turning over evidence of any illegal activity to the police. :)
He'd likely still be prosecuted (if he read your or my mail), as he'd be acting as a vigilante.
I thought some of the "details" include Palin using her personal email for government business, which I think is illegal?
I want to applaud this guy, but at the same time, unless he had a reason to think there was something illegal going on, and the authorities weren't doing anything about it, then he's just being douchy.
I don't think of the rapid decline as conspiracy, as much as a much of people who like to censor what conservatives have to say. Not that they are organized in any way, just as I said that there are a large number on Slashdot.
Again, I'll say: there's writing a conservative point, and there's writing conservative flamebait. That post is #2.
I'd expect a post that claimed that all conservatives were dirty goat-fuckers to get modded down in the exact same way.
Reasoned discourse between people who disagree benefits everyone. Posting "OMG if this bad thing that happened to my side happened to your side, you'd hate it instead of loving it, you dirty hypocritical bastards!" doesn't.
You can find a range of sanity levels on the Birther thing, whereas any Truther is pretty much for sure going to be well off the deep end in all sorts of other matters.
There again I have to disagree. I've met people who felt that the standard story of what happened on 9/11 doesn't add up in some way or in terms of physics doesn't make sense in some way, who haven't (as far as I can tell) made the leap to the idea that it's all Dick Cheney's evil conspiracy to grow the power of the executive branch and steal oil. But maybe you wouldn't call those people Truthers, in which case I'd say that your problem would be that you're trying to draw a false equivalence between two groups of people with differing levels of crazy. (And between two groups of vastly differing size.)
He got a slap on the wrist for looking at e-mails, and a year for felony obstruction of justice (which the justice department tends to frown upon, strangely enough).
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
There was exactly ZERO evidence that they intended to bug a telephone. You'd think the arresting officers would have at least found bugging equipment on them. They did not.
He was charged with the one crime he committed: Entering a federal building under false pretenses. And for that crime, which actually harmed nobody, he got three years probation and 100 hours of community service -- and his part in it was organizing and videotaping. That's pretty severe.
BTW, the police erased the video he took before giving him his phone back. Hmmm...
A year and a day means he can earn 42 days of "good time" for early release. In the Federal system you can earn upto 54 days of "good time" per year 5884.04 Good Conduct Time Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act
It's also wrong regardless of political position. If I were to do exactly the same thing to you, you'd be lucky to get the police to give it a second thought, even if you could pinpoint me for them. Politician? Oh, that's different, they deserve the actual protections named under the law.
I haven't followed O'Keefe closely at all -- what did he do that warrants a felony?
Gaining access to the communications infrastructure of a Federal building under false pretenses?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
His only crime was he wasn't as rich and powerful as Mark Zuckerberg.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
You're making the common conservative mistake assuming that liberals are as partisan and blindered as you are, which isn't the case most of the time. I think you'd find that if Kernell had gotten into Obama's or Clinton's email and found that they're conducting blatantly illegal activities, and Kernell had then exposed those activities, most liberals would be applauding him and complaining about his sentence. The even bigger difference between the liberals and you guys is that we'd then be COMPLAINING ABOUT THE EXPOSED ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES and trying to hold our candidate responsible for them. Conservatives have gone to great lengths to make sure that the entire story is about illegally accessing the account, and absolutely **NOT** about Palin's illegal use of them. After all, it's all right if your guy does it, right?
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
No one believed you the first time you said it (including yourself), so why did you think repeating it would help?
Wrong!
What happened now? Sarah Palin e-mailed Snoop Dogg and now he is being jailed? Crazy world we live in.
"Never give up, for that is just the time and place when the tide will change." -Harriet Beecher Stowe ^_^
Yeah, he could have just stuck with that last line and been okay. His sig is very true too.
Why are you letting these clowns ruin our country?
Would you feel the same way if it were YOUR email account he compromised and your information he distributed?
hacking into the email account of the (potential) vice president is clearly more damaging than hacking into a random person's.
You are incorrect. Your conclusion is certainly not clear by definition.
The current president's email account is included in your "random person" argument, as well as any email account belonging to an agent of the FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. Therefore, "hacking into a random person's" email is clearly (potentially) more damaging than hacking into the email account of a vice presidential candidate.
The terms "random" and "average" are related, but are typically not interchangeable.
Ok, fine -- throw this guy in jail for computer trespass.
But while you're at it, throw Sony in jail for their rootkit. Throw Starforce in jail for their rootkit. Throw the "ACORN pimp" in jail for his tampering with the phones in the Democratic office.
If you're going to apply a law, apply it consistently. The way it's being enforced now is way too arbitrary.
--Jeremy
Jesus was a liberal
there is no reason this eprson should see any jail time. It's stupid. He is not a menace, he isn't violent, and this was a prank.
I'm not saying punishment shouldn't be done, but this is just obscene.
I mean, instead of costing us money, he could be on parole with a job paying taxes.
God damn private prisons are ruining this countries legal system.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
...to put Sarah Palin in a Crackpot Asylum! Recently Dubya blasts Palin as 'unqualified' for President and McCain as being 'less of a man' ... http://bit.ly/dmzcJ6 Go Dubya! :D
For one time I agree with the father of Barney Bush who bite a journalist! ( Good dog...) :D
Claude LaFreniere aka climenole
time to read it.
For the record, I despise Sarah Palin and think she's a dangerous nut job, and yet I'm the one saying that I think jail is appropriate. I guess your broad generalizations don't really work out so well do they?
Go read the commentary here about Facebook and their privacy practices, and the howls for Zuckerberg's blood, and then consider the question.
If privacy is important enough to warrant safeguarding, it deserves protection from corporate and personal invasion, even if you don't agree with the politics of the person whose privacy is being invaded.
As far as the severity of the crime, sentencing guidelines call for 15-21 months, prosecution asked for 18 months, and the judge sentenced him to a year and a day (making him eligible for parole, which is usually applicable after serving 1/3 the sentence, or 4 months), and recommended it be at a halfway house.
As sentencing goes, that seems fairly light considering the felony charges. He'll probably serve 4 months in a halfway house, and then spend a few years on probation. What would you suggest as a more equitable sentence? (Bearing in mind that what he is guilty of is misdemeanor computer fraud and felony obstruction of justice, of course?) If he hadn't attempted to erase the evidence, he probably would have received a comparative slap on the wrist: the misdemeanor charge would have carried with it a sentence of "up to a year in prison," and would most likely have turned into a fine, community service, and probation - given his age, and the relatively light charge.
that is just fucking bullshit. if Obama's email was hacked and published, the entire internet including slashdot would want the hacker's head off. well, at least NOBODY would argue that one year is too many.
If you were a maverick you'd understand. Thank you; come again.
Reply to That ||
"I know I would hate to have anyone snooping in my private e-mails"
If someone did that, what do you think would happen to them? Nothing. Only 'important' (read: useless, corrupt politicians) are protected from actions such as this.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Or overly harsh penalties for non-violent crimes in general. In general, putting people in jail serves three purposes, (a) to protect the public from this person, (b) teach the person a lesson, and (c) serve as a deterrent to others. If it is a crime where the perpetrator is actually pretty low-risk to the public, it seems to make sense to examine how we can adjust (b) and (c) appropriately because sending people to jail tends to turn them into institutionalised criminals (not to mention becoming a burden on the tax payer).
The question is, what is the best way they can "pay back" their debt to society, whilst serving as a lesson to others. It seems to me Community Service, doing litter picking etc, along with a criminal record is going along the right lines. When it appears that a rapist is serving less time than somebody that has downloaded a few tunes for private enjoyment, then it is clear some form of reform is needed.
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
No, slashdotters are reacting so strongly because, being slashdotters, they didn't RTFA and see that he didn't get a year in prison, nor did he get a year's sentenced for violation someone's privacy. The incarceration is for "obstruction of justice". This felony provides for a maximum of 20 years incarceration, yet the guidelines applied to this case recommend 15-18 months. The *total* term sought by the prosecution was 18 months. How is either the request or the result out of the range in the guidelines? Neither the notoriety of the case nor the perp can be credited with affecting the incarceration term. In this case the guy outright posted his goal was to "disrupt her campaign". The breach of privacy was merely a vessel to his goal, and the end punishment of a felony was for destroying evidence during a federal investigation of his criminal activity.
The misdemeanor penalty he got for the computer offense is apparently too small to be reported on, and/or is "rolled into" the 18 month request.
My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
See, and this is an example of how courts (well, a jury in this case) still don't really understand computers. The evidence for the obstruction charge is that he delete some photos (not related to the incident) and then defragmented his hard drive. Also, he uninstalled one web browser and cleared the cache in another. This interfered with the later forensic probe, sure, but obstruction of justice requires the /intent/ to interfere with an investigation. That defragging the hard drive was done with the intent of interfering with the forensic probe is not only open to reasonable doubt, but the allegation strains credibility. If he was really concerned about destroying the evidence, he would have reformatted the drive or physically destroyed it. And people clear browser caches for all sorts of reasons. I believe the jury was, on this charge, critically confused.
---linuxrocks123
vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
~shrug~ it's worth an experiment surely.
I don't believe your post is very accurate. It's stated here:
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2010/apr/23/fbi-kernell-tried-to-destroy-proof-of-e-mail/
That part of the obstruction charge resulted from testimony that:
[Kernell] worried the FBI was on his trail and openly pondered the merits of reformatting his hard drive.
Furthermore, it seems as if material from Palin's account was deleted ("including deleting from the computer material gleaned from Palin's account") and then he took the steps you mentioned. Next, the guy had malware installed on his computer. I I don't think we're talking any computer expert here... it's interesting he even knew that defrag might do something. How many people just happen to delete files, uninstall a browser, delete cookies, and defrag? Coincidence? That plus the testimony that Kernell was trying to figure out how best to destroy evidence, seems to negate your point.
So basically, no, you're completely wrong about what the evidence is as far as I can tell.
Hadn't read about that, that would do it!
edit: though when I checked Wikipedia on O'Keefe right now, it states:
So the difference basically is that the testimony and evidence in the Kernell case led the court to a guilty felony, not so much in the O'Keefe. ~shrug~
So someone that illegally access my email will get a year in prison? Highly doubt it. This is just another case of some rich bitch and her political army ensuing their own versions of justice. Do you think for a second she hasn't done or committed something that could potentially have been tried for at least double that time? Fuck this. I guess in hindsight after reading my comment; I think it's bullshit that we only make an example of people that attack the rich and famous and those of us that are normal have to live with the fact that there is no system that gives a shit about protecting us. I doubt there would even be any repercussion at all, probably not even cooperation from the business that said attack was committed on/or from. A big ":("
Well, if Palin used it illegally, why doesn't someone bring charges against her? From everything I've seen and heard, the snooper was looking for damaging stuff, but found nothing damning.
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
The obstruction of justice charge is the strangest part IMHO. Trying to clean up after a crime is a bigger crime than the crime itself? So if I wear latex gloves to commit a murder and then throw them away when I'm done, am I now guilty of obstruction of justice charges as well as the murder? If I shoplift something and then run away before someone can catch me, am I guilty of obstruction of justice charges as well? Is any attempt to remove evidence of a crime make you guilty of a felony? That just seems crazy. Running away is obstructing justice. Wearing a mask while committing a crime is obstructing justice. in fact, anything other than going directly to the police station with evidence in hand is obstruction of justice.
I don't get how they draw this line so easily for computer crimes but not for other crimes.
d
all language nazi's will burne in heil!
...since O'Keefe did just about the same thing and came up clean for it.
Pardon Kernell, who's only crime was crossing Palin.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
It might not be politically favorable to someone, but it'd at least mitigate the damage.
Kernell's only crime was his political alignment. It would only be consistent to do that, or make O'Keefe a felon as well.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
I guess someone else's nerve got hit close by asking for consistency.
Pardon Kernell, or recognize O'Keefe as a felon. Same kinds of deeds, except Kernell didn't have Murdoch at his side to clean up loose ends.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Their mask slipped, but anyone who says anything about it gets silenced. Such is life.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
It is ironic that he hacked the account for political reasons and now has lost his right to vote. That alone seems like the ultimate poetic justice.
I'm not a high-profile political figure that puts on a charade about how average I am, yet is not afraid to politically destroy someone with not-so-average-person power.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Yes, the evidence is there, despite what O'Keefe's lawyer might try to claim.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
He won't be able to use the ballot box (until a pardon or commutation), but he isn't financially blocked. He would be free to donate to anyone he wished, and support any candidate he wished. The laugh's on his opponents.
Especially if it means that he can help get someone to make Tennessee recognize his right to vote. Or get enough support for a politically inconvenient (for Kernell's attackers) pardon.
He isn't going to suffer as much as you would want him to.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Sanity in sentencing(or even letting the charge stand) wouldn't satisfy the Palin's desire for political destruction.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Ah, so it is OK to break the law as long as the victim is someone you don't like. You are a person, she is a person, the perp is a person.
You are also a hypocrite and you didn't answer my question.
Would you feel the same way if it were YOUR email account that was compromised and your information that was distributed?
Political heavyweight Jim McDermott acquired an illegally recorded phone call and released it for political gain.
Privacy issues, you would think....
Jail time?
Not even.
Check out this statement: "Full D.C. Circuit Rules McDermott Had No First Amendment Right to Leak Phone Tape Due to Ethics Committee Rules".
Really?
It is only an 'ethics committee' rule violation.
http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cla/discoveries/2009/10/full_dc_circuit_rules_mcdermot.html
I am just as surprised as you, they have an ethics committee?
No brain, no pain.
Like I said, people taking sides would flip their positions.
Only because he is president. They would react the same if Bush was hacked when he was president.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
Yes, destroying the evidence is obstruction of justice, and it’s pretty clearly defined from the legal end of things, so I’m not sure what your confusion arises from.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Both sides play dirty tricks, I wouldn't have been surprised if he had been a Republican party operative's son going after Obama.