Slashdot Mirror


Hacking Neighbor Pleads Guilty On Death Threats and Porn

wiredmikey writes "Another good reason to make sure your wireless is secured! 'Barry Vincent Ardolf of Blaine, Minnesota pleaded guilty to hacking into his neighbor's wireless Internet system and posing as the neighbor to make threats to kill the Vice President of the United States. Just two days into his federal trial in St. Paul, Ardolf stopped the trial to plead guilty. According to the US Department of Justice, in his plea agreement, Ardolf, 45 years-old, was indicted on June 23, 2010, admitted that in February of 2009, he hacked into his neighbor's wireless Internet connection and created multiple Yahoo.com email accounts in his neighbor's name." Ardolf's guilty plea included child porn possession, as well as the death threats.

44 of 284 comments (clear)

  1. My neighbor's IP by asher09 · · Score: 5, Funny

    First post! ...(from my neighbor's IP address; so mod him down, not me)

    --
    Some were yelling one thing, some another. Most of them had no idea what was going on or why they were there. Acts19:32
    1. Re:My neighbor's IP by Eudial · · Score: 4, Funny

      Stupid Flanders!

      --
      GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
    2. Re:My neighbor's IP by Co0Ps · · Score: 2

      Diddly-doodily-death threats!

    3. Re:My neighbor's IP by MachDelta · · Score: 5, Informative

      He sent threats and child porn (etc) to his neighbours co-workers. His neighbours hired an "investigator" who then discovered buddy was jacking their wireless.

      Basically someone looked at their router logs.

  2. What's not to like? by seebs · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Death threats against the vice president, breaking into his neighbor's wireless... But no, he didn't stop there. Child porn.

    I wonder if some company that has a wireless security technology hired this guy to make their product look necessary.

    --
    My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
    1. Re:What's not to like? by gnarfel · · Score: 2

      +1 Ethically Questionable Business Tactic

      --
      Local music(to upstate NY). http://gnarfel.com/ radio.
    2. Re:What's not to like? by andolyne · · Score: 5, Informative

      when you read TFA, it actually just sounds like he was screwing around and the child porn was more like "this'll get the dude in trouble" rather than "I have a private collection because i'm a pedo".

      Either way, the dude was really stupid and deserves to get jail time for it.

      edit: changed the word "article" to TFA cause that's the way it's done here ;)

    3. Re:What's not to like? by MoonBuggy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The article is rather sparse on details, but what interests me is that Ardolf didn't succeed in his "this'll get the dude in trouble" plan; what led the police to believe that the access point had been 'hacked'? What security was used, for that matter? Were there logs?

      The guilty plea certainly makes it seem like this is a case where computer fraud was handled correctly by the system, and since the courts often seem to make the mistake that 'IP address == person' it'd be good to see how they went about distinguishing the actual criminal from the victim here.

    4. Re:What's not to like? by benjamindees · · Score: 2

      He worked for Medtronic, which is a huge recipient of healthcare funding for unnecessary surgeries for old people. So, in a sense, yes, he was being indirectly paid by the US government as he tried to frame his neighbor as being anti-government-spending. I'd say that qualifies as promoting a product.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    5. Re:What's not to like? by Capsaicin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Unsecured doesn't imply incompetent - there are people who happily leave a public WiFi connection to the net which is securely isolated from their internal network.

      In fact, if you intend doing anything online which might raise the ire of authorities, "securing" your WiFi is actually quite foolish. What you are effectively doing is removing a reasonable doubt that activity over the connection is your activity.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    6. Re:What's not to like? by Idbar · · Score: 2

      I recently moved to a new apartment, my connection wasn't that great and I was having problems with my router. I used WEP to make it "light" to the router to deal with security and due to some backward compatibility I needed for some devices at home.

      When I thought my router was having problems, I bought a new one, only to realize through logs that my lovely neighbor broke into my network and was torrenting and stressing my router, my connection and most likely downloading illegal stuff.

      Now, my router is secure, yet there's an asshat hacking my network and making me look bad (in the case that I was detected to be downloading by **IA and friends).

      Luckily, I tracked this down and secure further the network, but without proper tools, what can a normal user do against these smart asses?

    7. Re:What's not to like? by Barny · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Browser history, cache, etc.

      They would have gotten the guy who owns the net connections PC and gone to town, found it clean of any corroborating evidence and then gone looking for neighbours who might have been using it (since it would have been a regular thing over time). Cross reference which neighbours don't have their own net connections with a motive (who had a grudge against him).

      Easier to narrow down the field of who would do it by motive, of course once it was established it was a frame up.

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
    8. Re:What's not to like? by icebike · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The article is rather sparse on details, but what interests me is that Ardolf didn't succeed in his "this'll get the dude in trouble" plan; what led the police to believe that the access point had been 'hacked'? What security was used, for that matter? Were there logs?

      Chances are it was wide open, no security. The guy does not sound bright enough to have even hacked WEP, let alone anything stronger.

      With that fact in hand, and finding no evidence that the neighbor had any knowledge or ill intent, your circle of suspects is limited to what you can measure with a standard hard ware store carpenters tape measure.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    9. Re:What's not to like? by Barny · · Score: 2

      It would have.

      Police still don't think technically, they stick to police work and leave the dissecting of evidence to professionals. They would have thought, "The crime was done via computer, so lets get a warrant to search for and seize his computer stuff" then they get someone else to go through that, to find the evidence that ties the person to the crime. Finding none they would have gone searching for a motive.

      The problems arise when technology forms the core of the case, rather than just being evidence for an crime that is at its core, revenge (whether justified or not).

      Either way, this guy (the perp) is likely going to spend a fair while reflecting on why its a bad idea to try and have the police do your dirty work for you.

      Note: IANAC (I am not a cop), I just know a few pretty well, the funny thing is some of them are very switched on about technology, its just they are not encouraged to use that knowledge when on cases.

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
    10. Re:What's not to like? by ProfanityHead · · Score: 3, Informative

      what can a normal user do against these smart asses?

      Here's an idea. Get a Linux based router (I have a Linksys with DD-WRT) and use it to muck with any connections coming from his MAC address. You could block all his Bittorrent connections and redirect his HTTP connections somewhere else (such as a rickroll or goatse). Do this long enough to annoy the heck out of him and then block him completely using a higher grade encryption (such as WPA2) and/or MAC filtering.

      MAC filtering? SERIOUSLY?

      That is just so wrong.

    11. Re:What's not to like? by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Luckily, I tracked this down and secure further the network, but without proper tools, what can a normal user do against these smart asses?

      Read Slash Dot occasionally and notice that WEP is insecure.
      http://lmgtfy.com/?q=WEP+insecure+site%3Aslashdot.org

      Move away from WEP (its been known for 5 years to be easily hacked).

      WPA2 is where you want to be.
      I had a laptop with a mini-pci network adapter built in that was old enough that it didn't support anything but WEP. 8 bucks got me a replacement card from Amazon, which did WPA2.

      Computers are easy to upgrade. Some stuff is harder.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    12. Re:What's not to like? by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The guilty plea certainly makes it seem like this is a case where computer fraud was handled correctly by the system

      Don't be so quick. Many innocent people plead guilty because they've been poorly advised by a public defender. A plea of guilty doesn't mean the person was guilty. It means that a deal was offered and the suspect had no faith in his defense at trial.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    13. Re:What's not to like? by Idbar · · Score: 2

      That's exactly my point. You think you're the smartest guy because you're stealing your neighbor's BW? You can be as smart as you want, but if you pick my lock, and try to get into my place when I'm in, in my defense I can shoot your head with my gun.

      Then again, I check my network and see something abusive. I don't care if a person uses my network (I used to leave it open - as a grad student you realize that some people just don't have the money to pay for a freaking network connection). What I don't like is abusive people that get into my network even though I'm using security. Let's face it, your regular lock on an average US neighborhood can be open even with a credit card, no reason to break into the houses. You expect that little security will keep your neighbors informed that you DON'T want them to use it.

      Then again, if I manage to break my neighbor's WPA then I'm good and I can start downloading whatever it pleases me on his behalf?

    14. Re:What's not to like? by igreaterthanu · · Score: 2

      If BitTorrent never works then it is obvious that it is blocked. If you slow it down to something ridiculously measly, such as a few kb/s, and eventually disconnect at random intervals, it is much more annoying for the neighbor and hence funnier that way.

      Same goes for HTTP redirects. Make them only happen every 50 pages or something. If you have a fair bit of time on your hands then injecting fake news articles onto their favorite news site could be interesting.

      --
      I dream of a nation where a man is not judged by his skin color but by an number assigned by a credit rating agency.
    15. Re:What's not to like? by Cwix · · Score: 2

      If he doesnt have a large number of devices, AND he doesnt add new devices with any frequency, then adding a few address to a MAC list isnt a bad idea. Unless the neighbor knows what mac to spoof, he wont get on.

      It by no means is a great or even good security practice, but in certain situations, it isnt that horrible.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    16. Re:What's not to like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      This guy has a history of problems with neighbors. This isnt his first run in with the law
      See: http://www.startribune.com/local/99435264.html
      and
      http://www.startribune.com/local/north/96012389.html

    17. Re:What's not to like? by westlake · · Score: 2

      Death threats against the vice president, breaking into his neighbor's wireless... But no, he didn't stop there. Child porn.

      Read deeper.

      Think before another knee-jerk mod-up:

      It began in August 2008, when Ardolf's new neighbors called Blaine police to report a creepy encounter. Ardolf, they told police, had picked up their 4-year-old son and kissed him. After that, Matt and Bethany Kostolnik said, they intended to just keep their distance from him.


      Unknown to them, he began moving to exact revenge.


      He created e-mail accounts in Matt Kostolnik's name and used a password-cracking program to hack into the Kostolniks' wireless router. He then sent e-mails -- one containing sexually suggestive language, others containing images of child pornography -- to Matt Kostolnik's co-workers and boss. It was all meant to appear that the e-mails came from Kostolnik. Ardolf also used the bogus e-mail accounts to create a fake MySpace page, which contained a child porn image.

      Later, he sent another fake e-mail to Kostolnik's law firm, purporting to be from a woman who claimed Kostolnik sexually assaulted her. The woman was real, the incident was not.

      Vengeful neighbor in Blaine pleads to Biden threat, hacking [Dec 17]

    18. Re:What's not to like? by Jardine · · Score: 2

      If BitTorrent never works then it is obvious that it is blocked. If you slow it down to something ridiculously measly, such as a few kb/s, and eventually disconnect at random intervals, it is much more annoying for the neighbor and hence funnier that way.

      My ISP provides that service already. Thanks Bell Canada!

    19. Re:What's not to like? by nbauman · · Score: 5, Informative

      Minneapolis Star Tribune http://www.startribune.com/ had several stories, which you can find by searching for "Ardolf". Good stories, although not too technical.

      The victim, Matt Kostolnik, worked in a law firm, and Ardolf sent messages to the firm. The law firm hired an investigator to figure out what was going on. The investigator tracked Kostolnik's wireless traffic, and fingered Ardolf. Then they sent the cops with a search warrant to Ardolf's house, which produced even more incriminating evidence.

      Ardolf turned down a plea bargain on the identity theft charges alone, so they added the child porn charges and went to trial. When he saw the evidence against him, he gave up and pled guilty.

      I can remember a handful of cases like this where the victim got out of it because they managed to catch the real criminal. (Wasn't there one recently in England?) I wonder how many cases there were where the innocent victim got convicted.

    20. Re:What's not to like? by blueg3 · · Score: 2

      In criminal matters, law enforcement knows full well that an IP address is not a unique identifier. There are countless cases where a computer is shared among multiple people or an access point is "borrowed" to obtain illicit material. You can't really get a conviction with just evidence that illicit material was sent to a particular IP address; the defendant's lawyers will have a field day with that. You need real corroborating evidence, like files on the guy's computer.

    21. Re:What's not to like? by apparently · · Score: 2

      If he doesnt have a large number of devices, AND he doesnt add new devices with any frequency, then adding a few address to a MAC list isnt a bad idea.

      The problem is that the scenario involves a neighbor who has gone through the effort of breaking WEP; anyone using the tools to break WEP already has the tools available to see the MAC addresses of whitelisted clients, and thus can just spoof a valid MAC address.

    22. Re:What's not to like? by Capsaicin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The geek's notions of "reasonable doubt" will most likely land him in the slammer.

      IAAL.

      But do note, I'm not saying that simply leaving your connection unsecured will keep you out of the slammer. I'm saying that securing your connection will give us (lawyers) one less handle to work with.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    23. Re:What's not to like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      MAC filtering is a waste of time. MAC addresses can easily be changed to match one of your exciting addresses. And you're already broadcasting your existing devices. Guess what one of the first things attack tools do when they're having trouble getting a response from the AP?

    24. Re:What's not to like? by witherstaff · · Score: 2

      With that fact in hand

      This last week stealing wifi was front page news.

      This past week Officer Keith Kirk, during the middle of the day caught and arrested a subject standing in an alley behind a local business, with residential housing on the other side of the alley, holding his laptop in one hand and self-gratifying himself in public. The person had connected his computer to the internet through the connection that the local business he was standing next to offers to their customers. This subject has been charged with multiple felony charges and his computer has been seized

    25. Re:What's not to like? by gnasher719 · · Score: 2

      MAC filtering is a waste of time. MAC addresses can easily be changed to match one of your exciting addresses. And you're already broadcasting your existing devices. Guess what one of the first things attack tools do when they're having trouble getting a response from the AP?

      Changing the MAC address of a device means you give up any excuse that you got onto someone's WiFi connection by accident. So when I call the cops, you are in serious trouble. The good thing about WiFi hacking is that you have to be nearby. Which means I'll find you. And I'm not mad enough to knock on your door myself.

    26. Re:What's not to like? by tehcyder · · Score: 2

      He is, it's called Crime. Contrary to popular belief, most criminals do get caught.

      That is a meaningless statement, as nobody knows how many unreported crimes there are, nor how many criminals have never registered on the authorities radar.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  3. Re:Tea Party strikes again! by DJ+Particle · · Score: 2

    Addendum: How much legal headache did his neighbor go through before Ardolf was suspected? The article doesn't say

  4. In all fairness... by DWMorse · · Score: 5, Funny

    In all fairness, I live in Minnesota. I can vouch that there's just not much else to do around here in the winter.

    --
    There's a spot in User Info for World of Warcraft account names? Really?
  5. Re:curious... by binaryseraph · · Score: 2

    The only thing I can think of is that the neighbor starts finding this suspicious stuff about them online. Calls the cops (or the cops call him) and then start pulling records off the wireless router.. Like you said the MAC address should be recorded. They may have been able to subpoena (or not, thanks patriot act) the local ISP's and start pulling mac addresses from the neighborhood.

    lesson learned heh.

  6. MAC Address Spoofing by nuckfuts · · Score: 3, Informative

    Connecting to a wireless router usually means obtaining IP settings via DHCP. In the process, the MAC address of your network adapter (which is supposed to unique) will be recorded on the router, at least for some period of time. Therefore, if you want to connect without leaving an obvious fingerprint pointing back to your computer, first modify the MAC address that your network card is putting out. On Windows machines, drivers often provide a way to specify your MAC address under the "advanced properties" of the adapter. On my Intel network adapter, for example, the setting is listed as "Locally Administered Address", and is undefined by default.

    You might even spoof a specific make of network adapter by choosing an "Organizationally Unique Identifier" from the OUI Public Listing.

  7. This article has a lot of details... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The neighbors suspected the guy right away. Fortunately, the investigators listened to the [innocent] neighbors and started looking at the real bad guy.

    http://www.startribune.com/local/north/112080854.html?elr=KArks:DCiUHc3E7_V_nDaycUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUoD3aPc:_2yc:a_ncyD_MDCiU

  8. Re:Derangement by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What I don't get is why so many folks let themselves uniquely be turned into raving lunatics about politics - especially given how important the issues are to them.

    Because the law is fucking insane. For instance, we live in a country where it's considered an appropriate and measured response to throw someone in prison, and confiscate their home, for growing a plant that's some people disapprove of. How do you deal with that rationally?

    If you have a mission, and that mission is important - you need to focus. Turning explosive (figuratively, or literally when you mix in religion) might seem a good way to get attention on something that is overlooked - but if you pay any attention to how political events turn out, it rarely has a positive net effect.

    The problem is, nothing really has a positive effect. It's been a steady slide down towards authoritarian corporatism for all of my 30 years in this country. Every last tiny shred of hope has been crushed out of me. There is no chance for change besides another American Revolution. Unfortunately, I don't see it coming in my lifetime. All I can do is keep my head down and try not to get caught up in the machine. If anything, I'm surprised we haven't seen more people flip out. The situation definitely calls for it.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  9. Re:Tea Party strikes again! by Barny · · Score: 2

    Likely all his computer equipment confiscated for evidence, some good ol' police questioning (think how bad you would be treated if the police know you were downloading child porn) and of course his local reputation tainted by association with the case.

    Of course once forensics failed to find corroborating evidence on his PC that he did the crimes, they would have immediately gone into 'this is a frame up' mode, and he would have been questioned further in regards to who would have a motive to having him arrested.

    Until all the paper work is done, the 'I's dotted and the 'T's crossed, he will be without his computer gear, since it would be evidence in the case still.

    WPA security is not rocket surgery! ;)

    --
    ...
    /me sighs
  10. Re:Derangement by east+coast · · Score: 2

    His threats against Biden had nothing to do with politics. Had it been McCain in office Palin would have gotten the death threat instead. It seems that he wanted revenge against his neighbors and was sane enough to understand that the local cops were worthless in matters of cyber crime and wanted to insure that semi-competent agents of the law got involved.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  11. Re:connecting != hacking by east+coast · · Score: 2

    Find me a judge who'd consider this content secure and you might have a case. Sucks to be ignorant, doesn't it?

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  12. The case went to trial - and he folded. by westlake · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Don't be so quick. Many innocent people plead guilty because they've been poorly advised by a public defender. A plea of guilty doesn't mean the person was guilty. It means that a deal was offered and the suspect had no faith in his defense at trial.

    Where does it say he had a public defender?

    He'd refused a more favorable plea deal last summer, insisting on fighting the government's case against him. But after two days of trial -- including Thursday's testimony from expert witnesses who showed the elaborate means Ardolf used to harass and smear neighbors who'd once called the police on him -- he stopped denying what he had done.
    "The reality of it became apparent to him that this was going to happen and he didn't want to perpetuate his own distress or the pain for the victims," Ardolf's lawyer, Seamus Mahoney, said Friday.
    Vengeful neighbor in Blaine pleads to Biden threat, hacking

    Seamus Mahoney is a criminal defense attorney with a state-wide practice in Minnnesota.

  13. Peculiar Skew in Law by Bob9113 · · Score: 2

    Ardolf faces a potential maximum penalty of 20 years in prison on the distribution of child pornography charge, ten years on the possession of child pornography charge, five years on both the unauthorized access to a computer and the threats to the Vice President charges, and a mandatory two-year minimum prison sentence on each count of aggravated identity theft.

    Ardolf, they told police, had picked up their 4-year-old son and kissed him.

    So let me see if I get this straight. The max penalty for child porn possession is 10 years, and picking up a 4 year old and kissing him (presumably without the parent's consent) isn't even in the charges? Given that child porn has been extended to include images of adults who are portrayed as children and that he had inappropriate contact with a real child, that seems out of whack to me. Distribution of child porn is easier for me to understand being in the same ball park as inappropriate contact, but possession? And not even including inappropriate contact in the charges?

    Maybe there is a good reason in this specific case that the articles don't cover, but this seems like a solid red flag to analyze the laws and make sure they are coded properly. This sounds like a pretty serious bug to me.

  14. The idiot left a trail leading straight to him. by RedHelix · · Score: 2

    Unless you have the foresight to use a spoofer or - even better - use a throw-away USB wi-fi dongle, your MAC address will show up in the router's DHCP client log until the lease expires. Boom, headshot.

  15. I know; I was there... by AntariMysteec · · Score: 3, Informative

    I just got forwarded this link by an associate of mine. I was surprised to find out this made slashdot... I was the "private investigator" that was hired to originally absolve the neighbor from sending the original emails which included the child porn to the lawfirm's partners. After seeing the pattern I thought I had a good chance to catch the hacker and the firm retained my services to go after him. The reasoning was that if we were to lock things down (remove the wireless and hardwire) that the person trying to get at the neighbor would find other avenues to get at him. We had a very reasonable honey pot that could produce honey sitting in front of us. I'm independent not working for any one other than my own company/myself or subcontracted for numerous firms around. I used a combination of wireshark and a few self custom written utilities to go after this guy. And no, these utilities are mine and are not for sale; sorry. I'm an engineer/analyst, security specialist, and developer with about 24 years of paid professional experience which really helps when you need to understand something then write a utility to provide it. His wireless was installed by qwest and used WEP as the base configuration (GASP). Whether or not this encryption should have been used or not, the sheer nature that there was some form of encryption did matter in the end. It is easy to hack WEP (and not too hard for WPA/WPA2 either...) but it is illegal to do so. This is one of the six charges he was charged with. From what I understand, if there was no encryption then it would have been a completely different case... It took months of watching the traffic, sifting through gigabytes of PCAP logs, to find what I was looking for. Once I found the smoking gun it was provided back to the FBI that validated what I found then issued a search warrant to go after the guy. The fact was that a MAC address was impossible to use so the firewall log only showed that rogue connections were being made. A single IP address was also impossible to use since that IP address was being assigned by the neighbor's DHCP server (dsl router). The FBI and Secret Service was not involved with the initial technical search nor could they be due to federal laws. Barry was a "certified ethical hacker" (CEH) which means that he knew the process and has been trained to run the proper utilities to hack. Not that this is mandatory, any kiddie can search on youtube to find out how to do this and just how easy it is. But he at least understood the concept of IP addressing. It turns out that he understood MAC addresses as well since he was changing his computer's NIC's MAC address on a regular basis. I don't know exactly what was found on Barry's computers once the FBI took over or how much (if any) additional child porn was pulled. I do know he found the previous neighbors (from another city) SSNs, their tax returns, and also copies of the current threatening letters on his computers. The other neighbor's around Barry's house were also broken into which made the argument of using a YAGI antennae an almost impossible feat due to the physical locations of the houses. All I know is that this guy had some serious issues and became "bitter" at the world that seemed to have started when his wife suddenly died about 10 years ago. There was a LOT to this case and it wasn't a simple slam dunk. We had a mountain of evidence that was racked up over a period of time. Each piece was necessary to prove/disprove methods and ownership. The worst part was getting the information in a form that the jury would understand. I firmly believe that our federal prosecutor had a good understanding (and took the time to understand) the technology behind it and created a very easily understood case without losing the intrigrity of the technology. Point is, no matter how good you think you are; there is always someone better (and the same goes for me as well). Stay white; its just not worth it.... This guy is looking at a possible 44 years in fed. Barry was offered a plea of 2 y