Hacker Posts His Crime On YouTube, Lands In Jail

wiredmikey writes "A former contract security guard who admitted hacking into a hospital's computer systems (where he worked), was sentenced to 110 months in Federal prison. Why did he do it? He admits that he intended to use the bots and the compromised computers to launch DDoS attacks on the websites of rival hacker groups. The FBI says he posted video of himself hacking into the hospital computers on YouTube — While the theme of 'Mission Impossible' played, he described his hack, step by step, including the insertion of a CD containing the OphCrack program, which allowed him to bypass all security. The FBI found the CD containing the OphCrack program in McGraw's house and found the source code for the bot on his laptop."

Comments

I think he knows the underwear gnomes.

[gurps_npc]

Step 1) Post a video of yourself committing a crime

Step 2) ????

Step 3) Jail!

Ladies and Gentleman

[Tigger's Pet]

Do we have a winner for the prize of "stupidest person alive"? Who, with the slightest semblance of common sense, would think that posting a video of themselves doing this was a good idea? This ranks up there with the guy who used a camera mounted to his motorbike to record himself doing 140mph+ in the UK, then posted it on YouTube with his face and licence-plate.

Self-defense

[Anonymous Coward]

This is exactly why we don't counter-attack those attempting to penetrate our network. While you *might* have some slim chance of reaching the attacker, chances are equally good you will end up attacking some systems in a hospital or something equally unacceptable.

Re:Security researchers or confidential informants

[SuperKendall]

That depends on whose home it is. If it's a rich assholes home, probably not

You do realize that this means you, too, are an asshole, and that someone even lower on the moral chain than yourself will watch someone break into your house and do nothing for the same reason?

The chain of violence only stops when people like you stop demonizing based on external factors.

Re:Seems a bit excessive

[betterunixthanunix]

Are we going to imprison the people who decided to use Windows as the operating system for a critical, safety-sensitive computer? Why are we acting like the problems here end with this guy? Computers are not some magical object that dark wizards vie for control over; the fact that this guy could have endangered hospital patients because he was interacting with the HVAC computer (and ultimately, that is what he was doing: interacting with the computer) says more about the problems with the HVAC controller than about the hacker.

Re:Security researchers or confidential informants

[ElectricTurtle]

Exactly. As Cullen Hightower said: "There's always somebody who is paid too much, and taxed too little - and it's always somebody else."

I always ask people, at what magical number does 'theft' become 'economic justice'?

Re:110 Months

[WrongSizeGlass]

That's not that bad. People could get much worse for having the police catch them with crack in their home!

That sentence is the least of his problems. Wait until the MPAA & RIAA find out he used the theme from 'Mission Impossible' in his YouTube posting without paying the appropriate licensing fees.

Re:Come on, dude.

[Hatta]

Don't be too hard on them. Any HVAC system can be circumvented using windows.

Re:Security researchers or confidential informants

[ElectricTurtle]

This is the worst kind of thinking. 'The poor don't get justice so I'll make sure the rich don't get it either! Then we'll all be equal!' Equally fucked. Such an great thing to which to aspire. Equality is not the sacred thing you seem to think it is. To paraphrase Margaret Thatcher, it is better to have a higher standard of living for the majority in a society with a high disparity than it is to have a lower standard of living for the majority in a society of greater equality.

Re:Security researchers or confidential informants

[iamhassi]

"The stigma of being a "confidential informant" is quite hazardous. Why do you think there's a Witness Protection Program?"

But... he is a security researcher, here's his security websites and his LinkedIn says he has a PhD in Computer Science and works at the Mississippi State University Center for Computer Security Research (CCSR).

I'd say he's qualified. I don't understand why parent automatically assumed he was just an informant. If you're a private detective and with PhD in Criminal Forensics and you see a felony take place wouldn't you call the police? Would /. then assume you're simply an informant instead of being the private detective that the article correctly identified you as being?