Slashdot Mirror
LulzSec Suspect Arrested By UK Police
An anonymous reader writes "The UK's Police Computer e-Crime Unit (PCeU) has arrested a 19-year-old man in Wickford, Essex, in connection with the series of LulzSec attacks against organizations including the CIA, PBS and Sony. The man, who has been arrested under the Computer Misuse and Fraud Act, has had his house searched and a significant amount of material taken away by police for forensic examination. The PCeU worked with local Essex police and the FBI on the investigation."
It's important to note at this point that it has not been confirmed that the arrested man is suspected of being involved with LulzSec by the authorities. But many observers are speculating that that could be the case.
So this "news" article is nothing but speculation?
sysadmins and parents of newborns get the same amount of sleep.
How about some due process, first?
I'm gonna need a spec.
Opening arguments next month:
Judge: "Can the defendant please state, for the record, why they felt it was necessary to take down several high-profile website, costing those companies hundreds of thousands in lost income, cleanup costs, and angry support calls?"
Defendant's Lawyer: "Ah, your honor, let the record show... they did it for the 'lulz'".
Judge: "I see. Well, in the spirit of their crime, sentencing will be 'for the lulz'."
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
It's important to note at this point that it has not been confirmed that the arrested man is suspected of being involved with LulzSec by the authorities. But many observers are speculating that that could be the case.
How can you go from that to "Lulzsec suspect arrested?"
Give me a break. If it is THAT vulnerable where a hacker can access a system then they are going after the wrong person. It isn't like this guy is in the country. You can't just go after anybody you please. It isn't reasonable. They can't catch guys operating out of North Korea, Sudan, Iran, or Cuba. There should be standards that developers have to live up to or I should say the products. If they don't then the companies selling said products should be the ones held liable. Yes- it means increased costs. That is what would be reasonable. Just because you catch a handful of the people who can exploit these systems because those systems are so easy to exploit does not fix the problem. It is stupid to go after the very people who are finding the holes rather than fixing the damm holes.
Yeah, you try breaking in to a house and after that try to explain it with "well, they should had armored their door and made better locks".
It's lulzier without it.
Sounds like you hate America, son.
With all the high profile attacks and leaking private info of companies then attacking FBI and other law enforcement agencies I bet his looking for a lifetime sentence. Serves him right.
This is the UK. Should he be someone from lulzsec and if they have a decent amount of evidence to prove he was a main player I'd say he'll get 2-3 years max and likely out in 12-18 months for good behaviour
A lifetime sentence for what? Was any demonstrable harm done?
If the allegations are true he engaged in criminal activity, no doubt, but let's not lump him in with war criminals.
What I don't get is why is this shit always publicized? Instead of waving their dicks around every time a dumb fuck is caught, it'd make more sense to use that caught individual to provide new leads, and catch as many as possible before the rest of the organization goes further into hiding. Seems to me they're doing it purely for PR, rather than because it's their damn job.
How about some due process, first?
They've been arrested. The public is watching. There will be a trial. How much more due process do you think a criminal deserves? These guys aren't going to some secret military prison to be tortured because their second cousin twice removed once had a bad thought about his government...
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
You're missing the point. The parent is criticising the grand parent for automatically labelling him as guilty and already saying what his sentence is, before any due process has taken place..
1. Someone attacks senate.gov "for teh lulz"
2. FBI investigates and discovers it is coming from an English IP address
3. They ask Scotland Yard for help, and trace it to someone in Ess*x
4. Ess*x Police get the appropriate wiretap warrants, and move in while he is in the middle of attacking soca.gov.uk, again "for teh lulz"
Pretty normal cross-border crime investigation
You're missing the point. The parent is criticising the grand parent for automatically labelling him as guilty and already saying what his sentence is, before any due process has taken place..
Yeah. On the internet, we call that 'tuesday'.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
I know it makes for boring news but apparently Ryan Cleary did nothing except host the IRC where lulzsec had a channel.
This is the UK. Should he be someone from lulzsec and if they have a decent amount of evidence to prove he was a main player I'd say he'll get 2-3 years max and likely out in 12-18 months for good behaviour
At that sentence length, no. Maximum 1/3 off for good behaviour once the sentence is over 2 years long.
"Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
Sure, and I think people should fly planes into buildings to demonstrate the lack of airport security.
(+1, Judiciary)
It's the UK. Surely having a TrueCrypt partition is a slam-dunk jail sentence under http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/23/section/49
After all they can keep asking for the key to the hidden partition they "know" is there and when you refuse to provide them (because there is no hidden partition) you get 2 years in jail (5 if they can make it look terrorism related)...
[...] Ess*x
Ess*x[...]
lolwhut? What the hell is wrong with writing Essex? Let's meet in Fucking to drink one [or more] pints of Fucking Hell - maybe afterwards you're more relaxed about funny geographical names
Closer would be placing your money in a bank, then later finding out - after the bank has been robbed and your money stolen - that their vault door was just painted onto a bit of plywood leant against the wall.
Can't wait for the due process... I've been wondering how the "I Did It For the Lulz!" defense would hold up in a court of law for years!
LulzSec has already responded on Twitter. "Seems the glorious leader of LulzSec got arrested, it's all over now... wait... we're all still here! Which poor bastard did they take down?"
"Seems the glorious leader of LulzSec got arrested, it's all over now... wait... we're all still here! Which poor bastard did they take down?"
See: www.twitter.com/lulzsec
They've been arrested. The public is watching. There will be a trial. How much more due process do you think a criminal deserves?
Alleged criminal.
If the courts are as quick to jump to conclusions as you, then all the publicity in the world won't buy him due process.
It wouldn't be beyond LulzSec's ability (or maybe just one member) to frame someone 'for the lulz'
It is a dig at stupid internet naughty words filters. I do the same for Sc**thorpe (missing letters are "un"). Also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essex_girl
You really are a complete prat, aren't you? Staggered by the idiocy of your comment, I have looked through your comment history, and am somewhat surprised to find that it's not a one-off. You despise rules imposed by other people, but nevertheless believe that everyone should abide by your own.
Someday lulzsec, or some equivalent group of twats, will release your own personal details on the Pirate Bay. And then you will be back here to tell us all how information should be free and that lulzsec are great. I don't think.
I really hope this kid was using strong encryption and covering his tracks enough to provide a credible legal defense,.
Using encryption gets you nowhere in the UK. If you are suspected of using it, they can't break it and when they ask you for the key you refuse, you get an automatic 2 year jail sentence.
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
Of course after a fair hearing. Thing is that if he is guilty then they will make an example of him and get him to turn in others. After a few dozen of the LulzSec minions are sitting in prison the rest will follow. It is funny that so many people on Slashdot really thought that LulzSec was going to get away with taunting world governments. They have their own really bright folks and lots of resources. As long as Anon and Lulz where just messing with companies like Sony and generally being juvenile they where not worth the effort. Now they are worth the effort...
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Because attacking a PBS website because they broadcast a story you didn't like makes all of us safer. I mean no need in hearing any news story that might upset us now is there?
I hope the catch as many as possible. They have attacked freedom of speech and freedom of the press. They have hurt many innocent consumers if not out right hurt them all for the lulz. You have a really odd idea what good work is.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
There are two separate issues: did the hackers make unauthorized use of a computer, and was the computer adequately protected. These are independent. There are laws against unauthorized use of computers, and they do not specify some 'degree of difficulty' before they are effective, nor should they. Unauthorized use is unauthorized use, period. There may or may not be laws regarding protection of data. However, even if there are, violation of THAT law would be a separate crime, and in no way would excuse someone who violated the unauthorized use law.
And your analogy is much worse than the house analogy. The hackers actually did damage - they released account info, DDOS'd servers etc. To complete your analogy, the bomb must actually be detonated. If that were the case, I doubt anyone would be defending the person who did it as some kind of hero for pointing out a security weakness.
needs to be a force in the world working to encourage better security practices
That force is usually called "the bad guys." If no one ever tried to steal anything, we wouldn't need any security. And your stuff would be just as safe.
Closer would be placing your money in a bank, then later finding out - after the bank has been robbed and your money stolen - that their vault door was just painted onto a bit of plywood leant against the wall.
Ok... the robber is still a criminal.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
It gets better.
http://twitter.com/#!/LulzSec/status/83164092998758400
Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).
I think he was referring to the way people react to the news that someone was arrested in connection with a thing - they don't presume innocence until proven guilty, unless they are the ones in the hotseat. There hasn't been a trial, so the process hasn't been completed, yet people are passing judgment as if it were over. So you're right about the thought police, but the unfortunate reality is that the public's mob justice tends to ruin lives whether those lives were actually guilty or not. Let's all just wait and see what the courts decide before we assign guilt or innocence.
So you wouldn't mind if I broke into your bank account, and moved some information around so you had nothing left in your account? I didn't actually steal anything, just moved some data around...
"But this one goes to 11!"
I don't think those words mean what you think they do.
If you think imaginary property and real property are the same, when does your house become public domain?
Meh.. few countries, if any, have more "process" than America (the US). It's probably far more common that a guilty person gets off on a technicality than an innocent person gets sentenced, though it does happen.
-OTOH, most cases don't involve the CIA...
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
It isn't in the summary, I just threw it out there to demonstrate a point. OP said only data was moved, nothing was physically taken. So I asked if I could move data around to show his bank account was zero - I didn't actually take anything, just moved data around. I wasn't trying to illustrate what had actually happened. If I somehow led you to believe that is what took place I apologize.
"But this one goes to 11!"