US Charges Russian With Launching 2008 Amazon DoS Attack

The Seattle Times reports that Dmitry Olegovick Zubakha, "A Russian man believed to be behind cyberattacks on Seattle-based Amazon.com and other online retailers in June, 2008 has been arrested in Cyprus, says U.S. Attorney Jenny Durkan." Along with a partner, Sergey Vioktorovich Logashov (still at large), Zubakha apparently also undertook, and later bragged about, attacks on Priceline and Ebay. After extradition, he's expected to face trial in the U.S. for possession of illegal access devices, conspiracy, and aggravated identity theft.

Comments

Illegal access devices?

[tragedy]

What's an "illegal access device"? I always worry about the criminalization of tools.

Re:Illegal access devices?

[artor3]

It's legalese for a stolen credit card.

Re:Illegal access devices?

[Anonymous Coward]

He had 15 cereal whistles.

Re:Illegal access devices?

[tragedy]

Did he also have a Drogan's Decoder Ring?

Easily Misread

[Ranguvar]

"Charges Russian"? Not man, not woman?
I was sure at first that the U.S. was making claims of the country Russia, and so prepared for big shit to go down.

Hubris or Greed

[DarkOx]

Either Hubris or Greed seems to be the undoing of almost every high tech criminal that is actually caught. You'd think some of them would learn that lesson.

Really guys let me help you with this.

1. Hack site
2. Use stolen identities to flush corresponding bank accounts
3. SHUT THE *#*$(@) UP ABOUT IT
4. Profit

Notice there is no ??? step there. Everything after step 2 is simple really. The trick is take enough in step 2 that you don't need to repeat steps one and two again, and don't blab. If you complete one and two, and stop there you'll either be caught right away or very likely never caught at all.

Where is the jurisdiction?

[BlueCoder]

Were these people on US soil when they performed these acts?

Am I the only US citizen that is concerned about this?

Is Saudi Arabia now able to extradite me because I read playboy?

Re:Where is the jurisdiction?

[Anonymous Coward]

Were these people on US soil when they performed these acts?

Am I the only US citizen that is concerned about this?

Is Saudi Arabia now able to extradite me because I read playboy?

The servers were. That's the point, you can do harm to people in another country and that country's government can say...hey, we don't like that, and your government (or another's) may respond accepting or rejecting it.

  You might be, but I doubt we'd be so lucky.

No, because they don't have jurisdiction. I suppose they might try, but they'd have to be extra stupid that way, and I doubt the US judge would be stupid enough, though Scalia seems to be losing his tenuous grasp on sanity so I suppose you'd better hope it doesn't go before him.

Re:Where is the jurisdiction?

[Charliemopps]

Well, in a lot of cases I'd agree with you. For example, if he hosted some content on his Russian site that's illegal here and then someone here downloaded it... our current justice department seems to think that's fair game and would go after him. That's obviously an overreach of our government. Same with wikileaks.

But in this case, this man alegedly used a computer network to attack, or hack, sites in the US. I'd liken it to someone using a remote controlled robotic arm to stab you. Even though they are in Russia, the robotic knife attack happens in the US. I'd say that's fair game for extradition. I think that, where things could get sketchy is where the user doesn't actually know which country the servers he's accessing are hosted. So you're in a country where online gambling is legal, and you go to some gambling site... only to later find out that it was hosted in the US and the US federal government is trying to extradite you for using the site...

Re:Where is the jurisdiction?

[the eric conspiracy]

Why does being on US soil have anything to do with committing a crime against a US entity?

People commit crimes. You don't have to be on US soil to commit very nasty crimes against US interests. For example Osama bin Laden was never on US soil AFAIK.

Depending on the extradition treaties of the place they commit them from or later visit the US may or may not be able to bring them to trial. Sometimes the US may even use force of arms to bring such people to reckoning.

It's called being a sovereign power.

Obviously Cyprus is one of the places you don't want to visit after committing such a crime.

> Am I the only US citizen that is concerned about this?

No, but you are seriously in the minority.

> Is Saudi Arabia now able to extradite me because I read playboy?

Very unlikely since there is no extradition treaty between the US and Saudi.

Re:Where is the jurisdiction?

[LazLong]

One might think that the jurisdiction is that in which the damage occurred. i.e. if the servers were in the US, that is where it lies. This is simply an international attack, the same as mailing a bomb from one country to the next.

There is a far too prevalent belief or ethic amongst the techno-educated from the former Soviet republics that it is their right to take advantage of whoever is 'stupid' enough to be vulnerable to their skills. This needs to come to an end. The Internet is not the cyber wild west. I am not saying that the US should be the marshal, let Interpol do it, or whoever. It just needs to be done.

Re:Where is the jurisdiction?

[rtb61]

The real question here is the form and method of extradition. The US has managed quite effectively and beyond doubt to soil it's legal reputation overseas. The US legal process is felt to have more in common with third world countries and crime gangs, having been corrupted by lobbyists, politicians and corporations. Perhaps a more solid review of the extradition process (they seem to spew out any kind of bullshit with only limited evidence or proof), the court process (far too much intimidation of other parties with threats of life imprisonment or death to force suspected false testimony) and finally associated punitive punishment (the routine and publicly accepted use of homosexual rape as punishment) or remedial training process.

The US justice system instead of being a world leader especially with regard of foreigners (life time imprisonment until confession of guilt and routine torture), has come to be viewed as shite, well done The Shrub (Bush) and The Betrayer (Obama).

Instead of extradition perhaps the trial should be held at the country where the person is being held, the accusing country should prove their case and dependent upon the nature of accepted penalties, the now guilty person should be penalised. The accusing country can pay for the process, including incarceration (costs subject to treaty). Where the accusing country fails to prove their case, they should pay full penalties to the defendant.

What the ... ?

[X.25]

Would Cyprus arrest creators of Stuxnet, on request from Iran, if those people would show up in Cyprus?

Re:What the ... ?

[artor3]

That's up to them. Countries have the right to determine whether or not to extradite someone accused of a particular crime. I don't know how else you could expect it to work.

How much is that doggie in the window?

[pongo000]

I'm curious as to how much this operation cost the US taxpayer, and whether or not Amazon et. al. will be asked to foot the bill. I'm sure it's not a cheap operation to kidnap/extradite someone, fly them back to the US, put them on trial in front of a jury of non-peers, and house this sure-to-be convicted individual for an insane number of years.

Do I also get the same courtesy if I were to complain about the sustained DDOS attacks on the small network of servers I maintain?

Re:US has world Jurisdiction

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? Person commits crimes that are even crimes by Russian standards, and you guys get butthurt because he's actually going to be extradited to the country he committed the crimes against?

That's how extradition works, you tools. It's not only the US who engages in the practice.