Former Anonymous Spokesperson Indicted

SternisheFan sends this quote from Ars: "On Friday, a federal grand jury in Dallas indicted Barrett Brown, a former self-proclaimed Anonymous spokesperson, for trafficking 'stolen authentication features,' as well as 'access device fraud' and 'aggravated identity theft.' Brown has been detained since he was arrested in September for allegedly threatening a federal agent. 10 counts of the 12-count indictment concern the aggravated identity theft charge (the indictment references 10 people from whom Brown is alleged to have stolen information), but the most interesting charge is probably the first; a single count saying Brown, 'did knowingly traffic in more than five authentication features knowing that such features were stolen and produced without lawful authority.' But rather than a physical back-alley hand-off, this alleged trafficking happened online when Barrett transferred a hyperlink, 'from the Internet Relay Chat (IRC) channel called "#Anonops" to an IRC channel under Brown's control, called "#ProjectPM."' That hyperlink happened to include over 5,000 credit card numbers, associating Ids, and Card Verification Values (CVVs) from the Stratfor Global Intelligence database."

Comments

ED entry

[gmhowell]

And now you know!

Former?

[rossdee]

Well I guess he's not anonymous anymore now they caught him.

link = trafficking?

[Anonymous Coward]

So now posting a URL can be trafficking in whatever it links to even if you're not serving it?

This is nuts, think of the implications;

Post a link to pirate bay and you've trafficked copyrighted material!?

Re:link = trafficking?

[anyaristow]

No, real world analogy would be, "See that car around the corner? It's unlocked and you don't need a key to start it. You're welcome." = Trafficking in stolen vehicles

Re:link = trafficking?

[elucido]

So now posting a URL can be trafficking in whatever it links to even if you're not serving it?

This is nuts, think of the implications;

Post a link to pirate bay and you've trafficked copyrighted material!?

That is a legit argument. Legally that is a concern but honestly at this point considering the stakes of the situation they weren't going to fight fair. If you piss off or threaten the feds they'll find something. Just ask Jim Bell.

Re:link = trafficking?

[grumpy_old_grandpa]

It is nuts, but not new. And since you mentioned PB, which is an example of exactly the same; metadata but no content. Unfortunately, that did not shield them from attack, eventually conviction, and lately censorship.

Judges, politicians, and governments everywhere are starting to catch up on the technology. Unsurprisingly, they twist it in their favour, and use it to survival, censor, and control.

It is time to build a new network: Decentralized, anonymous, encrypted, and free.

Re:link = trafficking?

[Anonymous Coward]

real world analogy: "you can buy drugs in washington heights, here let me take you to my buddies house where you can get some"

also note the date and the date of the compromise and of course the other charges in the indictment that at least implies they're saying he's involved in the initial hack and was responsible for distributing the information; i bet the irc logs in question go like "lol heres some credit card numbers go use them"

Re:link = trafficking?

[__aaltlg1547]

Aided others in doing so and probably conspired to do so, at least.

But here's the rub. Let's say you post a link to something that looks like a interesting information piece on Slashdot.
Unbeknownst (= really stupid word, by the way! ) to you, that site has a link on it to a file containing thousands of stolen credit card numbers, bank account numbers and unencrypted passwords. Now you are a suspect in an "identity theft" case. (We used to call this kind of thing bank fraud, but now it's identity theft.). Also, so is Slashdot. So is everybody who modded you up. So are the moderators and the hosting service.

And there are even more outlandish (but very possible) scenarios. You post a similar link to an informative piece. But the actual article you refer to is on some obscure site hosted by god knows whom. And the owner of that site decides to replace the article you referred to with bunch of links to identity-theft materials. By the time the FBI sees a complaint about this, they can't tell that you weren't referring everybody on slashdot, prolific identity thieves that they must be, to this hijacked material. It looks even more damning. Everybody's going to prison unless you can persuade the FBI that that shit wasn't there when you posted the link and you had no knowledge that the owner or more probably the hacker who took down his site was in the stolen-credit-card-number racket.

If the feds want you they can get you. Learn that.

[elucido]

Let this be a lesson to any cyber pranksters or not so serious e-revolutionaries. These sorts of games are very dangerous and only lead to two possible outcomes, getting yourself killed or getting yourself locked away in prison.

The same thing happened in the 60s-70s when the Black Panthers, Crips, Gangster Disciples and many urban gangs wanted to fight for social justice through unity. The problem with these gangs is they did not understand that the FBI wasn't going to go along with that. FBI has had a counter intelligence program since the 1940s founded after the business plot coup attempt against FDR. Originally COINTELPRO was designed to protect the USA from fascists but when World War 2 ended World War 3 began (the Cold War) and it reached it's peak in the 60s-70s.

The problem with these e-revolutionaries is they don't study history. They don't understand that many of them are being exploited by foreign intelligence agencies, basically being tooled, and in many cases are nothing more than useful idiots. Just as the USA launched a war on drugs to fight and win the 60s Civil War, and now due to the crackdown on gangs you have millions of prisoners who are directly connected or the descendants of Black Panthers and or other groups. No one was paying any attention or fighting for these political prisoners and it's not over.

The new front is the internet. The government has made Julian Assange enemy of the state. Anyone who isn't prepared to go to prison or get killed should immediately distance themselves from this situation because the stakes are too high. You may disagree with your government, you may agree with the values of Julian Assange, but it does not mean it is going to be wise for you or your family to get involved in the situation. Cyberwarfare is not fun, it's not fair, there are no human rights, you can be entrapped, framed, set up for crimes you didn't do, or tricked into doing things you didn't know were crimes. You'll never know who among your friends are informants, you'll never see all the angles or know who is trying to get you killed or get you arrested.

The life of a revolutionary is very similar to the life of a gangster. It's often a shortened life. This is something many of the kids involved do not understand because they did not grow up around gangs and had somewhat sheltered childhoods. If they understood the dangers they wouldn't get involved. Barrett Brown is in over his head, he did not understand the dangers of which he got himself involved in. He also underestimated the lengths that governments will go to take someone out. The governments who want to take people like him out do not have any limits, they have way more technology than he can possibly hope to deal with, way more resources than he could possibly fathom, and a ruthlessness he cannot hope to understand.

He never was an Anon. He was a self promoter.

[elucido]

He was promoting himself. He did not understand what he was doing. He was a typical kid from the suburbs getting himself involved with cartels, pissing off the FBI, and challenging the US military establishment. He is lucky to be arrested and be alive, and yes he's going to be spending many years in prison as apparently he did not agree to become an informant.

Re:He never was an Anon. He was a self promoter.

[elucido]

still, posting the link to the data from a practically public forum to another.. what the fuck kind of crime is that?

I think I saw links to the data on slashdot. in any case at the point he was linking to them they were for all intents and purposes already public.

When they want to get someone they'll fish for something illegal until they find something. There are so many laws on the books that it's a certainty we are all criminals so if they want to get you they can.

Re:He never was an Anon. He was a self promoter.

[amiga3D]

Exactly. Everyone in the US is a criminal. If they want you there is a law somewhere they can use to burn you.

Re:He never was an Anon. He was a self promoter.

[CodeBuster]

When they want to get someone they'll fish for something illegal until they find something.

Hence the need for powerful friends who can be called upon for favors. If you cannot afford such friends then it's best to remain hidden and out of site amongst the great unwashed masses. Remember, it's the tall grass that gets cut first by the scythe.

Re:He never was an Anon. He was a self promoter.

[CodeBuster]

Everyone in the US is a criminal. If they want you there is a law somewhere they can use to burn you.

Yes. However, those who challenge the authorities should not be surprised by the response. It's one thing to be targeted, but it's quite another to paint the target on your own back.

Re:Greyhound Bus Station - Locker 36

[bruce_the_loon]

That depends on whether they can prove you had knowledge of illegal contents inside the locker prior to passing on the address.

If the accused chap knew what the link pointed to and was passing it on in order to disseminate the stolen credit card information, then he should get into the same trouble that he would get into if he had printed copies of the stolen card information and was handing it around in the streets.

It's not black and white

[Anonymous Coward]

Seeing as so many people are dumbfounded that it can be considered at all wrong and indictable for him to do such a thing lets consider the following:

A person knows of a quantity of drugs out in the open with no owner. He goes to a group of kids and says "Hey come with me I'll show you where a bunch of drugs are". Has he done anything wrong? Is he responsible in any way?

Now lets assume that he knew those kids were actively seeking drugs. Has he done anything wrong now? Is he responsible?

Now lets assume one of the kids dies from an O.D. Anything wrong now? Is he responsible now?

Finally, is it really as black and white as a lot of users here want to make it?

Re:If the feds want you they can get you. Learn th

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone has to do it.

Re:If the feds want you they can get you. Learn th

[Anonymous Coward]

The same thing happened in the 60s-70s when the Black Panthers, Crips, Gangster Disciples and many urban gangs wanted to fight for social justice through unity. The problem with these gangs is they did not understand that the FBI wasn't going to go along with that. FBI has had a counter intelligence program since the 1940s founded after the business plot coup attempt against FDR. Originally COINTELPRO was designed to protect the USA from fascists but when World War 2 ended World War 3 began (the Cold War) and it reached it's peak in the 60s-70s.

Wait, what? The crips and gangster disciples were established to fight for social justice? I think its you that needs to go read a history book. If an idiot commits a crime and he gets arrested and indicted, thats not cointelpro, thats called the legal system.

They don't understand that many of them are being exploited by foreign intelligence agencies, basically being tooled, and in many cases are nothing more than useful idiots.

While this is partially true, its amusing that you neglect that anonymous is exactly what the USA needed in terms of cyberwarfare-- look at anonymous china, they relentlessly hacked .gov.cn sites, got real data-- not a collection of emails no one cares about, nothing but defense contractors and no real leaks came from it. They arrest a few and shrug at china and go 'i dunno our legal system isnt perfect' and smile.

I could go into some personal experiences with the unacknowledged humint sides of anon, but whatever. You just wanted to blather on about stuff you dont know anything about, not actually be informed.

Re:If the feds want you they can get you. Learn th

[lightknight]

So far as our current government seems to be concerned, everyone is a potential enemy.

Re:If the feds want you they can get you. Learn th

[Bing Tsher E]

A way to rephrase what you wrote in the proper jargon is:

Anonymous aren't revolutionary. They're adventurists.

Same as it ever was when middle class kids decide to take on 'The Man.'

Re:haha aggrivated identity theft ROFL

[anyaristow]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aggravation_(law)

Re:If the feds want you they can get you. Learn th

[elucido]

Wait, what? The crips and gangster disciples were established to fight for social justice? I think its you that needs to go read a history book.

If you know the history of these gangs and the founding members you would understand why they started these gangs. They were started as a means of obtaining social justice for disenfranchised minority groups and youth during the civil rights era where minorities could not trust the police because there were few if any minority police, where the government was openly racist, where the KKK was still around. The fact that you don't know anything about Urban history proves my point that you're one of the people I'm talking about.

If an idiot commits a crime and he gets arrested and indicted, thats not cointelpro, thats called the legal system.

COINTELPRO works through and beyond the legal system. The FBI handles all that.

While this is partially true, its amusing that you neglect that anonymous is exactly what the USA needed in terms of cyberwarfare-- look at anonymous china, they relentlessly hacked .gov.cn sites, got real data-- not a collection of emails no one cares about, nothing but defense contractors and no real leaks came from it.

Where are your facts? Provide a URL to the real data you're talking about.

They arrest a few and shrug at china and go 'i dunno our legal system isnt perfect' and smile.

I could go into some personal experiences with the unacknowledged humint sides of anon, but whatever. You just wanted to blather on about stuff you dont know anything about, not actually be informed.

HUMINT side of Anon? Anon in China has nothing to do with Anon in the USA. If you're saying some Anon are patriotic then that is fine and dandy but some Anon act like domestic terrorists and are unpatriotic and you have to accept that truth as well. The Julian Assange faction of Anon is misguided. If you think you're more informed than me then say what you have to say.