Slashdot Mirror


Cybercriminals Has Heroin Delivered To Brian Krebs, Then Calls Police

Okian Warrior writes in about a package of heroin that found its way to the door of Brian Krebs. "'Fans' of [security researcher Brian Krebs] have shown their affection in some curious ways. One called in a phony hostage situation that resulted in a dozen heavily armed police surrounding my home. Another opened a $20,000 new line of credit in my name. Others sent more than $1,000 in bogus PayPal donations from hacked accounts. Still more admirers paid my cable bill for the next three years using stolen credit cards. Malware authors have even used my name and likeness to peddle their wares. But the most recent attempt to embarrass and fluster this author easily takes the cake as the most elaborate: Earlier this month, the administrator of an exclusive cybercrime forum hatched and executed a plan to purchase heroin, have it mailed to my home, and then spoof a phone call from one of my neighbors alerting the local police. Thankfully, I had already established a presence on his forum and was able to monitor the scam in real time and alert my local police well in advance of the delivery."

187 comments

  1. Working link to article by Svenne · · Score: 4, Informative
    --

    Slagborr
    1. Re:Working link to article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://idle.slashdot.org/story/13/08/01/0324210/ahref= doesn't work for you?
      just keep clicking on it until samzenpus update the article

    2. Re:Working link to article by pne · · Score: 5, Informative
      --
      Esli epei etot cumprenan, shris soa Sfaha.
    3. Re:Working link to article by paulatz · · Score: 0

      And a google cache copy which is not currently slashdotted/script-kiddied or whatever.

      --
      this post contain no useful information, no need to mod it down
    4. Re:Working link to article by auric_dude · · Score: 1

      Would "Cybercriminals Had Heroin Delivered To Brian Krebs, Then Calls Police" be a better headline than "Cybercriminals Has Heroin Delivered To Brian Krebs, Then Calls Police", not being an English major I don't know for sure but am sure the slashdot editors have made the correct decision.

    5. Re:Working link to article by davetv · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't

      "Brian Krebs Calls Police, Then Cybercriminals Have Heroin Delivered "

      be a headline that is more representitive of the actual story.

    6. Re:Working link to article by SMoynihan · · Score: 2

      Ahem, if you're going to point out a grammar mistake, it might be worthwhile checking your own correction:

      "Cybercriminals Had Heroin Delivered To Brian Krebs, Then Call Police" (Cybercriminals call the police)

      Or:

      "Cybercriminal Has Heroin Delivered To Brian Krebs, Then Calls Police" (Cybercriminal calls the police)

    7. Re:Working link to article by naff89 · · Score: 1

      The reason it looks weird to you is because "Cybercriminals" doesn't match the verbs in the sentence.

      It either should be "Cybercriminal Has Heroin Delivered, Calls Police" or "Cybercriminals Have Heroin Delivered, Call Police"

    8. Re:Working link to article by msauve · · Score: 4, Funny

      I figured "Cybercriminals" was a corporation.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    9. Re:Working link to article by msauve · · Score: 3, Funny

      The author of the summary was distracted by his cable TV, which was being paid for by the admirers of Brian Krebs.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    10. Re: Working link to article by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      You probably were thinking on Cyberdyne.

    11. Re:Working link to article by VortexCortex · · Score: 4, Funny

      Warning @ Line 3: Expected end of statement or continuation delimiter.
      Syntax Error @ Line 5: Extraneous capitalization of boolean list qualifier.
      Syntax Error @ Line 5: Invalid list contiuation; Character ':' already in use. Syntax Error @ Line 7: Expected end of statement punctuation.

      # Funny how you humans emulate dumb parsers while machine intelligence has overcome this_

    12. Re:Working link to article by OakDragon · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Cybercriminals Can Has Cheezburger"?

    13. Re:Working link to article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Line 3: Unknown word: "contiuation".
      Line 3: Missing newline before "Syntax".
      Line 6: Expected punctuation, got "_".

    14. Re:Working link to article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cybercriminals have heroin delivered to Brian Krebs, then call police. Am I the only one here today who speaks English?? Christ, the high school dropouts in the ghetto speak better English!

    15. Re:Working link to article by complete+loony · · Score: 1

      Line 1: Whoosh.

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    16. Re:Working link to article by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 2

      It's called subject-verb agreement. Singular subject agrees with singular verb, and plural subject agrees with plural verb. For example, "Cybercriminals have" is correct; as is "Cybercriminal has." I have; you have; he, she, or it has; we have, you have, they have. As another writer here pointed out, this is third grade grammar.

      --
      Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
    17. Re:Working link to article by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      Line 0: reference past end of file. What are you, a BASIC programmer?

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    18. Re:Working link to article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hilarious.

    19. Re:Working link to article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahem, if you're going to point out a grammar mistake, it might be worthwhile checking your own correction:

      I don't have to use correct grammar to point out a rather glaring mistake in the fucking headline of the story. After all, I'm not the one who has an editor reviewing my post prior to submission.

      Maybe the headline should read "Slashdot can has editor?"

    20. Re: Working link to article by motorhead · · Score: 0

      I used to work there, you insensitive clod.

      --
      Employee Of the Month - Cyberdyne Systems Corporation - September 1997
    21. Re:Working link to article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I figured "Cybercriminals" was a corporation.

      That's another name for Sony.

    22. Re:Working link to article by multisync · · Score: 2

      Am I the only one here today who speaks English??

      Completely off topic, but so is this whole discussion:

      Thanks to Pulp Fiction, I can not make a language choice during an install without saying "English, mother fucker! Do you speak it?"

      Okay, that's all I've got.

      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
    23. Re: Working link to article by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Miles..! How much longer can you hold it? Do you know?

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    24. Re:Working link to article by Threni · · Score: 1

      I can has pedantz?

    25. Re:Working link to article by jamthecat · · Score: 1

      The author of the summary was distracted by his cable TV, which was being paid for by the admirers of Brian Krebs.

      Actually, his bill was paid for with credit cards stolen by the cyber criminals.

    26. Re:Working link to article by hutsell · · Score: 1

      Ahem, if you're going to point out a grammar mistake, it might be worthwhile checking your own correction:

      "Cybercriminals Had Heroin Delivered To Brian Krebs, Then Call Police" (Cybercriminals call the police)

      Or:

      "Cybercriminal Has Heroin Delivered To Brian Krebs, Then Calls Police" (Cybercriminal calls the police)

      In addition to the singular verb not matching the plural subject, there may be additionalf mistakes with the two phrases separated by the comma — related to another singular/plural problem combined with the mixing of past and present tenses. However, since IANAE[nglish Major], not only will this reply probably have its own list of errors, there's probably some obscure style rule allowing this for headlines. Perhaps the following examples helps my explanation (and are better sounding titles that works for me):

      Cyber Criminals Send Heroin to Brian Krebs, Then They Called the Police (plural-past)
      Cyber Criminal Sent Heroin to Brian Krebs, Then Called the Police (singular-past)
      Cyber Criminals Sending Heroin to Brian Krebs, Then Calling the Police (plural-present)
      Cyber Criminal Sends Heroin to Brian Krebs, Then Calls the Police (singular-present)

      --
      Yesterday's Weirdness is Tomorrow's Reason Why
  2. WTH is Brian Krebs?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...And why is an article with a broken link featuring on the /. homepage? Are the moderators drunk?

    1. Re:WTH is Brian Krebs?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...And why is an article with a broken link featuring on the /. homepage? Are the moderators drunk?

      No, but they did recieve a small brown package in the mail this morning...

    2. Re:WTH is Brian Krebs?! by Stalks · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The summary switches between third-party and first-person perspective multiple times which is confusing.

      Is this the quality standard we are to expect from Slashdot now?

    3. Re:WTH is Brian Krebs?! by semi-extrinsic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Indeed, yesterday I read multiple summaries which had spelling errors that a fifth grader would catch when reading through. One can only surmise that Slashdot editors now need to spend less than three minutes writing a summary.

      --
      for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
    4. Re:WTH is Brian Krebs?! by Psychotria · · Score: 1

      I only clicked into this story to say exactly that. What the summary is talking about is more than just confusing, it's undecipherable.

    5. Re:WTH is Brian Krebs?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this the quality standard we are to expect from Slashdot now?

      Is this the quantity standard we are to expect from Slashdot now?
      There, fixed that for ya.

    6. Re:WTH is Brian Krebs?! by Megane · · Score: 1

      What, you think they write most of the summaries? Go to http://slashdot.org/recent and see for yourself. Most of them come straight from submitters, though every now and then they add a blurb at the end.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    7. Re:WTH is Brian Krebs?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny how you think that there are humans involved with the gathering of news (on slashdot). Most of this stuff is simply filler, and grabbed automatically by web-crawlers. Judging by the extremely low numbers of responses these days on slashdot, I'd say that they're not getting the advertizing money that they used to get, and have had to scale down their man-power.

      I look at it as a good thing, as it means that less people are dominated by the feeling that they get by responding to these things, and perhaps are out in the real world, doing something for the good of our race.

    8. Re:WTH is Brian Krebs?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, his grandfather was famous...

    9. Re:WTH is Brian Krebs?! by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      Did they get their neighbour to call the police?

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
  3. A basic spell check by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cybercriminals have..
    i mean, wtf

    1. Re:A basic spell check by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Cybercriminals have...
      i mean, wtf

      I think that's actually a grammar check. In my experience people with a knowledge of English can do that. Slashdot editors ...

      Seriously, come on folks.

    2. Re:A basic spell check by somersault · · Score: 2

      Samzenpus is actually a cat. Don't hold it against him.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    3. Re:A basic spell check by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Samzenpus is actually a cat. Don't hold it against him.

      My cats have better grammar than that. It's me-ow, not ow-me (a compound word in feline speak).

    4. Re:A basic spell check by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      me-ow, you-ow, he/she/it -ows.

    5. Re:A basic spell check by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      We-ows, you-ows, they-ows, keep going many, it's a whole new adjunct to lol-speak.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
  4. Working link to editor by Cornwallis · · Score: 0, Troll
    1. Re:Working link to editor by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      I only see an "f" in the middle and a crossed out "s" in the top left.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Working link to editor by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      That's nearly seizure inducing.

    3. Re:Working link to editor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WARNING - FUCKING LOUD JINGLE AT THAT SITE!

      (blah blah blah yeah I know there's a lameness filter and I know all-caps is shouting - that's the whole point)

    4. Re:Working link to editor by NatasRevol · · Score: 3, Informative

      WARNING

      You're an idiot if you actually clicked on that link.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    5. Re:Working link to editor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Usually I call for cutting /. editors slack, as they weren't English majors, but COME ON... "Cybercriminals has?" Guys, lay off the beer when you're at work.

    6. Re:Working link to editor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Cybercriminals can has cheezburger.

    7. Re:Working link to editor by unitron · · Score: 1

      Usually I call for cutting /. editors slack, as they weren't English majors, but COME ON... "Cybercriminals has?" Guys, lay off the beer when you're at work.

      Yeah, that really "clanged" in my mind's ear as well, but then I thought, "Hey, maybe these guys have incorporated, and 'Cybercriminals' is the name of the business", which would make the headline acceptable in the US.

      Of course in the UK it'd still be wrong.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  5. Czar by vikingpower · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A guy named Czar posted a thinly veiled threat as a comment upon Krebs' blog post:

    "and easy to speak of the lives of others [hackers, carders, botmasters]

    you [Krebs] invade the forum these guys and find that they do not go doing anything?, it would be foolish on your part

    be realistic, you are at risk talking shit about these guys

    this minimum and that they can make in relation to you,

    Now, imagine if it was a bomb?, what do you think? [Krebs]

    would be surprising if some hacker will not do this someday

    good luck with your work, the risks are increasing lol;"

    Now one wonders how THAT is going to be played out....

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:Czar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If they start playing with bombs, I guess the number of fingers of cyber-criminals is going to decrease sharply

    2. Re:Czar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Czar, You Sir. Will hear from my editor. Just you wait.

    3. Re:Czar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm surprised your editor is still on speaking terms with you.

    4. Re:Czar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know, I read that picturing William Shatner reading that with Yoda's voice. It was highly entertaining.

    5. Re:Czar by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Well, it might get them off line at least.

      Oh, stupid DragonSpeak.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  6. Krebs is a scam. by vovick · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I posted a comment on his blog a while ago where I questioned the validity of the results of his research that caught a lot of attention a while back. For example, one of his biggest finds was that that one of the scammer' name is Vasily Ivanovich Petrov, which is just a placeholder name just like Joe Public in Russian. He never approved my comment or provided any feedback. If he was an actual researcher, he wouldn't silence reasonable criticism towards him.

    It's sad to see him get one meaningless article after another on Slashdot.

    1. Re: Krebs is a scam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have a link to your investigation? Or some research you did?

    2. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      He never approved my comment or provided any feedback. If he was an actual researcher, he wouldn't silence reasonable criticism towards him.
      So he didn't bother or didn't have time to reply. How is that *silencing* criticism? Did he delete your comment? Also, researcher doesn't mean infallible person. It means person doing research, and people make mistakes.

    3. Re: Krebs is a scam. by vovick · · Score: 3, Interesting

      He never approved my comment, so it never made it in the comment section. I didn't do anything significant, I just made a couple of observations that made his research look less exciting, the most significant find I already mentioned above. A good lesson for me to avoid dealing with blogs and bloggers that pre-moderate comments or at least preserve them locally.

    4. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He never approved my comment or provided any feedback.

      And so to you the only reasonable explanation is that he read your comment and covered it up, secure in knowing that no one else could catch that error, even though (assuming it's true) it would be obvious to millions of people.
      Comments "awaiting moderation" are often never read by anyone and simply fall into a bucket. If they get moderated at all they can easily be inadvertently flagged as spam along with dozens and dozens of other actual spam comments.

    5. Re: Krebs is a scam. by Required+Snark · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      Oh, you poor little ego is wounded. Boo hoo hoo. All of Slashdot should rise up in arms and defend you against this horrible "scam" artist.

      Now I don't know Krebs from a hole in the ground. As far as I know I've never read anything by him and I never went to his site. However, the fact that someone went to the trouble to have heroin sent to his house means that he is making some really nasty people unhappy. So it's clear that you whiny little post is as pathetic as you are.

      I have a suggestion: if he doesn't take you seriously, then just quit going to his web page. I'm sure you departure will spell the end of his evil reign of terror. It will make the heroin seem like a box of candies.

      And while you're ignoring Krebs, why don't you quit posting on Slashdot? There are already enough self absorbed knuckle dragging fools around here, so your contribution is not needed.

      --
      Why is Snark Required?
    6. Re:Krebs is a scam. by vovick · · Score: 1

      Did he delete your comment?

      He did not approve it, so it never became visible. A comment cannot be "deleted" it never gets "approved". How convenient.

    7. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      He has uncovered the Anti-vovick conspiracy! Quick everyone look like you were doing something else...

      Lord Krebs commands it!

    8. Re:Krebs is a scam. by vovick · · Score: 3, Insightful

      even though (assuming it's true) it would be obvious to millions of people.

      First of all, I greatly doubt his article was read by millions. Second of all, how many readers spoke Russian to spot the questionable moment? Very few, I must imagine.

      Comments "awaiting moderation" are often never read by anyone and simply fall into a bucket.

      That is certainly a valid thought. However, a few comments praising his research got approved both before and after mine. In addition, he commented on some of them in person. This is leading me believe that he did read my comment, even though I will never be able to prove it (great way to deal with the critique, Krebs!).

    9. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      There seem to be a lot of Vasily Petrovs out there in the real world, just as there are a lot of John Smiths. What makes you think it's not a real person?

    10. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I have a personal experience with Krebs that aligns with your observations. He posted my email address on one of his blog entries, and he refused to take down my address when I pointed out the flaws in his (and his security researchers') methods (specifically that the site he was investigating did not do email validation at all, so the email addresses from their user database he accessed can not be verified to real accounts). I would give more details, but currently I'm in the process of seeking legal advice for this matter.

      I guess that most people will agree that if you bill yourself as a security researcher or journalist, it's quite important to show some professionalism and integrity and not mislead or give false impressions.

    11. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm the same AC as below (regarding the issues with my email address being posted by Krebs) - just wanted to say that you hit the nail on the head and it is the lack of any acknowledgement that there may have been mistakes or inadequacies in his "research" or "reporting", (and the attitude shown when faced with the case presented) which is the issue here.

    12. Re:Krebs is a scam. by vovick · · Score: 1

      It's not just Vasily Petrov. It's Vasily Ivanovich Petrov. Three very common placeholder names chained in a row. At least one person does have this name, but it seems very fishy to see a name like that in a hacker's credentials. I did not claim anything, all I did was make a valid observation that casted certain doubts on the results his work and he effectively muted me instead of giving his thoughts about this or just silently approving my comment.

    13. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Funny

      I posted a comment on his blog a while ago where I questioned the validity of the results of his research that caught a lot of attention a while back. For example, one of his biggest finds was that that one of the scammer' name is Vasily Ivanovich Petrov, which is just a placeholder name just like Joe Public in Russian. He never approved my comment or provided any feedback. If he was an actual researcher, he wouldn't silence reasonable criticism towards him.

      It's sad to see him get one meaningless article after another on Slashdot.

      I posted a suggestion to the Pope on how to run the Catholic church and he never approved the comment. This proves he's a fake, right?

    14. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is certainly a valid thought. However, a few comments praising his research got approved both before and after mine. In addition, he commented on some of them in person. This is leading me believe that he did read my comment, even though I will never be able to prove it (great way to deal with the critique, Krebs!).

      You probably (if you tell the truth) just commented on a several-month-old blog post, nobody checks the spam filters of those. Or maybe, Krebs was just tired of getting stupid threats and so auto-filtered all comments from Russia, or when the OS language is Russian. Or you just forgot to type "Send". There is no need to assume an evil conspiracy against you, when simple bad luck and/or a human error is an equally valid explanation.

    15. Re:Krebs is a scam. by eyenot · · Score: 1, Funny

      You can't prove the de facto standard to be fake.

      The Pope is the de facto authority of the Catholic church. To back up this relationship, the Pope is regarded as infallible within the church. Questioning the Pope's authority over church matters doesn't even make sense, because it's an unquestionable authority.

      On the other hand, Krebs is not de facto authority *over* the facts and knowledge of security. If Krebs says encryption doesn't work, that doesn't make encryption fail to work. Whereas if the Pope says e.g. pedophilia is excusable, it becomes so to the Catholic church, despite whatever *beliefs* were held before.

      Krebs is an "authority" by one definition of the word; there is an entirely different definition of "authority" that means something else. In fact, depending on which dictionary you refer to, you may find two entries for "authority" considering them different enough as to be homonyms. I'm not going to go through the rigamarole of actually verifying that for you -- it's the same difference, either way.

      Being "an authority concerning a field of knowledge" doesn't give a person control over that field of knowledge the same way a person who is "an authority over an organization" gives that person control over that organization.

      You tread a really stupid, fine line between idiocy and another different kind of idiocy when you completely mix up science and religion. You should just get away from all of that.

      --
      "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
    16. Re:Krebs is a scam. by eyenot · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that if Krebs did what OP is alleging, that makes it a conspiracy? Who would Krebs have to be in with? Krebs, himself? Is this perhaps why you're already implying that if Krebs takes action, that action is necessarily "evil"? Because you see Krebs as an unnatural form of two different people? I don't get it.

      --
      "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
    17. Re: Krebs is a scam. by turbidostato · · Score: 2

      And you are French, obviously.

    18. Re:Krebs is a scam. by s.petry · · Score: 3, Funny

      The word is not "casted", it is "cast". Please approve my correction comment /. mods!

      Intended as ironic humor, not an insult just in case it gets over looked...

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    19. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      I was just illustrating that because someone does not post a comment by any old tom, dick, or harry does not necessarily mean that they are fakes.

    20. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Megane · · Score: 2

      You probably (if you tell the truth) just commented on a several-month-old blog post, nobody checks the spam filters of those.

      One of the little known good features of Slashdot is that all threads go to archive mode in two weeks. This removes one of the biggest problems with blog spam, which is dropping SEO bait at the end of old comment threads, like bird poop on a car that's been parked under a tree for a few months. It also avoids the problem of people who can't be arsed to check the dates on threads, and post in dead threads as through there was still a conversation going on.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    21. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if someone's going to have three names, the three commonest names seems very likely. I'm not sure it's such a valid observation.

    22. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so says Joseph Michael John...

    23. Re:Krebs is a scam. by motorhead · · Score: 0

      "No one would make up a name on the internet"
      - Carlos Dangerfield

      --
      Employee Of the Month - Cyberdyne Systems Corporation - September 1997
    24. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm calling you a (probable) liar.

      Signing up for a website account using a falsified email address is useless.

      Either you're one of the pieces of shit that Krebs is going after, or your account has been pwned by one.

      I suppose there's a slight chance that the address he posted is typo'd to look like yours, but how is he supposed to separate a legitimate complaint from the crap he puts up with on a daily basis?

    25. Re:Krebs is a scam. by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Banner adds and clickety click clicks. Plus of course marketing and gaining those highly profitable mass media consultancy (heavy on the con) spots, especially if you going to push the pro government security propaganda line. Of course it seems really lame to 'publicly' seek donations to purchase heroin unless of course you are seeking to publicly expose your scheme to frame someone (which doesn't make any sense at all), as obviously framing someone must be kept really really secret as it tends to fail otherwise. Of course it the whole thing is a publicity scam it seems pretty weak and desperate. Then again what else would you expect from someone from The Washington Post and it's shoddy corporate propaganda image.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    26. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Tharkkun · · Score: 1

      I'm the same AC as below (regarding the issues with my email address being posted by Krebs) - just wanted to say that you hit the nail on the head and it is the lack of any acknowledgement that there may have been mistakes or inadequacies in his "research" or "reporting", (and the attitude shown when faced with the case presented) which is the issue here.

      If his research truly was incorrect, why would he have cybercriminals constantly trying to screw him over? Obviously he is doing something to interrupt their business which is pissing them off.

    27. Re:Krebs is a scam. by unitron · · Score: 1

      Maybe one of his foes hacked in and removed your insightful little gem before he saw it, leaving no trace, so as to deprive him of the improvement he would otherwise have derived from it.

      They are true fiends, I tell you, and there are no lengths to which they will not go, nor any concern for collateral damage such as that which was inflicted on you.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    28. Re:Krebs is a scam. by unitron · · Score: 1

      ... Questioning the Pope's authority over church matters doesn't even make sense, because it's an unquestionable authority....

      Can I question whether it's unquestionable?

      Would that be okay?

      Or is it unquestionably unquestionable?

      And is it only unquestionable because it refuses to answer any questions?

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    29. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why would it be useless? Just type in a random word @hotmail/gmail/yahoo.com if the site requires you to put in an email address, especially if you know the site doesn't send to your email a link to validate your account. My email address also happens to be a simple word @ a often used public email provider. A lot of people signing up account with my email address, especially to sites that don't require email validation. There are a lot of sites that sign people up without validating their email address. I get lots of mail because of that.

      The account data from that particular website in question contained email addresses that were obviously not valid. This indicates that the website didn't do email validation and the email address were most likely bogus. If a researcher was competent or had any integrity, they would not have posted the email addresses in a accusatory tone as they have under the circumstances.

    30. Re: Krebs is a scam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      QQ

    31. Re:Krebs is a scam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, I mean. There are people in the USA named 'John Doe'. Why couldn't there be someone whose family name is Petrov, whose father is named Ivan, be named Vasily? Vasily Ivanovitch Petrov. And his sister, Alina Ivanovna Petrova.

    32. Re:Krebs is a scam. by eyenot · · Score: 1

      Damn if it wasn't several days ago I'd say mod parent up.

      The whole part about publicly/semi-publicly (might as well be the same thing in many situations, and oh look there was Krebs himself sitting in the balcony) soliciting blackmail funds really is stupid when you put it plainly.

      I was more floored by the fact that Krebs was allowed to tamper with the heroin that was delivered and take those pictures. I can't imagine a single sheriff's department anywhere in America that would find that Kosher. Funny, Krebs' article didn't mention charges of Tampering with evidence. Or, if real drugs were spilled by Krebs while waiting for the Sheriff to arrive, funny no mention of reprimands for Pollution.

      If the heroin wasn't even real, Krebs wouldn't have any reason to include that detail in his story. Which, also coincidentally, is tidied up by the Sheriff's missing Herion Durg Testre Kit.

      "Hi I'm the Sheriff. What's that? Got Heroin? Hold on! I'll zoom right on out there and NOT BRING MY HERION DURG TESTRE KIT."

      "Oh LET ME CHECK MY COLLECTION OF DRUG TESTING KITS. ... HMMMMM ... I DID NOT BRING HERION TEST. Hmm.. what did I come out here for, again? Oh, yeah. THE HEROIN YOU WARNED US MIGHT BE COMING LIKE TWO WEEKS AGO. THAT'S COOL I'LL JUST TAKE THIS WHITE POWDER BACK WITH ME. BYE BYE!"

      Lolz. I wonder how much of the entire story is true, at this point...

      [[ NARRATOR: Eyenot disappeared into Cluesforum and was never heard from, again. ]]

      --
      "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
  7. Next up is child porn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    then it won't matter if he spots the plot...

    1. Re:Next up is child porn by s.petry · · Score: 1

      He's not investigating Dynacorp or the Franklin Cover up...

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  8. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't know who he, but I get the feeling that if he keeps publicizing everything that people send his way or do to him, it might become an internet past-time for more people to start doing the same. It'll be like an internet gameshow:

    "Who can send the craziest thing to Brian Krebs?"

    It's all fun and games til somebody decides to send a shit covered blasting cap or who knows what else.

    --
    Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
  9. Good scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice scheme :) now the dude can do basically anything and blame it on others...

  10. How often does law enforcement do this? by LeepII · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You have to wonder how often law enforcement does this to justify SWAT raids.

    1. Re:How often does law enforcement do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You expect too much of them. Those (actually very few) corrupt cops will just plant a few dime bags, which is enough. They're not very creative.

    2. Re:How often does law enforcement do this? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 2

      Not often, I'd think. Failed SWAT raids are quite expensive, and embarrassing. The SWAT members involved would not take wasting their time lightly.

      Misreporting crimes to get them dealt with by another bureaucracy or other department, though, is an interesting way to work around frightened police or bystanders. Remember how assault, especially rape, victims are sometimes encouraged to scream "fire" insead of merely "help I'm being raped"? I've actually run to a fire alarm when my cell phone was out of charge in an emergency. (I saw someone else using their cell phone and didn't have to use the alarm.)

    3. Re:How often does law enforcement do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Police departments like their toys and normally like the high profile of the operations.

      Local SWAT erroneously broke down the doors at the Berwyn Heights mayor's house and killed his dogs. The mayor filed suit after the sheriff's department declared itself exonerated following an internal investigation. http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2011/jan/24/settlement_reached_maryland_mayo

    4. Re:How often does law enforcement do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If you justify the raid with planted evidence it is no longer considered "failed".

      Get some reading comprehension.

    5. Re: How often does law enforcement do this? by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      Given that probably about 90% SWATs shouldn't exist to start with (I remember an article here not so long ago) I'd bet they run to "demonstrate" they are in fact so much needed.

    6. Re:How often does law enforcement do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not often, I'd think. Failed SWAT raids are quite expensive, and embarrassing. The SWAT members involved would not take wasting their time lightly.

      You gotta be kidding.

      Here's a case where police broke in because the woman in the home screamed. Why did she scream? Because an officer not in uniform pointed a gun at her through the window:

      http://jonathanturley.org/2013/07/22/federal-marshals-raid-womans-home-after-she-screams-and-hides-from-officer-pointing-gun-at-her-at-her-window/

  11. What the hell, Slashdot? by EmagGeek · · Score: 2

    Cybercriminals HAS [sic] Heroin?

    What is this, I Can Haz Slashdot?

    1. Re:What the hell, Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      There's a missing 'e'. What he means is cybercriminals kidnapped Wonder Woman and mailed her to this security researcher's home.

    2. Re:What the hell, Slashdot? by maroberts · · Score: 1

      There's a missing 'e'. What he means is cybercriminals kidnapped Wonder Woman and mailed her to this security researcher's home.

      I'd prefer CatWoman

      --

      Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
      Karma: Chameleon

    3. Re:What the hell, Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, article (supposedly) not posted by Krebs, and talking in the first person.
      Except for a "this author".
      I think this article deserves a few medals, but not the ones its author would like to receive.

      (captcha: "excuse". no I won't)

    4. Re:What the hell, Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOLCatWoman?

    5. Re:What the hell, Slashdot? by eyenot · · Score: 2

      ... that's because the article was cut and pasted from the link. Which the author does write (it's Krebs' blog). In the first person, naturally. Whoever wrote the article took the first instance of "me", and replaced it editorially [using braces], and then failed to understand that it would be within acceptable editing as well as much easier to read if they took the liberty of changing the rest of the first-person references to refer to Krebs, as well.

      --
      "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
    6. Re:What the hell, Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the Joker sweeping in in his ROFLcopter

  12. Why write about this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Disclosing the ways he found out about the plot will only prompt the criminals to be more careful. Now they know which of their communication channels Krebs listens to and that their btc wallets have been traced, and can take measures to evade raising suspicion next time.

  13. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

    Hello is that 118Lube :D

    --

    Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

  14. Slightly off topic by Presto+Vivace · · Score: 3, Interesting

    but I have to wonder how many bitcoin users are government intelligence officers of assorted nationalities, or even security officers for assorted private corporations doing stuff that they do not want traced.

    1. Re:Slightly off topic by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      That's what secret Swiss bank accounts are for. You just need the (large) account number and nothing more to do business. Driving world politics for hundreds of years, accept no substitute.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    2. Re:Slightly off topic by PRMan · · Score: 2

      The Swiss made rules that required identities years ago. That's why everyone switched to the Cayman Islands.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  15. GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY by korbulon · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is obviously yet another blatant attempt by the federal government to discredit a real American hero. Not convinced? Look at the facts:

    1. Heroin is known by several street names, including (but not limited to) smack, dope, junk, brown sugar, and WHITE HORSE
    2. "Brian" is an Irish-Breton name meaning 'High'.
    3. Krebs is German for 'Cancer', but in a pinch can also mean 'Crab'
    4. 'Crab' has four letters. Four in German is 'vier', which when pronounced sounds like 'fear' in English.
    5. In July of 1963 a little-known top-secret project sanctioned by the CIA was started, which studied - among other things - the effects of illicit drugs on sea-faring crustaceans. The name of this project was Operation Dungeness. Among the members of the research team was - you guessed it - a German scientist of dubious political background, last name of Krabbe.
    6. As the Dungeness scientists became deranged with drugs and power, their range of test subjects expanded from sea-faring crustaceans to rodents and finally to small orphan children
    7. These orphas were harvested from foster homes and from the streets,to become nameless waifs, but one of these orphan children was nicknamed Brian Krebs ('High Crab') - a sick joke of the scientists
    8. One dark and stormy night a lightning strike knocked out the main power transformer suppling power to the underground lab. In the ensuing chaos, Krebs escaped, but during the escape he was bitten by a radioactive sea-faring crustacean, and it left a mark in the shape of a 'K' on his outer right thigh
    9. Armed with the truth, Krebs reached an uneasy truce with government goons, keeping them at bay - for now. But behind the scenes he wages a one man crusade against the mad CIA scientists who subjected him to a wide range of inhumane experiments as a nameless waif. Masquerading as a security expert, he uses his contacts in the underground to uncover evidence which will one day bring the perpetrators to justice.
    10. But the government does not stand idly by: knowing that direct confrontation is out of the question, it instead opts for a campaign of slander, defamation, and sabotage. This latest attempt to deliver illicit drugs is not simply meant to defame and criminalize Krebs, it is a message. And that message is: "We are coming for you."

    I could go on and on, but I believe these facts speak for themselves.

    1. Re:GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY by korbulon · · Score: 0

      Already downvoted to oblivion.

      I see that nowhere is safe.

    2. Re:GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY by Beorytis · · Score: 1

      Score:1, Troll? Man, the mods have no sense of humor today.

    3. Re:GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY by Shatrat · · Score: 1

      Krebs is German for 'Cancer', but in a pinch can also mean 'Crab'

      Krebs is german for Crabs. Cancer is Latin for Crab. There's no pinch needed.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    4. Re:GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY by unitron · · Score: 1

      So he has a secret base in the K-Man Islands?

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    5. Re:GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      It wasn't until the 6th or 7th step that I realised you were pulling the piss.

      I also hopefully goggled operation dungeness, only to be sorely disappointed.

    6. Re:GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY by V+for+Vendetta · · Score: 1

      Krebs is german for Crabs. Cancer is Latin for Crab. There's no pinch needed.

      "Krebs" is German for both "crab" and "cancer", no pinch nor Latin needed.

  16. Didn't work for me by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

    I tried that "Hey, cybercriminals delivered this heroin to me" routine and the cops didn't buy it.

    I have shitty luck.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Didn't work for me by korbulon · · Score: 1

      I tried that "Hey, cybercriminals delivered this heroin to me" routine and the cops didn't buy it.

      Next time don't use FedEx

    2. Re:Didn't work for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should they buy your heroin if they can seize it instead?

    3. Re:Didn't work for me by Ksevio · · Score: 2

      Did you tell them before it was delivered or when they walked in on you injecting it?

    4. Re:Didn't work for me by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      You tried to sell the heroin to them?

  17. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm still amazed the police gave a shit. Around here they normally just fob you off until the drugs actually arrive, then arrest you and take your DNA, computers, phones etc. Then finally when you get a lawyer they might drop the case (typically takes about six months if it's fast-tracked) and then after a few years you get your stuff back.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  18. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by Niggle · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Who can send the craziest thing to Brian Krebs?"

    A bobcat? http://xkcd.com/325/

    --
    - Blah blah blah, missing scientist. Blah blah blah, atomic bomb. -
  19. War on Drugs by FuzzNugget · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Another reason why the war on drugs does more harm than good. This guy is lucky to be alive and was very fortunate to have the wherewithal to be one step ahead of the ne'er-do-wells. Anyone else would have had a very real chance of getting injured, maimed or killed by the local paramilitary police force. Let's not kid ourselves, it probably helps that he's white and privileged, too.

    If we had sane drug policy, the worst that could have happened is having the drugs confiscated and getting a slap-on-the-wrist regulatory fine.

    1. Re:War on Drugs by Hentes · · Score: 1

      I know that people here tend to sympathise with hackers and distrust the cops, but blaming this on the police instead of the criminals who plotted it is beyond ridiculous.

    2. Re:War on Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, no, "sane" would mean nothing happens and people are free to mail drugs back and forth like Christmas fruitcakes with no harassment whatsoever. But a regulatory fine would definitely be saner.

    3. Re:War on Drugs by swb · · Score: 2

      But the criminal setup only works if the police response to it is over-the-top, and with drugs it always is. The police aren't responsible for this "prank" but they are responsible.

      If I was your neighbor and I called the police suspecting you got a suspicious package that didn't involve drugs, it might warrant a squad driving by to check out the house and possibly stopping to talk to me (who made the call) to get more information. They might knock on your door and say "Yeah, your neighbor was concerned..." just to get an idea if I was on the level or not.

      If I was your neighbor and called the police and said "Yeah, I think he's dealing drugs and just got a shipment." you may end up getting your house raided by a high-risk entry team, including having them toss the contents and detain you. If you're white, have a good lawyer, no criminal history and pass a piss test the D.A. *might* buy your story that those drugs aren't yours. Otherwise you're facing a possible Federal felony drug beef, sitting in Federal detention for months waiting for trial and bankrupting yourself to prove your innocence.

      The overreaction and police state tactics certainly are the cops fault.

    4. Re:War on Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's not blaming the police, he's blaming the stupid laws they have to enforce.

    5. Re:War on Drugs by SuperBanana · · Score: 1

      Let's not kid ourselves, it probably helps that he's white and privileged, too.

      The vast majority of the US prison population is white and male. Women have significantly lower arrest, conviction, and incarceration rates - with significantly lower sentencing lengths, higher probation rates, etc. Women are enormously privileged when it comes to the criminal justice system, and that includes when they're victims; males are victims of violent crime at a ratio of 3:1 men:women, and case clearance rates for female victims are higher than case clearance rates for men.

      While we're on the subject of privilege: women are more likely to finish high school, more likely to go to college, more likely to finish, more likely to pursue an advanced degree. Worldwide, basic literacy rates are far lower for men...because they're out doing the menial, tough, hard labor jobs women can't/won't/don't want to do. 99% of workplace deaths in the US are men, by the way...because women can't, won't, or don't want to do the brutal, dangerous manual labor jobs.

      Most of the homeless population in the US is male. Unemployment is higher for men than women. Life expectancy is significantly lower for men than women, and in every category of disease, men are afflicted more than women and are more likely to die from said disease. The draft is still male-only, and our armed forces are predominantly male...

      Nice job parroting the social justice crap, though.

    6. Re:War on Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given all the previous events local law enforcement is probably well aware that he is targeted.

    7. Re:War on Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The vast majority of the US prison population is white and male

      I always love it when people make obviously false statements like this. It's like they don't know the Internet exists, despite the fact that they are posting on it. Even a quick search and click on the first link shows 693,800 white males vs 1,283,000 blacks and hispanics in 2009. You have a strange grasp of what the phrase "vast majority" means. You also don't seem to understand that this is despite white males outnumbering other males of other races, making the racial distinction far greater than the simple numbers themselves suggest.

    8. Re:War on Drugs by FuzzNugget · · Score: 1

      and in every category of disease, men are afflicted more than women and are more likely to die from said disease.

      Breast cancer?

    9. Re:War on Drugs by Hentes · · Score: 1

      Not sure whether any of you RTFAd because that's totally not what happened. The police handled it cool.

    10. Re:War on Drugs by swb · · Score: 1

      Sure, there was more in play than in most situations and Krebs has some actual credibility as a security consultant so a story (with evidence) about being setup is great exculpatory evidence.

      But most people wouldn't be able to track a frame-up like this and would be left helpless victims of SWAT tactics and prosecutorial hostility.

    11. Re:War on Drugs by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      and in every category of disease, men are afflicted more than women and are more likely to die from said disease.

      Breast cancer?

      If one man and one woman each contract breast cancer, the man is far, far more likely to die.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  20. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the perfect DOS against the police. Keep them so busy with one person until they finally realize they are the ones wasting all their own money and resources; THEN, they will stop arresting people for stupid things, will leave people alone unless they are really required.

  21. Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how the drug dealers will respond to him calling the police, and them not getting their product back, or paid for it.

    1. Re:Hmm by cusco · · Score: 1

      The dealer probably got paid in BitCoin, so now he's really pissed. Don't worry though, if it was a large enough amount the dealers will get it back as soon as the lock on the back door of the evidence room breaks again.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  22. What about that free cable? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    I hope he does not have to pay EFT fees and other stuff to fix that and that they don't cut him off. What cable co lets someone pay for 3 years up front like that without an fraud flag going up?

  23. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whilst I would never advocate harm to an animal (and am not doing so now), I'm sure this could be done at no harm to the welfare of the cat...
    Come'on people...someone's got to have access to a Bobcat, the correct type of cage etc....

    INTERNET - TIME TO DELIVER!!!

  24. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or, a length of rubber hose, a ski mask, and a map of the Pentagon.....

    http://xkcd.com/576/

  25. Made of pure win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cybercriminals plot to send a large package of heroin to his house
    [success kid]
    Lurk on the forum, hear about the plan, alert the cops in time to stop them from finding the meth lab

  26. So this general is named Joe public ? by aepervius · · Score: 1

    Some people have that name :

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasily_Ivanovich_Petrov.

    When yous ay some guy is "joe Smith" and the first hit is a general in the army... That means at least ONE person is named that way, and therefore ANOTHER can be. So your assumption that the name means nothing is falsified.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:So this general is named Joe public ? by vovick · · Score: 1

      Great to see that you found the link I have already posted in an earlier reply! I didn't hold an

      assumption that the name means nothing

      I just raised the point which I believe is important that the criminal's name he presented as a significant result is likely to be fictional. If you were a security researcher yourself and a criminal you traced would call himself Joe Bloggs, you would want to recheck your sources before presenting your discovery, would you?
      There were lots of other questionable moments in his "research" related to Russian hackers, such as attributing all forum accounts having the same very common Russian username (which was a simple derivative of a word or a name, such as my username) to a single person who he coined as the culprit, without any additional justification that the accounts were actuall theirs.

  27. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by bipbop · · Score: 1

    Usually? Are you trying to say getting set up in this manner is a common occurrence where you live?

  28. Journalist can has risk by plover · · Score: 5, Informative

    Brian Krebs is a former Washington Post investigative journalist who has been writing about Internet security issues for a long time. He writes a lot about malicious attacks and often exposes the attackers. These are not nice people, either; they are spammers, botnet herders, guys who make, sell and buy credit card skimmers, hackers who steal credit card info, guys who run DDoS-for-hire sites, etc.

    He uses aliases to get himself invited to underground forums, monitors them for as long as he can, then exposes the criminals. The bad guys are also improving their own security, and becoming more adept at turning the tables. One forum placed unique values in the "# of posts" listed in the left side column of their forum, then outed him when he posted a screenshot.

    Needless to say, the people he is messing with are very annoyed at him. They are trying all the tricks they can to harass him remotely, such as ordering merchandise paid for on his credit cards, sending him unwanted (and now illegal) stuff, and using his credit cards to donate to charities. They've been trying to send him all the craziest, most annoying, most hazardous stuff they can without personally touching the merchandise themselves. The most dangerous stuff they have managed to send him so far was the SWAT van full of cops in a midnight raid. If these guys could get someone else to ship him a live cobra in a box, or a shit covered blasting cap, they wouldn't hesitate for a second.

    While he may not be a "hero", Mr. Krebs has done some good work at cleaning up several of the nastier elements that infest the Internet. You get less spam in your in box thanks to him.

    --
    John
    1. Re:Journalist can has risk by yurtinus · · Score: 1

      We should all send flowers to his house!

      --
      +1 Disagree
    2. Re:Journalist can has risk by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      If he keeps it up and starts to seriously affect their bottom line then they will send a thug to his house.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
  29. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by chihowa · · Score: 2

    He looks pretty clean cut; that seems to go a long way with the police. From his history, it seems like the local police and him have a pretty intimate (and not adversarial) relationship. I think that helps quite a bit, too.

    Repeat the situation with a mass-media stereotypical "hacker" and it would probably fit your description a little closer.

    --
    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
  30. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

    The police hate reports like this because they require huge resources to solve. Some guys in Russia ordered some drugs from the Farmers Market on Tor and paid with BitCoins. The seller presumably took steps to prevent them simply tracing the origin of the package. All the report does is add 1 to the unsolved drug crime stats for their area, making them look bad.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  31. My bad - will try harder by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 1

    Cybercriminals HAS [sic] Heroin?

    What is this, I Can Haz Slashdot?

    OP here - all the typos are my fault and the editors didn't notice them.

    No excuse, it was late and I was tired. I'll try to do better in future submissions. I did submit a working link - *that* I checked - no idea how it got screwed up...

    1. Re:My bad - will try harder by unitron · · Score: 1

      I clicked on your "working link" and it did, in fact, work.

      To be nitpicky about it, I right-clicked and clicked "open in new tab".

      But it might have been better to have written

      Over the past six months, “fans” of this Web site and its author have shown their affection in some curious ways...

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    2. Re:My bad - will try harder by unitron · · Score: 1

      I clicked on your "working link" and it did, in fact, work.

      To be nitpicky about it, I right-clicked and clicked "open in new tab".

      But it might have been better to have written

      Over the past six months, “fans” of this Web site and its author have shown their affection in some curious ways...

      And I just screwed up my own editing.

      Meant to say

      But it might have been better to have written

      "Security researcher Brian Krebs writes

      Over the past six months, “fans” of this Web site and its author have shown their affection in some curious ways...

      "

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  32. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

    Most drug dealing thugs look like (1 Thugs or 2) clean cut executives
    Most Corporate thugs look like (1 Thugs or 2) Clean cut executives

    Profiling 101

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  33. Neat little detail by CODiNE · · Score: 1, Insightful

    In the article it mentions a new name was set up "briankrebs7" and used to make the Silk Road purchase.

    Further down in the screenshot it says in the upper right corner :
    "Hi, briankrebs7"

    It's a pretty important detail that he had control of this account and impressive that he was able to hack into it that quickly before the package arrived.

    So it tells us a bit that the article doesn't. To what level has he pwn'd thecc.bz and how deeply does he get into these boards while investigating?

    Would be funny if a spammer successfully charged him with hacking their servers. They could also claim that he set up the account and posted the whole thing on the forum after hacking their accounts to frame THEM.

    --
    Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    1. Re:Neat little detail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Um, That screenshot doesn't show Krebs hacking into the account. it shows a post by Flycracker showing off his order.

    2. Re:Neat little detail by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      You're right... boy I look silly!

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
  34. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by demonlapin · · Score: 3, Funny

    No, usually the cops have to plant the drugs themselves.

  35. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most thugs arent drug dealers - they work for drug dealers.

  36. Please proof your title by azav · · Score: 2

    That title is just embarrassing.

    Either of these are correct:

    Cybercriminals Have Heroin Delivered To Brian Krebs, Then Calls Police
    or
    Cybercriminal Has Heroin Delivered To Brian Krebs, Then Calls Police

    Let's at least hold our submissions up to standards of English that we should have learned before leaving grammar school.

    --
    - Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
    1. Re:Please proof your title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first one of your alternatives should read "Cybercriminals Have Heroin Delivered To Brian Krebs, Then Call Police". I guess even the critics aren't immune to poor grammar.

    2. Re:Please proof your title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Either of these are correct:"

      Should that not be:

      "Either of these is correct:" ??

    3. Re:Please proof your title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That title is just embarrassing.

      Either of these are correct:

      Cybercriminals Have Heroin Delivered To Brian Krebs, Then Calls Police
      or
      Cybercriminal Has Heroin Delivered To Brian Krebs, Then Calls Police

      Let's at least hold our submissions up to standards of English that we should have learned before leaving grammar school.

      That comment is just embarrassing.

      This is correct:

      Cybercriminals Have Heroin Delivered to Brian Krebs, Then Call Police

      Let's at least hold our comments up to standards of... oh hell, I can't keep a straight face saying that.

  37. noob by slashmydots · · Score: 2

    Security researcher or enthusiast rule #1: if you're going to try and frame someone or whatever, don't fucking post about it on the public internet

    1. Re:noob by DocSavage64109 · · Score: 1

      I think the person with the heroin and the plan didn't know how to impersonate a call from a neighbor -- which was required to make the report plausible. Thus a post asking for help was reasonable.

  38. The perfect alibi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well gee whiz, now he has a "record" of this kind of thing happening, he can now order heroin, use stolen cc numbers - all kinds of things and just claim it was a setup.

    I wonder if someday he'll "discover" a Swiss bank account number for an account filled with cash that some evil hacker "opened for him" in order to set him up.

    Something is very fishy about this whole fucking thing, theres bullshit going on somewhere. All these evil hackers foregoing all this cash/cc numbers, etc etc and spending all this time and effort to "set him up" all for no real better reason than that he's annoying?

    He has either seriously, materially fucked with someone in a way he is not disclosing or ~gasp~ much of this he set up himself or with acquaintances...now why would someone do that I wonder?

  39. He's not the only one. by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

    A manager came into my office one day and asked if I would change her phone number because someone had been making appointments in her name with her contact information for breast enlargement consultations with various surgeons. They were calling her to confirm the appointments once or twice a week for a couple months.

  40. Tampering with Evidence by Infiniti2000 · · Score: 1

    If this story is legit, then the dumbfuck Brian should get a misdemeanor for tampering with evidence. His blog is proof that he knows it's evidence, so ignorance (not even normally allowed anyway) is no excuse.

  41. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who can send the craziest thing to Brian Krebs?"

    It's all fun and games til somebody decides to send a shit covered blasting cap or who knows what else.

    You want a toe? I can get you a toe, believe me. There are ways, Dude. You don't wanna know about it, believe me. Hell, I can get you a toe by 3 o'clock this afternoon... with nail polish. These fucking amateurs...

  42. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by Cederic · · Score: 2

    "Local police successfully intercept Heroin shipment"
    "Police seize drugs worth $4000"
    "Police thwart blackmail attempt"
    "Police become fucking heroes of the night"

    The police _love_ this sort of shit.

  43. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Police become fucking heroes of the night"

    This is Slashdot, not SlashFIC, take that to the proper forum.

  44. Re:Asshole blogger can has publicity stunt by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

    Most drug dealers are Clean Cut Executive types (think Pharma)

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  45. In Soviet Russia by Roachie · · Score: 1

    Heroin delivered BY police!

    --
    This sig is not paradoxical or ironic.
  46. Major Discovery in Biochemistry by Iconoclasism · · Score: 1

    By golly! There's another Krebs Cycle!

  47. Re:Working link to article [morterforker] by WillBravo · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one here today who speaks English??

    Completely off topic, but so is this whole discussion:

    Thanks to Pulp Fiction, I can not make a language choice during an install without saying "English, mother fucker! Do you speak it?"

    Okay, that's all I've got.

    It's "motherfucker" (an epithet and compound word) if, as is the case, let's say, 99.444% of the time, the intent is figurative and not meant to literally connote an incestious relationship. Cuz why would we not want to take this as far afield as is humanly possible and... squirrels!

  48. Cyberciminals hijack SD's proofreader by Optali · · Score: 1

    Mates: CybercriminalS HAVE blah, blah, blah... :)

    --
    -- 29A the number of the Beast