Slashdot Mirror


An FBI Hacking Campaign Targeted Over a Thousand Computers (vice.com)

derekmead writes: In order to fight what it has called one of the largest child pornography sites on the dark web, the FBI hacked over a thousand computers, according to court documents reviewed by Motherboard and interviews with legal parties involved.

Just a month after launch, a bulletin board called Playpen had nearly 60,000 member accounts. By the following year, this number had ballooned to almost 215,000, with over 117,000 total posts, and an average of 11,000 unique visitors each week. Many of those posts, according to FBI testimony, contained some of the most extreme child abuse imagery one could imagine, and others included advice on how sexual abusers could avoid detection online.

But after Playpen was seized, it wasn't immediately closed down, unlike previous dark web sites that have been shuttered by law enforcement. Instead, the FBI ran Playpen from its own servers in Newington, Virginia, from February 20 to March 4, reads a complaint filed against a defendant in Utah. During this time, the FBI deployed what is known as a network investigative technique (NIT), the agency's term for a hacking tool.

7 of 138 comments (clear)

  1. Not hacking by 110010001000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They weren't hacking. They were obtaining the IP address of connected machines who were using Tor to access child porn sites. I just call that good investigation. Your IP address isn't private information, just like your postal address isn't.

    1. Re:Not hacking by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I just call it clever programming. After all, your computer is connecting to ME and sending me information that I am requesting. I'm not logging/breaking into your machine and getting the information. There are no laws that state what "information you shouldn't be able to get".

  2. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    This is a legitimate use of hacking.

  3. Slippery Slope by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bit of a slippery slope when Law Enforcement is breaking laws to catch criminals. This is not good policing in my opinion. There should be no excuse for breaking the law, especially in an effort to enforce the law. Law enforcement should never be 'do as I say, not as I do.'

    A simple test is.. if a citizen did this to another citizen, would that be against the law? Last I checked, hacking your neighbors computer and collecting information from it is definitely against the law. (Unless you're Microsoft and say you're going to do it in your EULA, bit that's a different can of worms.)

    1. Re:Slippery Slope by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As long as they got warrants (even if they're "John Doe" warrants), they're in the clear, methinks.

      I suspect that it would pretty much follow the same legal framework as wiretapping, albeit the 'tap' is put directly in the 'phone', without knowing fully who owns said phone.

      If this is indeed the case, I have zero problems with it - covertly swipe a website/host via legal means, and use it as a honeypot to catch/trap offenders, using a modified wiretap warrant/framework to 'tap' the computers that connect to said site. Assuming everything is properly documented and that the procedure is transparent enough to stand up in court, you then monitor that user's activities to not only collect evidence but to identify the user behind it.

      The only real problems would be with computers used by multiple individuals, in which case you'd have to suss out which user is responsible. Another problem would be to have a procedure (and malware) in place that doesn't give a defense attorney enough credible ammunition to claim his client was framed, or that evidence was 'planted'. This is why the procedure(s) would have to be transparent to all (it would become that way anyway come the first court case, if the prosecution wanted any hope of winning a conviction.)

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    2. Re:Slippery Slope by killkillkill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Uhh... I read it

      Reuters revealed that the Special Operations Division (SOD) of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration advises DEA agents to practice parallel construction when creating criminal cases against Americans that are actually based on NSA warrantless surveillance

      And the sited article:

      http://www.reuters.com/article...

      Of course two senior DEA agents said your quote, so it must all be hogwash.

  4. So the gov knowingly ran a child porn site? by sgrover · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I haven't seen it in the comments yet, but by seizing the site and NOT shutting it down, the government chose to run a child porn server. Does that not then put them under the same legal scrutiny as those they were investigating? Of course I did not read the article and may be missing a bunch of detail, but if the gov was actively serving child porn, then THAT is a crime in my eyes - regardless if it was a honeypot or not.