Slashdot Mirror


Romanian Hacker 'Guccifer' Sentenced To 52 Months In US Prison (reuters.com)

Romanian hacker "Guccifer" who targeted high-profile US politicians has been sentenced for 52 months in prison. Guccifer, whose real name is Marcel Lazar, pleaded guilty in May on charges of aggravated identity theft and unauthorized access of a computer. Lazar targeted former Secretary of State Colin Powell and the Bush family and was arrested on hacking charges in Romania in 2014 and was sentenced four years. He was extradited to the U.S. to face charges in March 2016. Reuters adds: Lazar has said in interviews he breached Clinton's private server at her home in Chappaqua, New York, but law enforcement and national security officials say that claim is meritless. Lazar is believed to have hacked into email accounts of about 100 victims between 2012 and 2014. They include prominent political figures such as former Secretary of State Colin Powell, a relative of former President George W. Bush and Sidney Blumenthal, a former Clinton White House aide and an unofficial adviser to Clinton. Clinton is now the Democratic nominee for president. Lazar leaked online memos Blumenthal sent Clinton that were addressed to her private email account, which was used during her time as secretary of state to conduct both personal and work business in lieu of a government account.

15 of 117 comments (clear)

  1. Legal vs Justice System by BoberFett · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He may be guilty under our legal system, but as many people are starting to understand a legal system and a justice system are not the same thing. If we had a justice system, the Bushes and Clintons would be in prison and Guccifer would be free. People like this should be considered heroes for exposing the criminals that lay claim to positions of leadership. The legal (not justice) system that those criminal leaders have set up are designed to keep themselves wealthy and powerful, and people like Snowden and Guccifer threaten their wealth and power.

    1. Re:Legal vs Justice System by DRJlaw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He may be guilty under our legal system, but as many people are starting to understand a legal system and a justice system are not the same thing. If we had a justice system, the Bushes and Clintons would be in prison and Guccifer would be free.

      Certainly, because the ends always justify the means. Hack your way in to discover evidence of crimes -- it's ok so long as they deserve to go to prison.

      "People like this should be considered heroes for exposing the criminals" says every U.S. TLA when deploying Stingrays, "Network Investigative Techniques," and other exploits against the very not wealthy and very not powerful.

      Yet what happens when they don't find evidence of a crime -- are they still guiltless? If some of the roughly 100 people Guccifer raided in his quest to expose were not themselves reasonably suspected of a crime, are they just acceptable collateral damage? When a TLA runs with this principle, are your fellow citizens just acceptable collateral damage?

      Sorry, I don't buy it.

  2. Re:Anyone surprised by sycodon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Guccifer exposes Hillary's illegal email server and goes to jail for it.

    Hilary gets off Scott Free.

    BTW, Comey said "Leeeeave Hillary Alllloneeee" because there were more appropriate administrative punishments available.

    And? What were they? Were the ever applied?

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
  3. Lesson here is by OrangeTide · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't mess with powerful people.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  4. Re:Anyone surprised by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sweet Jesus, but there's a lot of slashdotters think they live in a Dan Brown novel.

    --
    Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
  5. But she wasn't indicted by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 4, Informative

    Guccifer exposes Hillary's illegal email server and goes to jail for it.

    Hilary gets off Scott Free.

    BTW, Comey said "Leeeeave Hillary Alllloneeee" because there were more appropriate administrative punishments available.

    And? What were they? Were the ever applied?

    It's 'kinda worse than that.

    Hillary Clinton sent classified E-mails after leaving the state department, after the FBI concluded its investigation more deleted E-mails turned up that they should have been given, even more E-mails turned up that should have matched the FBI search terms Hillary was given.

    (Also, Bill Clinton used tax dollars to subsidize the private E-mail server and pay for employees at the Clinton foundation.)

    Looking at the media reports, things like Sigh. Yet Another Non-Scandal at the Clinton Foundation come up.

    Nothing to see here, no smoking gun. She wasn't indicted, so let's leave her alone.

    1. Re:But she wasn't indicted by quantaman · · Score: 2

      It's 'kinda worse than that.

      Hillary Clinton sent classified E-mails after leaving the state department

      We already knew that Hillary was using her private email server for work, and that some of that information was classified.

      So what is the shocking new scandal? That the previous secretary of state emailed information to an official at the state department?

      , after the FBI concluded its investigation more deleted E-mails turned up that they should have been given, even more E-mails turned up that should have matched the FBI search terms Hillary was given.

      FTA,
      "At this time, we have not confirmed that the documents are, in fact, responsive, or whether they are duplicates of materials already provided to the Department by former Secretary Clinton in December 2014.”

      So yeah, gimmie a call when they find evidence that something was deleted because it contained incriminating info, and not because some dumbass lawyer a) thought it was a good idea, and b) sucked at it.

      Or at least let me know when they know it's not a duplicate.

      (Also, Bill Clinton used tax dollars to subsidize the private E-mail server and pay for employees at the Clinton foundation.)

      Looking at the media reports, things like Sigh. Yet Another Non-Scandal at the Clinton Foundation come up.

      Yeah! The media is notoriously easy on Clinton!

      Did you actually read the Mother Jones analysis instead of looking at their rebuttal as evidence of media bias?

      The whole "scandal" is around the fact that Bill Clinton still does stuff in his capacity as ex-President. This takes some money, not a lot of money, but because it's considered to be in the national interest the federal government gives him funds to do this, ~$100k.

      It would be kinda stupid to bring in a whole different set of staff just because you spend a few hours doing ex-President stuff inbetween Clinton foundation stuff, so he just has the same staff work for the government instead of the foundation for that period.

      I'm not clear what he should have done otherwise. A bigger scandal would have been if he paid the staff for an ex-Presidential event using Clinton Foundation funds!

      --
      I stole this Sig
    2. Re:But she wasn't indicted by kenh · · Score: 2

      In 2007, when Congress asked the Bush administration for emails surrounding the firing of eights U.S. attorneys, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales revealed that many of the emails requested could not be produced because they were sent on a non-government email server. The officials had used the private domain gwb43.com, a server run by the Republican National Committee. Two years later, it was revealed that potentially 22 million emails were deleted.

      Where to start?

      OK, how about we start with the firing of eights U.S. attorneys? - They were political appointees, and they served at the pleasure of the President.

      Now, what about many of the emails requested could not be produced because they were sent on a non-government email server? They were discussing political appointees on a private server explicitly created to ensure that political business was kept off government servers, AKA to comply with federal law, not to avoid it. (Do Democrats conduct Democrat party business on government servers? No, to do so would be a crime,)

      And finally, what about Two years later, it was revealed that potentially 22 million emails were deleted And then, a few months later all the "missing" emails were found with the help of federal investigators, experts from Microsoft, and the Republican party - all 22 million of them.

      Not really the same thing, not really a problem - but hey, it helps the low-information Democrat voters feel good about their criminal politicians. Here's a link that might help you.

      --
      Ken
  6. ARSTechnica smear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    The first sentence of the ARSTechnica article by David Kravets with the same headline reads-

    "The Romanian hacker who helped expose Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's use of private e-mail as secretary of state was sentenced Thursday to 52 months in prison in connection to an admission that he broke into about 100 Americans' mail accounts."

    Talk about a wicked psyop. It paints the picture that Hillary's use of private e-mail was a secret of some kind. I wonder how many hundreds or thousands of people she communicated with via that e-mail account who therefore knew of the activity long before any hackerZ came into the picture. That's an amazing conspiracy to have kept under everyone's radar for so many years. Or it's a political smear.

  7. Re:Anyone surprised by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Failing to maintain Public Records, and sending and receiving classified information that isn't properly secured (and possibly involved in the murder of a scientist in Iran) actually IS illegal. Her having an email server wasn't the issue. The issue was using that server in an illegal way, which is ... illegal.

    Quit trying to make it about the actual email server, rather than WHY she set it up, and how she actually used it. I have an email server, it isn't illegal to have an email server. I use that server as a tool in a commission of a crime ... that server is important evidence. She shredded that evidence, when she was required .. by law .. to maintain that evidence.

    And we all know why she did this, she is on record as saying as much, to avoid congressional oversight (which is ALSO against the law).

    So, Email server was legal, all the illegal things she did, was caught doing, reasons for doing ... all of that was ... illegal.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  8. Re:Anyone surprised by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 3, Funny

    I suppose you must live in a world where clumsy people do things like "shoot themselves in the back of the head" and "drop barbells on their own necks",

    Pretty much. I live below the Mason-Dixon line. The above 2 examples wouldn't even make a top ten of "Dumbest Ways Floridians Killed Themselves in 2016".

    --
    Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
  9. Re:Anyone surprised by chihowa · · Score: 2

    Honestly, this is the lamest argument and I say that as somebody who would like to see all of the criminals from both of your silly little teams in jail where they belong.

    So what if the loyal party members only speak out when the other team does something wrong? Do you really expect anything else from all of these idiotic partisan hypocrites? Here you are acting as an apologist for another criminal and trying to deflect the argument away from her because she's on your stupid team. How is that any different?

    A plague on both your houses.

    --
    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
  10. Re:Anyone surprised by quantaman · · Score: 2

    Failing to maintain Public Records

    Do you know of people who went to jail for that?

    No? You mean people generally don't even care about it??

    Then why is Hillary different?

    and sending and receiving classified information that isn't properly secured

    Can you show someone who went to jail for similar actions?

    No? You just realized those one or two instances of jail time are fundamentally different cases?

    Then why should Hillary go to jail?

    (and possibly involved in the murder of a scientist in Iran) actually IS illegal.

    WTF? So an Iranian scientist publicly gives information to the US, then voluntarily returned to Iran (against the advice of anyone), and then gets predictably arrested and then executed.

    And this is somehow Hillary's fault because there's an email where she made a vague reference to trying to convince him to not go back to Iran in an email?

    She's lived in NYC, is she responsible for 9/11 too?

    Basically BFD. Hillary isn't an absolutely perfect human being. She was careless with her communications, as countless public officials are. She was probably more likely to meet with people who contributed to her charitable foundation. Well welcome to politics!!

    Yes these are real issues, but for anyone else it basically be a trivia question.

    Hell, Trump gave a campaign donation to the Texas Attorney General right after they dropped the investigation into TrumpU. Why don't you want him investigated and arrested for bribery? That's a hell of a lot worse then Bill Clinton chatting with Loretta Lynch on a plane.

    --
    I stole this Sig
  11. Re:Anyone surprised by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh please, those people were clearly left alive for plausible deniability.

    --
    Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
  12. Re:When are the Blumenthal & Clinton Trials? by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Right after the Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld ones. A week from Never.

    --
    Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.