Slashdot Mirror
As Prosecutors Submit Evidence, WannaCry Hero's Legal Fund Returns All Donations (buzzfeed.com)
An anonymous reader quote BuzzFeed:
The vast majority of money raised to pay for the legal defense of beloved British cybersecurity researcher Marcus Hutchins was donated with stolen or fake credit card numbers, and all donations, including legitimate ones, will be returned, the manager of the defense fund says. Lawyer Tor Ekeland, who managed the fund, said at least $150,000 of the money collected came from fraudulent sources, and that the prevalence of fraudulent donations effectively voided the entire fundraiser. He said he'd been able to identify only about $4,900 in legitimate donations, but that he couldn't be certain even of those. "I don't want to take the risk, so I just refunded everything," he said.
Two days later, Hutchins posted the following on Twitter. "When sellouts are talking shit about the 'infosec community' remember that someone I'd never met flew to Vegas to pay $30K cash for my bail."
Hutchins is facing up to 40 years in prison, and at first was only allowed to leave his residence for four hours each week. Thursday a judge lifted some restrictions so that Hutchins is now allowed to travel to Milwaukee, where his employer is located. According to Bloomberg, government prosecutors complain Hutchins now "has too much freedom while awaiting trial and may skip the country."
Clickthrough for a list of the evidence government prosecutors submitted to the court this week.
According to BankInfoSecurity, this is the evidence submitted by government prosecutors.
Two days later, Hutchins posted the following on Twitter. "When sellouts are talking shit about the 'infosec community' remember that someone I'd never met flew to Vegas to pay $30K cash for my bail."
Hutchins is facing up to 40 years in prison, and at first was only allowed to leave his residence for four hours each week. Thursday a judge lifted some restrictions so that Hutchins is now allowed to travel to Milwaukee, where his employer is located. According to Bloomberg, government prosecutors complain Hutchins now "has too much freedom while awaiting trial and may skip the country."
Clickthrough for a list of the evidence government prosecutors submitted to the court this week.
According to BankInfoSecurity, this is the evidence submitted by government prosecutors.
- Statements made by Hutchins after he was arrested.
- A CD containing two audio recordings from a county jail in Nevada where he was apparently detained by the FBI.
- 150 pages of Jabber chats between the defendant and an individual.
- Business records from Apple, Google and Yahoo.
- Statements (350 pages) by the defendant from another internet forum, which were seized by the government in another district.
- Three to four samples of malware.
- A search warrant executed on a third party, which may contain some privileged information.
Hutchins' attorneys have requested 45-60 days to review evidence, and on October 13 both attorneys will then give the judge a proposed schedule for the actual trial.
And all you have to do is pay 5% of your Bitcoins and wait four days for the transaction to confirm!
#DeleteFacebook
I read the title and I thought that they were giving the legal fund donations back because they had given up, not because almost all of them were fraudulent.
The saddest thing abouth the whole situation is that in the majority of cases getting 40 years in a federal prison vs walking free is matter of how big your bank account is.
sudo rm -r -f --no-preserve-root /
a longer video about why you shouldn't talk to the police, at all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
Umm... Why was my post censored to -1? You moderators are incredibly stupid and have sticks up your asses.
Well, they did that, so you're simply denying reality.
Let's get this straight -- well-armed and resourced police have no duty to do anything, but he does.
Nope. One pretty much has to have actually seen a felony, or assisted someone after the fact knowing that they'd committed a crime.
Apparently the risk of death even though you may be heavily armed and virtually immune from prosecution. Oh, wait, you meant a civilian. Lack of training, no qualified immunity, and the aforementioned being shot by first responders, methinks
Internet tough guy. Try not to select such an obvious meme.
Sure... in a country of 350 million plus, we're dropping like flies. Get a grip you hyperbolic twatwaffle.
Where the fuck do you all fucking live? My friends in Texas own firearms and will go out to help a neighbour. They're not scared of the police, they just live more than 8 minutes away from emergency assistance, or have a sense of community, or trust that if they're not breaking the law then they're generally going to be just fine.
Your friends sound white.
Useful disagreement: articulate the reason(s) why something is wrong. This serves two purposes. It shows that your disagreement is legitimate and not the typical "shoot the messenger" response of child-men who overreact emotionally to truth they find uncomfortable or happen to be in denial about.
One of the best things about slashdot is it's moderation system. It allows those who have a silly opinion to still post without being blocked, and it serves to lower the value of the "Your mom really loved my cock" and all of the other bullshit posted by people with severe psychosexual issues. They are still here, but if I don't feel like scrolling through a hundred posts like that, I just set the slider to not show anything lower than two. If silly season isn't bad, I read wide open.
I don't know if you were around when the trolls and flamers destroyed Usenet. Talk about kooks. There wre the usual homsexual projections by people that were gay, but uncomfortable with it, so went around calling everyone els cocksuckers and describing what they did with others in graphic detail. The usenet response was "filter them out, but some of the kooks just kept opening new email accounts - I don't know what the guy was doing with his life, but he opened and posted hundreds of messages from new accounts every day.
We traced him down and complained to his ISP, but with no luck. By the way, it is really really really difficult to be anonymous on the interent when people really really want to find you.
And when the amount of bullshit was 10 times the amount of actual conversation, everyone gave up and went to groups with a moderator.
The ironic thing is that after all of the trolling and flaming killed a group, it wasn't as much fun for the trolls and flamers. So they abandoned the group they just killed, and moved on to fresh people to annoy.
So yeah, you can post as an AC here, and if people want to see APK or Moo Cow guy - whatever happend to him - he made me laugh - we can do that.
It also provides others a chance to learn something new or at least understand an alternate viewpoint.
So tell me, what is the useful point of "You moderators are incredibly stupid and have sticks up your asses." ?
What exactly will I learn? I did reply that I saw his post. But even that reply is not accepted by those of you AC's that apparently think that a person who diasgrees with them is censorship. Sorry, but you don't even want what you claim you want.
Useless disagreement: you can't be bothered to do any of that, yet you feel strongly enough to use a limited resource (mod points). You see what you think are wrong views out there, yet value your own so little that you won't try to represent it.
So anyhow, tell me the use of telling me that my mom enjoyed it when AC fucked her? She's dead, 6 feet under, fnad fuck no I'm not going to get into a serious discussion to learn the AC's viewpoint. He is sick person, and deserves that -1. DEal with it, if you want conversation post something to have a conversation about.
So you mod it "-1 Troll, Flamebait, Overrated" even though it fits none of the definitions of those mods. You fail to note that there is no "-1 Disagree" mod or you think that was some accidental oversight.
One of these approaches is definitely more useful (and indicative of an adult mind) than the other. They are not on equal footing, as you seem to be implying. They're not equal in intent, motivation, or observable effect. The former is clearly superior. It also tends to foster disagreement, so it would be the preferred choice among those who can handle disagreement.
All you have to do to get a conversation going is post something that is worth talking about. But when you expect a cogent response to accusactions that the moderators have sticks up their asses, all I can tell you in manner of serious thought is none that I know do.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.