Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Malware Developer Who Used Spam Botnet To Pay For College Gets No Prison Time (bleepingcomputer.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the don't-do-the-crime-if-you-can't-do-the-time dept.

An anonymous reader writes: The operator of a 77,000-strong spam botnet was sentenced to two years probation and no prison time after admitting his crime and completely reforming his life. The former botnet operator is now working for a cybersecurity company, and admitted his actions as soon as the FBI knocked on his door back in 2013. The botnet operator, a 29-year-old from Santa Clara, California, says he was tricked by fellow co-schemers who told him they were not doing anything wrong by infecting computers with malware because they were not accessing private information such as banking or financial records. Furthermore, the botnet operator escaped prison time because he used all the money he earned in getting a college degree at Cal Poly instead of using it on a lavish lifestyle or drugs. This case is similar to the one that MalwareTech (aka Marcus Hutchins) now faces in the U.S. for his role in developing the Kronos trojan, but also after turning his life around and working as a cybersecurity researcher for years.

16 of 57 comments (clear)

  1. America, F-yeah! by sinij · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You have to turn to crime to just be able to afford tuition.

    1. Re:America, F-yeah! by gnick · · Score: 2

      I think to pay my student loans, I'm gonna sell meth...

      There was a high school chem teacher in NM that tried that to pay for his chemo treatments. It didn't end well for him but made a helluva story.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  2. Unproven no? by Luthair · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Isn't it still entirely unproven that Hutchins had anything to do with writing kronos? Last I heard the FBI has accused him of it, but he hadn't admitted guilt or lost a trial.

  3. Sounds like a case of wilful ignorance by El+Cubano · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... says he was tricked by fellow co-schemers who told him they were not doing anything wrong by infecting computers with malware because they were not accessing private information such as banking or financial records.

    I might have believed that claim 30 or so years ago. However, anyone having anything at all even remotely to do with technology would have to be living under a rock in order to not understand that infecting computers that you do not own is considered a serious crime.

    That would be like claiming that you thought it was OK to drive yourself home after 6 drinks because you were careful not hit any parked cars or pedestrians and you made it home.

    I would call that wilful ignorance.

    I was originally going to say that this whole thing sounds like a case of #4 from "The Six Dumbest Ideas in Computer Security". Then I reconsidered because it seemed like he had "good" intentions. However, I cannot imagine who would hire this guy after the claim that he made that he did not know what he was doing was wrong. Definitely sounds like a case of #4.

    1. Re:Sounds like a case of wilful ignorance by omnichad · · Score: 2

      Anyone can be charged with violating some law. Even if it's just a scare tactic to get a plea and there's no chance of a conviction.

  4. So... crime's OK by Baron_Yam · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Crime is OK if you use the proceeds for education. This seems like a bad precedent to set, especially with computer crime. It's not like we don't already have bunches of script kiddies imagining they're fighting a just cause while committing computer crimes.

    So many talented but ethically-challenged kids out there can look at this and say, "Well, if I don't get caught I'm rich and if I do I get probation. Yay, free tuition!"

    1. Re:So... crime's OK by azcoyote · · Score: 3, Funny

      I know! He should have taken up pole dancing to work himself through college, like a respectable person.

      --
      Incipiamus, fratres, servire Domino Deo, quia hucusque vix vel parum in nullo profecimus.
    2. Re:So... crime's OK by Baron_Yam · · Score: 2

      My local university apparently has a lot of prostitutes, but that's mainly an option for reasonably attractive straight girls and gay men... or those willing to fake it, I suppose.

      As a straight male, I did manual labour from age 16 to save up for university. Maybe crime would have been a better option, but unfortunately I was raised with ethics and morals.

    3. Re:So... crime's OK by dissy · · Score: 2

      Crime is OK if you use the proceeds for education. This seems like a bad precedent to set, especially with computer crime. It's not like we don't already have bunches of script kiddies imagining they're fighting a just cause while committing computer crimes.

      So many talented but ethically-challenged kids out there can look at this and say, "Well, if I don't get caught I'm rich and if I do I get probation. Yay, free tuition!"

      While I can certainly agree that this would be a bad thing in the hands of people who are always trying to game any and all systems for their own benefit, I'm actually leaning the other way.

      Reading the summary the first thought that went through my head was "What the hell, our justice system is actually trying to find justice and not just revenge as is almost always the case?!"

      The very fact our revenge system is so expected to dole out revenge and ignore justice, such that people actively see justice as a negative thing simply because it is so far from the norm, is a very poor reflection on us as a nation.

      Reform is something everyone should absolutely believe in! Or at least the possibility of it.
      As I said, I do agree completely that reform shouldn't be determined by a checklist or set of rules that never changes, ie being encoded into law, for pretty much the same reasons you gave.
      But taken on a case-by-case basis, and with the proper amount of time and resources to do it correctly, it is absolutely something our justice system needs to return back to.

      Not believing in reform, when taken to its ultimate conclusion, is the worst possible situation for all of us.
      After all if you firmly believe reform isn't possible, then ultimately there is no point what so ever in assigning prison terms anything under "life". Why let anyone out if by your own definition they can never reform and will never stop doing what they did to end up there?

      Continuing to the extreme, can you name one person who has never in their life made a mistake? No, such a person doesn't exist. So why not imprison everyone ahead of time?
      After all the logic is sound: Everyone makes mistakes, one mistake is all that is needed for punishment, and there is no possibility ever for anyone to learn from that mistake and not make it again in the future.
      That certainly isn't a world I want to live in.

      How many stories have we all heard about a gifted child, as in mid-teenage or less child, with amazing skills yet the usual shitty judgement that children have who end up in prison for multiple decades? It is a waste of talent, a waste of money, a waste of any possible contributing to our society, and ultimately a waste of a life.
      Throwing away a person like that Should be reserved for people who really can't provide any benefit to society or can't stop causing harm to others. It shouldn't be for people who make one mistake.

      One of our biggest problems is allocating the resources needed to tell those two types of people apart, specifically in that we simply do not do so.
      There is a twisted kind of logic behind erring on the side of caution and just assuming the same answer for everyone, but the fact is we shouldn't be putting the justice system in the position to need to assume.

      If you're thinking of asking me what we should be doing as some kind of universal answer, I have nothing to give. But this type of thing is still refreshing knowing at least a few people in our justice system haven't totally and completely given up hope on everyone as a blanket position.

  5. time served by fibonacci8 · · Score: 4, Funny

    He got a degree from Cal Poly, the judge decided he'd suffered enough already.

    --
    Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
  6. Prison is stupid and cruel for things like this by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

    Just garnish some of his earnings

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  7. Pint of jurisprudence by ramriot · · Score: 2

    This case is similar to the one that MalwareTech (aka Marcus Hutchins) now faces in the U.S. for his role in developing the Kronos trojan Should say: This case is similar to the one that MalwareTech (aka Marcus Hutchins) now faces in the U.S. for his ALLEGED role in developing the Kronos trojan.

  8. Re:So, basically he used the money to set himself by dave420 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    He spent the money on rehabilitating himself, and will pay taxes with his job. Or would you rather the government lock him up, not receive those taxes, and instead spend even more money on his custody?

  9. Consistent Rulings by ytene · · Score: 2

    I can only hope that the portion of the US Administration that is currently investigating Marcus Hutchins is willing to apply a similar outlook that we see handed down here. The law should be fair for all; whilst I respect the value of allowing judicial discretion in certain circumstances, I do think it is important to be implemented in a neutral way.

  10. Re:So, basically he used the money to set himself by Gavagai80 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, in order to avoid encouraging everyone from paying for college with criminal activities.

    --
    This space intentionally left blank
  11. So the old IT adage... by JezmundBerserker · · Score: 2

    "Never ask for permission, always ask for forgiveness" confirmed.