Ex-judge Gets 27 Months on Evidence From Hacked PC

netbsd_fan writes "A former California judge has been sentenced to 27 months in prison for possession of illegal pornography, based entirely on evidence gathered by an anonymous vigilante script kiddie in Canada. At any given time he was monitoring over 3,000 innocent people. The anonymous hacker says, "I would stay up late at night to see what I could drag out of their computers, which turned out to be more than I expected. I could read all of their e-mails without them knowing. As far as they were concerned, they didn't know their e-mails had even been opened. I could see who they were chatting with and read what they were saying as they typed."

Lousy summary

[StrongGlad (687909)]

The summary is misleading on multiple fronts... First, according to the 2002 story, the "hacker" spent considerable time writing the trojan used to access the judge's porn stash---he's hardly a "script kiddie," as the summary dubs him. And "anonymous"? The guy was identified by name in both of the TFAs: "Brad Willman, the Canadian hacker, forwarded the information to an anti-pedophile watchdog group, which then sent the information to Irvine police detectives." "Dubbed 'Citizen Tipster' by police, Brad Willman, spent night after night writing a Trojan Horse program that gave him complete control over every computer that downloaded it. "

Also...

[EmbeddedJanitor (597831)]

This was not the sole evidence. The hacker mearly tipped off the authorities. The judge also admitted that he stored the images.

On /. it used to be that you didn't RTFA, but now I think that it is now time you didn't RTFSummary! Editing and summarising are just crap!

The script kiddy part...

[Gazzonyx (982402)]

The hacker in question was referred to as a 'script kiddy' solely for the fact that upon hearing of his success in implicating the former judge, he immediately blogged his victory on myspace under the appropriate title of 'PWN3D!'. Ergo, this title is moreso an indicator of maturity than his technical skill level, and furthermore, an indicator that he lives in his parents basement.

Re:The script kiddy part...

[fbjon (692006)]

an indicator that he lives in his parents basement.

From TFA:

"And don't tell me about meeting girls -- boy oh boy."

He is now working hard to launch a computer security career and thinking about moving out of his parents' basement to assume a new identity so he can hack again.

He is, in fact, living in his parents' basement. This guy's a slashdotter for sure.

Re:The script kiddy part...

[Gazzonyx (982402)]

I'm a slashdotter, as well; I didn't read the article and posted about it anyways.

Never in my life has blindly applying a stereotype yielded such positive results! I laughed at first, and then it hit me. As irony would have it, the double bladed sword in this case is that I just blindly applied a stereotype, that hit the nail on the head through the dark, only to realize that I just made fun of the very guy that the world sees me as.

Oh cruel irony! It doth smite me mightily! Twice.

Bust the buster?

[dotslashdot (694478)]

Isn't the hacker in legal trouble for downloading the same 3,000 pictures? (How else did he know the content was illegal?) He had to download them to his computer to view them, thereby committing the same crime as the guy he outed.

Re:Bust the buster?

[bersl2 (689221)]

Good point. What's the difference between possession with intent to expose someone and possession with intent to masturbate? It's still possession, right?

Could I have worded that any worse? :D

Re:Bust the buster?

[antiphoton (821735)]

Not to mention having access to 3000 other innocent people's systems including police and military personal. Not only that, but he could also view any email correspondence by that judge, which could have included sensitive court material.

While his actions are most likely altruistic, he should be punished for his deeds and then be enlisted by some the Canadian police and do it legally.

Terrified on both counts.

[Elemenope (905108)]

Not only that, but he could also view any email correspondence by that judge, which could have included sensitive court material.

Show me a judge who handles sensitive court correspondence by e-mail and I'll show you a judge I dearly want to smack in the face really, really hard.

he should be punished for his deeds and then be enlisted by some the Canadian police and do it legally

I wouldn't find it at all more comforting that the guy who has the job (self-appointed or not) trolling through private e-mails has a badge. Wouldn't that make him *more* dangerous to the average privacy-loving John Q. Whatever?

Re:Bust the buster?

[mwvdlee (775178)]

The hacker could have just as easily uploaded the 3,000 pictures to the judge's computer.
Is this type of evidence really admissable? It's not like the hacker can be trusted, after all he DID illegally hack into computers. Perhaps it was his intent to incriminate somebody. He was able to monitor a large number of computers and it just happenned to be an ex-judge's computer that had the pictures? It may be true, but it's a damn big coincidence.

It's not the pictures, it's the diary

[DrYak (748999)]

The judge kept a detailed diary of his actions.

Not only has the judge admitted the diary was genuine BUT ALSO a former victim came forward and spoke AND the police found the diary to seem real enough.
At no moment did the judge contest the fact and pretend to have been victim of some spyware/virus.

Therefore the ex-judge can be judged, even if the hacker will also be :
- Told (once more) to stop breaching into people's computers because it's illegal.
- Told to get an actual job at the police to be able to do it legally.

Re:Bust the buster?

[kestasjk (933987)]

What I want to know is where do you draw the line when it comes to taking down child molesters?

Whenever a politician wants to push some privacy invading law he has only to utter the magic words "kiddie porn" and there's no rebuttal. If a hacker invades your privacy and reads your e-mail that's terrible; unless he suspects you're a child molester, in which case he's a "hero".

One of the funniest, most well adjusted people I know was molested at six; it doesn't scar you for life, a savage beating from bullies just might though. Why do we practically encourage bullying but go to any lengths to stop child molesters?

Obviously here I have to clarify my stance, or people will start taking out their pitchforks.. Child molestation and kiddie porn is revolting, but what about getting stabbed? What about being forced to take addictive drugs and prostitute yourself to earn them? What about privacy?
No-one in power has the guts to say "we're going too far", because then they'll be labeled as a sympathizer.

What about the child prostitutes that everyone knows about, but won't donate money to build good orphanages to put them in? We go to any lengths to stop the abuse of children, unless it costs us money. If Brett is such a anti-child molester hero why not get a job, and donate money to take kids off the streets?
Because Brett just wants an excuse to get a rush from "hacking" (ie installing a trojan on gullible users computers, the nirvana of incredible hacks). He's just like loads of other "hacktivists"; working and donating money just isn't as exciting.


I'm not saying the evidence shouldn't be counted, but I do think calling Brett a "hero" for reading thousands of peoples e-mails for years on end is absurd.
Out of those thousands of people were any of them not child molesters? I'm guessing the majority weren't, since he has only a couple of arrests attributed to him. Would you call Brett a hero if you were one of the people he had been monitoring for years? Personally I'd want to lodge the end of my boot up his asshole.

Re:Bust the buster?

[anagama (611277)]

Yes you are missing something. How did the kid know that the pictures were child-porn? From the names? By just taking a flying guess that they were? Unlikely. Chances are he viewed them. Obviously, he didn't break into people's homes and sit at their machines. He did this remotely. This means the data streamed across the net and landed in his computer and then was displayed on his screen. So yes, vigilante also possessed the child-porn, at least for a moment or two.

Re:Bust the buster?

[bersl2 (689221)]

You have to have a copy of the information at some point, and AFAIK no program can determine whether an image is child pr0n or not, so whoever blew the whistle saw the images. I don't know the exact language of the applicable laws is, but I'm sure it's got some questionable elements---both ways, too. The meaning of "to have" is just too hazy a concept when it comes to digital information.

Illegal evidence

[KiloByte (825081)]

And how the fuck you can convince someone on evidence that got obtained in an illegal way?

And why the script kiddie isn't in jail? Spying and breaking the privacy of many thousands of people (the blurb suggests it was way more than 3000) isn't something to shake a stick at.

Son of a .....

[AftanGustur (7715)]

The son of a coffee shop owner, Mr. Willman, a.k.a. Omni-Potent, ....

And he stayed up all night .. night after night ... I wonder what kept him awake ?

I'm curious how you people think about this

[OeLeWaPpErKe (412765)]

Because obviously the hacker is guilty of more crimes than that judge

-> clear violation of privacy of thousands of people
-> use of that information for private gain
-> passing off vigilante-collected information to the police
-> (plus or minus) collecting that same porn

All this obviously without a court order, or even being in the police force.

This is also seriously worse than the riaa has ever done. So what should the punishment for the hacker be ? Clearly he cannot go free, despite having caught this criminal.

Re:I'm curious how you people think about this

[quantaman (517394)]

Because obviously the hacker is guilty of more crimes than that judge

-> clear violation of privacy of thousands of people
-> use of that information for private gain
-> passing off vigilante-collected information to the police
-> (plus or minus) collecting that same porn

All this obviously without a court order, or even being in the police force.

This is also seriously worse than the riaa has ever done. So what should the punishment for the hacker be ? Clearly he cannot go free, despite having caught this criminal.

Ahh but you forget, child pornography was involved, one of Bruce Schneier's four horsemen of the information apocalypse. You can be assured that no right is safe, nor investigative method over the line, when one of the horsemen is involved.

Re:I'm curious how you people think about this

[TACD (514008)]

A quick Google discovers that they are terrorists, drug dealers, kidnappers, and child pornographers [homelandstupidity.us].

Hacker Must be Prosecuted for Committed Felonies

[MSTCrow5429 (642744)]

I'd toss out the conviction of the judge based on an illegal search and seizure, prosecute the hacker through the DCMCA and general wire-tapping laws, and allow the judge to file a civil suit for property invasion. You can't spy on everyone possible where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy to see if they might be doing something illegal. You need a search warrant when American citizens are involved. So while breaking and entering into the judge's computer and finding data contraband, who knows what personal details of other people's lives, financial data, credit card numbers, etc. that this criminal has gathered while repeatedly breaking and entering into other people's property. I can't trespass into your home to see if you have drugs or child porn or what have you. Even if I find something illegal, I've already broken into your home and searched it top from bottom, without your knowledge, consent, or a search warrant, and I've broken into thousands of other houses and found nothing. This is the same thing; the hacker is a one-man brownshirt, with no respect for the rule of law or due process.

If one hacker does it for 'good'

[Don_dumb (927108)]

Then you can be sure there are one hundred doing it for ill.

But similar to what posters earlier have pointed out - How can we solely trust a trojan writer? How do we know that the hacker didn't simply set people up? Once he had taken control of their computers he could have planted the files himself.
Not to mention the fact that he must have broken into a great many innocent people's computers and read their emails. I wonder if they will be so happy of the methods that this superhero used.

If he knew the places pedophiles frequent, why didn't he just forward that info to the authorities, he can't claim that they weren't putting enough effort into fighting child pornography.

How can you find them guilty..?

[by Anonymous Coward]

This idiot thought he was doing the authorities a favor by finding evidence of what he saw as wrongdoing.

To do this he broke into systems and spied without a warrant, probable cause, or any authority whatsoever. Most of the people he did this to were innocent, but in any case the 'evidence' he found cannot be used to prosecute with. I doubt if he has much concept of the 'chain of evidence' anyway, so it will be inadmissable for all sorts of reasons.

'Never mind', you say, 'he has gained valuable intelligence. The authorities can mount a raid later and do things properly'.

But by his own admission these target machines have been hacked by a person anxious to 'find' kiddyporn distributors and users. Surely this makes ANYTHING on that system suspect thereafter? When accused, all the judge has to do is claim that he has never seen these photos before, and they must have been placed there by the hacker. Indeed, from TFA I think that is a credible possibility.

Not only has this idiot committed a nasty computer crime by hacking into innocent people's machines, he has messed up the possibilities of any future prosecution of people who may or may not have been involved in an actual crime.

{irony}
Of course, the above is only going by the Constitution. Everyone knows that nowadays the rule of law is suspended whenever:

Patriotism is mentioned
Children are mentioned
Global Warming is mentioned
Security is mentioned
Road Safety is mentioned ....... .......

{end irony}

None of the cases he's uncovered will ever succeed

[greg_barton (5551)]

He's found a judge with child porn on his computer. This judge will hire a competent defense attorney who will argue that Willman put all of the images there. After all, Willman had complete access to the machine, by his own admission. "Willman is a lone wacko who's obsessed by child porn," the attorney will argue.

And every single child pornographer he's uncovered will do the same. Many of them will get away with it, and precedent will be set.

There's a reason why we have search laws. Willman has now tainted the evidence in thousands of child porn cases, by his own admission. That's pretty much the definition of "well meaning idiot."

A lesson to be learned here...

[erroneus (253617)]

... if someone hacks your network to 'gain evidence' the counter-claim should be that the hacking was done to PLANT evidence. Force an end to the assault on your freedom and your character before the struggle itself becomes your downfall.

Reasonable doubt then has a good chance to keeping you free. If evidence is not properly gathered from the very beginning, how can proof beyond a reasonable doubt ever be presented?

This guy copped a plea, though, so much of the background is moot at this point. But I have seen many other cases (typically surrounding divorce where the woman would like to secure custody of children and such) where people's lives had been ruined on the basis of an accusation that could not be defended easily enough. As the article shows, this guy's whole life fell apart during all of this and while the resources of the prosecution are unlimited, the resources of the accused deteriorated and suffocated while he defended against the charges.

We, the public, will never know the full truth of this. A confession after all the strife he faced is nothing short of coerced and tainted.

Re:More vigilantes please

[DoktorTomoe (643004)]

You scare me ... you know, first this is against kiddie porn, then terrorism, and in a not all-too-far future, it is for the war on tax evasion or for finding that Bittorrent files you have...

There should be limits on what can be done legally. And that script kiddie should be jailed, too.