Botnet Spammer Gets Just 18 Months For Being Odd 83
itwbennett writes "Thirty-three-year old Scottsman Matthew Anderson was sentenced this week to 18 months in prison for orchestrating a malicious Trojan campaign in 2006. The reason for his relatively light sentence? He apparently wasn't seeking to maximize profit like any normal, red-blooded hacker. Also, his timing was good. His arrest in June 2006 predated by a matter of months the Police and Justice Act, which would likely have resulted in a harsher sentence. By comparison, David Kernell, who snooped in Sarah Palin's email, got a year in prison."
18 months light "by comparison?" (Score:5, Insightful)
How long does a year last in your world?
And Mafiaboy (Score:3, Insightful)
Who took down numerous big name websites, was sentenced to eight months of "open custody," one year of probation, restricted use of the Internet, and a small fine.
Lets face it, you can't properly gauge the sentence with the crime - too many other factors come into play that the judges are supposed to try and account for. Intent, remorse, etc etc - all play factors.
Welcome to planet Earth (Score:5, Insightful)
Thirty-three-year old Scottsman Matthew Anderson was sentenced this week to 18 months in prison for orchestrating a malicious Trojan campaign in 2006.... By comparison, David Kernell, who snooped in Sarah Palin's email, got a year in prison.
Matthew Anderson and David Kernell live, committed their offences and were tried in different countries to one another. Why on earth would you expect their sentences to be comparable?
Next.. libel laws in England harsher than in the US! Owners of internet gambling sites that are lawful in other countries face imprisonment in US! Producing the same drug can get you anywhere from a governement contract to a stern warning to imprisonment to execution depending on which country you pick. Hello, welcome to the world.
For God's sake (Score:3, Insightful)
It's spelled 'Scotsman', not 'Scottsman'.
A little proof-reading wouldn't go amiss.
Re:18 months light "by comparison?" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Anderson's not weird. He's you (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Anderson's not weird. He's you (Score:5, Insightful)
Shweet jumped up jebus.
His heart was not in the right place. He ran a botnet distributing malware. Malware for data theft. Surveillance on people using infected PCs. Infected by him. He knew precisely what he was doing.
But yes...lets glorify the poor, misunderstood dude working in his mom's living room.
'neato stuff' indeed. YGBSM. You know...there are ways to learn how to do that without abusing innocent civilians.
"Crossed the line" is an understatement. And this gets modded up, or recommended for a job.
Re:18 months light "by comparison?" (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Only 18 months? (Score:3, Insightful)
Does it bother you when a stoplight is red for 30 seconds longer than it should be? It only costs you a few seconds of time, and a few drops of gas, each commute... I think it's equally reasonable to be bothered by both of these things.
Re:Welcome to planet Earth (Score:1, Insightful)
Not sure that's the most crucial distinction.
David Kernell was stupid enough to go after someone with power.
That's because many on Slashdot are strange (Score:5, Insightful)
They have this view that, when it comes to computers, if they CAN do something, as in it is technically possible for them to do it, that makes it ok to do and means it ought to be legal. Breaking in to a system that has a weak password or lacks a security fix is fine in their view because that person is "stupid" and "deserves it". Of course none of them would be ok with someone breaking in to their house, even though like basically everyone they live in houses with known security vulnerabilities.
Hence why they are ok with a guy like this. They are ok with someone who breaks in to others' systems and abuses them because their ego says that only stupid people can be victims and the victims deserve it.
It is a sadly common view on this site.
Re:18 months light "by comparison?" (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh please.
No, it's 1 year for breaking into the potential vice president's account then trying to get rid of the evidence that he'd done so. Don't try and dress it up as a Noble crusader who loved his country being harshly imprisoned for something that anyone could've done by accident!
He was so noble he posted the information on 4chan! Clearly the most trusted, respected news outlet in the land! Improper use of email? Among the hundreds of emails there were one or two from work contacts talking about private matters. Technically improper usage but it would be unbelievably petty to go after a politician for other people's incredibly minor breach of protocol, it would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and at worst, she'd get a low key warning. All the evidence pointed to he not using her private email for public office matters in any deliberate manner.
It would take any half decent locksmith less time to pick the lock of your front door (assuming you use one of the most common locks) than to break into someone's email. This information is publically available on the internet. I guess if anyone breaks into your house, we shouldn't arrest them because of how easy it was for them. Heck they may even discover some illegal software or porn of questionable taste! They would be doing the world a favour by breaking into your house and revealing your porn tastes for everyone to see! Oh noble burglar, how misaligned by society you are!