Authorities Closing On LulzSec

mask.of.sanity writes "The noose is tightening on hacker group LulzSec, according to a coordinated group of like-minded users, some from LulzSec-Exposed that claim to have uncovered the identity of LulzSec members and supplied them to the FBI. An arrest Monday of a UK teenager was rumoured to be former hacker scene member Ryan Clearly, and the trackers, which includes a former FBI agent, say this arrest is the first of many. They refused to disclose the identities of LulzSec chief, saying it would cause the members to burn the evidence of attacks and scatter."

Re:Logic disconnect...

[Marc Madness]

Maybe that's the intention. By putting out a press release stating that arrests are imminent, maybe they are hoping that LulzSec will destroy their own infrastructure and go into hiding, thus eliminating them as a threat. It's true doublethink; it can mean that they have no leads whatsoever, or that they do.

LulzSec's downfall is that clearly it is NOT anon

[Borland]

It's been obvious from the beginning that Lulzsec might be fickle in their targeting like anons, but that they are a coordinated group. That lends them a bit more power, but also means that despite their bravado they are connected. And since they're not thinking like terrorists, I doubt they have formed "cells" like any organization which doesn't want to fall quickly to a coordinated assault.

Maybe I don't give them enough credit and the IRC operator was careful to shield everyone and knows no one by name. But despite the publicity, and the fact that they have more skill than I, somehow I doubt they are true black hat masters. Braggarts are the most likely criminals to land in jail.

Re:Logic disconnect...

[smelch]

Something tells me you underestimate true hacking talent, and the value of not being a dumbfuck attention whore. Seriously, what makes you think this guy is a more talented hacker than any of the people who actually write viruses, malware, develop jailbreaks, reveal encryption keys in hardware etc.? The only thing that got this guy attention was sticking his e-peen where it didn't belong and waving it about in people's faces.

I don't think the FBI needs more people to hunt out low-hanging fruit. Not to mention it's hard to run a sensitive investigation with some jackwad flopping his dick about. "You guys need any SQL injection writers?" ::thrust thrust thrust:: "I know how to make ASCII art too, and run IRC servers!" ::thrust thrust thrust:: "Somebody start DDoSing the" ::thrust:: "mafia!"

Re:Very Unfortunate.

[poetmatt]

"Working" and "set up properly" are entirely different.

They aren't breaking into complex shit, they're breaking into the equivalent of the old adage: "leaving the barn door wide open." If you are vulnerable to a SQL injection, whose fault is it that you set up your website that way? You're acting like it was working perfectly fine. It wasn't. It was left with a clearly bad process, almost guaranteed to have been done either a: as a cost cutting measure or b: by incompetent/underqualified people. Et cetera.

They have also very explicitly said whenever they release things that people should be more secure. Clearly you have a reading comprehension issue.

Re:Logic disconnect...

[bws111]

And just to clarify, the first thing in the extradition treaty [statewatch.org] is:

"An offense shall be an extraditable offense if the conduct on which the offense is based is punishable under the laws in both States by deprivation of liberty for a period of one year or more or by a more severe penalty."

Re:Logic disconnect...

[kevinNCSU]

The same way if someone in North Dakota fires an arrow up into the air and it lands in the chest of a little Canadian boy on the other side of the border the American who fired the arrow can be extradited and tried for breaking the Canadian laws regarding murder because the countries have extradition treaties. How is this at all confusing? Just because someone breaks the law online doesn't mean the legal system can't possibly figure things out because your in a different country AND online.

So, if American hacks into Chinese server, you agree that it will be ok to extradite said American to China?

Or even better, if you insult King of Thailand, you just broke some Thai laws. Therefore, you should be extradited to Thailand.

Right?

In the case of China, no, I do NOT agree that we should extradite citizens to a country we don't even have an extradition treaty with, duh, this would be illegal. In the case of Thailand, I believe we have a dual criminality treaty (most of our extradition treaties are dual criminality, while a few specifically list extraditable offenses) , and since insulting the King of Thailand isn't a criminal offense in the United States, it doesn't fall under an extraditable offense under the treaty. If I'm incorrect and we have a list treaty I'm pretty sure that one ain't on the list. Now if a citizen started committing a bunch of mail fraud or hacking a bunch of servers belonging to the Thailand government (acts that are also illegal here) and that government requested extradition through diplomatic channels then sure, by all means extradite him as long as it agrees with our current foreign policy goals.