Another LulzSec Member Arrested 211
hypnosec writes "Raynaldo Rivera, aged 20, suspected member of LulzSec, has been arrested for his alleged role in the breach of Sony Pictures Entertainment last year. The first suspect, Cody Kretsinger, has already pleaded guilty and was indicted last September according to the FBI. Rivera, who also goes by names 'neuron,' 'royal,' and 'wildicv', surrendered to authorities and he has been charged with conspiracy and unauthorized impairment of a protected computer. The LulzSec member may be facing 15 years in prison if convicted."
On the member who pleaded guilty: "Kretsinger, who pleaded guilty to the same two charges now facing Rivera, is slated to be sentenced on October 25. A federal prosecutor said he would likely receive substantially less than the 15-year maximum prison term carried by those offenses."
Not so many lulz now (Score:5, Insightful)
Hopefully with these arrests and others a few months back, the keyboard warriors out there will start to realise that they're not untraceable and can't just do as they damn well please on the internet.
I'm no fan of Sony but I hope this guy is banged up for a long time for stealing all that private data. And before any wannabe heros mod me down you might want to consider that YOUR data could be part of it.
Re:Not so many lulz now (Score:4, Interesting)
And before any wannabe heros mod me down you might want to consider that YOUR data could be part of it.
Or next.
An exercise in futility!! (Score:4, Insightful)
Hmm.. hate to break it to you but there ARE ways to be untraceable.. just like any criminal who gets bored they also get sloppy and hence getting caught.
Re:An exercise in futility!! (Score:5, Funny)
That's right. I'm behind seven proxies. Come at me bro.
Re: (Score:3)
"They" didn't "get sloppy", this kid, like so many others shoot off their mouths, brag and call attention to themselves!
"Anonymous"
"LulzSec"
Anybody who is STUPID ENOUGH to self identify as a "member" IS, without any organizational structure whatsoever automatically a "member"!
And because anybody who wants that kind of attention will undoubtedly have somthing that the blank faced automatons in the "justice" dept could label as "criminal" your self destructive desire for attention will be fulfilled!
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm.. hate to break it to you but there ARE ways to be untraceable.. just like any criminal who gets bored they also get sloppy and hence getting caught.
There are ways but they don't work all the time. Proxies could be run by the authorities or acting as a honeypot. VPN services could be run by FBI agents. Groups like Lulzsec could be FBI fronts run by FBI informants, etc.
If you do stupid things like align yourself with Antisec movement and declare war on the police agencies you should expect to get arrested. Who is stupid enough to target the CIA website?
Re:Not so many lulz now (Score:5, Insightful)
I come at it from the opposite direction: I'm no fan of LulzSec, but Sony deserves to have its toenails removed for being so bloody sloppy about security.
Re:Not so many lulz now (Score:5, Insightful)
I come at it from the opposite direction: I'm no fan of LulzSec, but Sony deserves to have its toenails removed for being so bloody sloppy about security.
Dead right, I don't know how you got modded down.
This was a SQL injection attack. Sony didn't follow that little rule about validating user input and should have known better. I'm not saying they deserved it because they didn't, but I'm saying it was bound to happen sooner or later.
Re: (Score:2)
I probably got modded down by the same people who left AC posts accusing me of :"blaming the victim", Hey, if you're negligent, you bear some responsibility for the result. That doesn't mitigate Lulzsec's malice, but neither does Lulzsec's malice mitigate Sony's negligence.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fine, I'll say it, then: they deserved it.
I'm a programmer who uses SQL on a regular basis; sanitizing user input is a trivial task.
They most assuredly deserved it.
Re: (Score:2)
I come at it from the opposite direction: I'm no fan of LulzSec, but Sony deserves to have its toenails removed for being so bloody sloppy about security.
Lulzsec didn't accomplish anything. They helped Sony more than hurt Sony and I don't like Sony but the revealing of user information made Sony into the good guy.
Re: (Score:2)
Jeesus. You're like the 20th person to accuse me of being an apologist for LulzSec. What part of "I'm no fan" do you not understand???!!!
Oh yeah, I must be fan of LulzSec if I say anything bad about Sony. I'm down on both of them. Can you wrap your feeble little brain around that simple concept?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You're comparing a company who act as the custodians of our virtual identities to someone leaving their door unlocked, or even a rape victim?
Way to hyperbole your strawman
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In my mind they are most definitely responsible. More so than the kids who took it (and apparently did nothing with it).
Re:Not so many lulz now (Score:5, Insightful)
Bullshit. Sony did not 'leave your money sitting out front'. They left your money in the teller's drawer, as is normal practice. If someone comes in and reaches over the counter, opens the drawer, and removes the money, that person has committed a crime. Not the bank.
Stop making excuses for these 'kids'. Sony may have had lax security, but they did not commit a crime. The 'kids', on the other hand, willfully commited a crime. The 'fault' is entirely theirs.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody's making excuses for anybody. Lulzsec was malicious, Sony was negligent. Neither is entitled to use the other as an excuse.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. They're both guilty, Lulzsec doing the crime doesn't absolve sony of responsibility however.
Alleged negligence over your security isn't a crime, at worst it's a civil matter.
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. Sony did not 'leave your money sitting out front'. They left your money in the teller's drawer, as is normal practice. If someone comes in and reaches over the counter, opens the drawer, and removes the money, that person has committed a crime. Not the bank.
Stop making excuses for these 'kids'. Sony may have had lax security, but they did not commit a crime. The 'kids', on the other hand, willfully commited a crime. The 'fault' is entirely theirs.
If you could reach over and grab money that easy in my bank, then yes, my Bank is responsible for that money and it's security. Now, if I have to cut some 1 inch plastic shield, take care of some security guards to get to that money, then no, the Bank is doing their job of protecting my money.
And in your example, the money isn't protected.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
regardless, my point wasn't so much to debate to what degree sony is culpable, just that they are. And considering that (afaik) the thieves didn't actually use the data they stole, and effectively caused no real harm to anyone (except that people had to bother closing accounts and the likes) and b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, yes I would blame the person who took the money. Taking something that is not yours is always wrong. Period. Doesn't matter how hard or easy it was to steal, stealing is wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Or how about stealing sensitive, insecure data and then publicly posting proof of the vulnerability?
The point is that is the customers who will potentially suffer here, not Sony. It is not the customers' faults, so why reveal sensitive information publicly?
Or do you think that perhaps Lulzsec wanted to punish them just for being customers of Sony in the first place?
Re: (Score:3)
So, if your bank left your money sitting out front and people took it, you wouldn't blame the bank?
Your analogy is a little over the top - Sony did the equivalent of leaving money sitting in a cash register.
Regardless, I blame the people who take the money. If a bank or a shop or some other business has a pile of money sitting out the front (say in an armored car), and it's unguarded, I won't take it. It's not my money. This is one of those few instances which really is black and white.
Have you ever seen news reports of people who find a windfall sitting on a table in a restaurant and they turn it in to
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. The thing is, they didn't take anything, but merely copied it.
This is this point at which analogies that compare tangible things to intangible things always fall apart. They're not at all the same type of thing, and any
Re: (Score:3)
Well, if you really want to play that stupid word games, lets. 'Merely copying' is potentially much more damaging than physical theft, because it is impossible to rectify. If you physically steal $1000, that is easily remedied by returning $1000 (notwithstanding any other punishments that may be meted out). 'Merely copying' private data, on the other hand, renders the data permanently non-private. So while you may not have 'taken' anything, you have completely and permanently destroyed its value.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a stupid word game.
I don't presume to say which criminal act is worse than the other.
All I said is that they are not at all the same thing. This fact is inarguable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is a stupid word game when you claim the analogy fails because of the difference.
Scenario 1: Customer leaves money with a bank, bank does not completely protect it, opportunist comes along and harms the bank and/or the customer (by stealing the money)
Scenario 2: Customer leaves private info with Sony, Sony does not completely protect it, opportunist comes along and harms Sony and/or the customer (by copying the data)
How is that not a valid analogy? The only way you can claim that the analogy is invalid
Re: (Score:2)
Regardless, I blame the people who take the money. If a bank or a shop or some other business has a pile of money sitting out the front (say in an armored car), and it's unguarded, I won't take it. It's not my money. This is one of those few instances which really is black and white.
Sure. The thing is, they didn't take anything, but merely copied it.
This is this point at which analogies that compare tangible things to intangible things always fall apart. They're not at all the same type of thing, and any argument rooted in the presumption that they are the same thing is inherently logically fallacious.
Then why do Slashdotters always insist on making this comparison when it comes to piracy, sorry, theft of songs, sorry, copyright infringement? You make a good point - they're not the same thing, so talking about copying digital bits and not being the same as theft is an inane concept. It's "digital theft", or "cyber-stealing", or some other fancy new phrase. All the arguments about "but you're not depriving anyone of physical property!!!" break down, because, as you point out, these analogies don't work be
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. The thing is, they didn't take anything, but merely copied it.
This is this point at which analogies that compare tangible things to intangible things always fall apart. They're not at all the same type of thing, and any argument rooted in the presumption that they are the same thing is inherently logically fallacious.
No, this is the point at which defenders of Lulzsec, copyright violation or whatever drag out the "copying is not theft" line as though there is only one crime in the world (physical theft) and therefore anything else is somehow OK, conveniently forgetting that copying is not murder, rape or arson either, with equal irrelevance.
If you think there is no harm in someone copying your bank details, medical history or whatever and publishing it to the world, you're living in a different world than me.
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't say it was harmless. I said that it is not the same thing. Please get your fucking arguments straight, and then post them.
Re: (Score:2)
You said they didn't take anything, they merely copied it.
Why emphasize the 'take' part? It indicates that taking is clearly import. Furthermore, not only does 'copied' not get emphasized, it gets a 'merely' tacked on.
Any normal person would read that as 'taking' is a serious action, while 'merely copying' is a much lesser offense. The only reason copying would be a much lesser offense is that it causes much less harm.
So yes, you did say exactly that it was harmless.
Re: (Score:2)
So, if your bank left your money sitting out front and people took it, you wouldn't blame the bank? That's effectively what sony did. Even better, they were WARNED they had left your money out. http://www.justpushstart.com/2011/02/is-your-private-information-safe-with-sony/ [justpushstart.com]
In my mind they are most definitely responsible. More so than the kids who took it (and apparently did nothing with it).
It doesn't matter. Lulzsec still were the victimizers, the bad guys. What they did they could not defend politically.
Re: (Score:3)
Malice doesn't excuse stupidity, any more than stupidity excuses malice. If a thief is caught, you don't accept the excuse "the back door was unlocked, if I hadn't ripped him off, somebody else would have" That's lame. Also lame: "Why should I have to lock my back door? People should know better than to steal."
Re: (Score:2)
Malice doesn't excuse stupidity, any more than stupidity excuses malice. If a thief is caught, you don't accept the excuse "the back door was unlocked, if I hadn't ripped him off, somebody else would have" That's lame. Also lame: "Why should I have to lock my back door? People should know better than to steal."
It may surprise you to know that in many places and times in the world you don't or didn't have to lock your back door. People SHOULD know better than to steal, the fact that they find an open door is simply not an excuse.
Re: (Score:2)
It would be cool to live in a place where you don't have to lock your door. But if you know you live in a place where that's a bad idea, not locking your door is negligent.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is, that girls in short skirts, or people not locking their doors are only risking their own stuff.
Sony was holding the personal details of many of their customers. To leave that so open to the outside world shoudl be deemed criminally negligent.
Re:Not so many lulz now (Score:5, Insightful)
You don't have to be a fan of Sony, to see what these guys are doing is wrong and criminal.
Sony says we we want to run our business this way. The hackers go we don't like it. So except for just informing the public on their opinion (freedom of speech) they bring down the site, because for some reason we think that Our Ideas are right and any disagreeing idea is somehow motivated by some corrupt cause.
If you are Pro-Choice then those Pro-Life people are trying to keep Women rights down.
If you are Pro-Life then those Pro-Choice people are trying to make a world where woman don't need to have any consequences for their actions.
If you are Republicans those Democrats are trying to keep the People addicted to government services so you can better control them.
If you are Democrat those Republicans are trying to brainwash people to keep buying crap from these companies so they no longer need to innovate.
We rarely ever get arguments anymore stating I understand your view, but I think my advantages may outweigh the disadvantages that you brought up. But we have moved to a world where a disagreement means your oponent has some Evil motive behind them. If you think your Ideological Opponent is evil then you feel justified hurting them in one way or an other.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And what is your opinion of Sony putting a rootkit on your machine?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't like the process... But... I knew about it and didn't buy a root-kitted product.
However what we call a root kit, others call a tool to help support the problems.
I don't think the benefit of better support justifies the increased security risk on your PC.
But is it really worth some holy crusade of breaking into their computers just so you can laugh at them and say Good you Deserve it?
Re:Not so many lulz now (Score:5, Insightful)
You don't have to be a fan of Sony, to see what these guys are doing is wrong and criminal.
But that's not why they're going to jail. Sony has done plenty of wrong and criminal things in their time, and no one there has gone to jail for it. Selective enforcement of the law is not justice.
Re: (Score:2)
So for the criminal things they probably needed to pay a fine. Which they did. Who do you jail when a company does something wrong? The CEO who may be too above in that particular decision making, the Middle Manager who was trying to make a directive bring in more money. Perhaps the lowly tech guy who did the work and didn't say No.
Getting a big fine for a criminal act, usually does more, as it effects what they care about the most money. Companies don't care about people... Any person.. This idea makes
Re:Not so many lulz now (Score:5, Interesting)
Who do you jail when a company does something wrong?
That's the problem isn't it. The mistake these kids made wasn't committing crimes. It was commiting crimes without a corporation to hide behind.
Personally, I'd be in favor of jailing both the CEO who gets the credit for success and should bear responsibility for criminal failures, and the lowly tech who didn't go to the police when asked to do something illegal for his job. That would be far more just than letting the rich and powerful get away with crimes.
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck you, racist. Ethnicity did not help Bernie Madoff, and it didn't hurt John Corzine. The justice system is biased in favor of wealth and power, not ethnicity.
Re: (Score:2)
That is the best argument I've read all week.
Re: (Score:2)
Understanding someone's view is one thing, treating objectively wrong claims about reality as if they are valid, is something completely different.
Re: (Score:3)
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. I'd be all for this guy going to jail if someone from Sony would have gone to jail for XCP, which vandalized thousands of their paying customers' computers. As it is, I say payback is a motherfucker and Sony got what was coming to them when this guy brok in to their systems. Actually, they deserve more. They deserve to be run out of business completely.
Yes, I was a victim of Sony's hacking. Put Sony's president in prison and I'll be all for putting this guy
Re: (Score:2)
I'm with you up until the end where you say "If you think your Ideological Opponent is evil then you feel justified hurting them in one way or an other.". I don't feel that is the case at all with most people. I think it will motivate people to completely miss the logic of the opponents argument, but most people won't actually hurt them in one way or the other.
Re:Not so many lulz now (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not so many lulz now (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
IANAL nor have I read the actual indictment. However this article http://www.informationweek.com/security/management/second-lulzsec-sony-hacker-suspect-arres/240006432 [informationweek.com] states that the charges include conspiracy. It also indicates that they caught him "after VPN service provider HideMyAss.com was served with a court order seeking information related to several LulzSec exploits, including attacks against Sony, the U.K.'s Serious Organized Crime Agency, as well as NATO."
Plus, the 15 years are possible and gi
Re: (Score:2)
It's just to deter other people who might want to do the same kind of things. And when it doesn't work (it never does), lawmakers will just up the ante. By the turn of the century, cybercriminals will all face the death penalty.
At least, if they get caught in the wrong state of the US.
Deterrence doesn't work. MICE, in this case IDEOLOGY is not going to be deterred by prison. EGO and MONEY might be deterred by prison because they weren't paid for it and most people wont get an ego boost by 15 years in prison but it doesn't change the fact that some people truly believed in the Lulzsec Antisec ideology to the point where even in prison they'll still believe in that ideology.
I agree he shouldn't get that kinda time (Score:2)
I definitely believe criminal activity should be punished but sending in prison a 20-year old for 15 whole fucking years and treating him as if he is a war criminal or serial killer, for simply hacking into a computer of a multi-billion-dollar company (which as it seems didn't care to invest some of it's awfully lot of money in protecting it's customer's data) , is a little too much. Especially when at the same time there are other criminals out there who roam free thanks to their financial status.
But it doesn't matter. His life is destroyed now and honestly you can thank Sabu for playing informant and helping to destroy it.
He can also thank himself for being an idiot.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree, cruel and unusual punishment.
It's just too great a quantity of punishment for the crime being punished.
It's not about the punishment being cruel or unusual, only that there is too much of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm no fan of Sony but I hope this guy is banged up for a long time for stealing all that private data.
I thank the guy for hacking Sony. Nobody from Sony went to jail when Sony vandalized my and thousands of others' PCs with their XCP trojan rootkit, why should this guy go to jail?
Where's the justice?
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully with these arrests and others a few months back, the keyboard warriors out there will start to realise that they're not untraceable and can't just do as they damn well please on the internet.
Funny how different opinions can be. I just hope they'll be more careful in future.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm no fan of Sony but I hope this guy is banged up for a long time for stealing all that private data. And before any wannabe heros mod me down you might want to consider that YOUR data could be part of it.
Well that's the thing. If he is proved guilty in a fair trail he should be punished but isn't 15 years too long?
He didn't kill anyone, he didn't physically hurt anyone, nor did he do anything terribly bad with that data. All he did was embarrass a company that should have been taking better care of the data. Sony was going to leak all that data anyway if they hadn't already.
Re: (Score:2)
the keyboard warriors out there will start to realise that they're not untraceable and can't just do as they damn well please on the internet.
I'm no fan of Sony
If you are Sony, you can do just as you damn well please on the internet. Still no arrests made for the rootkit fiasco, and that was every bit as illegal as this.
There is no rule of law in America.
Re: (Score:2)
And before any wannabe heros mod me down you might want to consider that YOUR data could be part of it.
I would prefer if my data on insecure servers was taken by someone who widely announces the problem, rather than by someone else who would do it in secrecy and cause me some serious trouble.
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully with these arrests and others a few months back, the keyboard warriors out there will start to realise that they're not untraceable
No, hackers are most definitely not "untraceable"
From TFA:
"The hacker after posting all the data onto Pastebin, announced the hack through a tweet.
"Hey @Sony, you know we're making off with a bunch of your internal stuff right now and you haven't even noticed?" LulzSec tweeted. "Slow and steady, guys."
Especially when they brag about it.
I bet he even hacked from his own computer. Or, rather, his parents' computer.
I've said it before, I'll say it again - NEVER HACK FROM HOME. It will make your dad really mad when the FBI comes knocking.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm no fan of Sony but I hope this guy is banged up for a long time for stealing all that private data. And before any wannabe heros mod me down you might want to consider that YOUR data could be part of it.
It's just data. His crime is worthy of punishment, but what's prison going to accomplish? Apart from satisfying your sense of revenge, it'll just introduce him to a bunch of people I think we'd all rather he didn't know. If he's abused while in prison, he'll either have a psychotic break or he'll come
Lulzsec diminished Anonymous (Score:2)
Hopefully with these arrests and others a few months back, the keyboard warriors out there will start to realise that they're not untraceable and can't just do as they damn well please on the internet.
I'm no fan of Sony but I hope this guy is banged up for a long time for stealing all that private data. And before any wannabe heros mod me down you might want to consider that YOUR data could be part of it.
I agree they went too far and I hate Sony too. I don't think revealing user data served the purposes of Anonymous in any way and if anything made Anonymous look like the bad guys and helped the opposition gain political cover to attack Anonymous and everything Anonymous was trying to do politically.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
All data should be free.
Everybody's data (including thoughts) should be available to everyone, realtime, no exceptions.
Only then can we derive true morality.
I disagree. Your theory is sound, but in practice Twitter and Facebook didn't result in more morals.
Re: (Score:3)
OK, I'll help you out with that: EVERY system that contains your data, including the systems you personally control, is vulnerable.
Re: (Score:3)
That's easy to say when you aren't being threatened with 15 years in prison. I'd imagine that innocent people plead guilty when they can't afford a good lawyer, or when they think that they are likely to be found guilty anyway and the plea deal is considerably better than the maximum sentence.
Re: (Score:2)
Because one pleaded guilty and the other "surrendered to authorities." I don't know about you, but if I was framed I would be fighting the charges.
Actually lots of people plead guilty to things they didn't do. There are lots of reasons people do this not just pressure from the police.
no sense of proportion, no justice (Score:2)
Raynaldo Rivera, aged 20, suspected member of Lulzsec has been arrested ....
charged with conspiracy and unauthorized impairment of a protected computer. The Lulzsec member may be facing 15 years in prison if convicted....
accused of hacking Sony Pictureâ(TM)s Web site in June 2011 through use of SQL injection attack and downloading thousands of records containing names, birth dates, addresses, e-mails, phone numbers, and passwords. The hacker after posting all the data onto Pastebin, announced the hack through a tweet.....
"Hey @Sony, you know we're making off with a bunch of your internal stuff right now and you haven't even noticed?"
The hacking collective claimed that they had managed to grab information of more than a million people whereas Sony countered the claims saying that only 37k records were actually stolen.
there is no sense of proportion here, it's not justice. Maybe it is the people, whose records were stolen, that should be outraged, not Sony, Sony as a company should be humble about it and do whatever to mitigate the problem their lack of interest in security may have caused.
But because large corporations like Sony are in bed with large governments, there will be no justice. Sure, send these guys to prison for 15 years because a company is outraged. How about company's clients?
My point is - this is none
Re:no sense of proportion, no justice (Score:4, Insightful)
So to sum up your position: victims of crime should bear the full responsibility and costs associated with finding, trying, and punishing the criminals. Gee, I can't imagine why the rest of society does not agree with you.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you're missing the point where you can go and beat up twenty grandmas and end up with less time.
or alternatively steal 500 million dollars from grandmas.
it was still a pretty lulzy run, tbh.
Re: (Score:2)
15 years is the MAXIMUM sentence they could receive. They have not even been convicted yet, much less sentenced, so you have no idea how much time they will actually get. And I am pretty sure the MAXIMUM sentence for beating up twenty grandmas or stealing 500 million dollars is at least 15 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. We live in a civilized society. Being in a civilized society means we all get benefits from it, and we all have responsibilities in it. What those benefits and responsibilites are is certainly subject to debate, but there is pretty much no modern society that places the onus of crime on the victim. If you don't want to live in such a society, remove yourself from it. There is plenty of wilderness in the US, go live in it.
Re: (Score:3)
They haven't been tried, convicted, or sentenced yet, so your hysterical '15 years!' crap is way premature.
'Sony is in bed with politicians' - now we are really off in tin-foil hat land. Other than creating a law prohibiting unauthorized use of computers, how exactly are politiicians involved in this? And what makes you think Sony had any hand in crafting that law, or that the overwhelming majority of Americans don't support that law?
Re: (Score:2)
People who lost money with him knew he was a criminal. They just thought he was 'their criminal' and would eventually be busted for insider trading while they whistled all the way to the bank.
They can all get jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you saying that LulzSec does nothing wrong? If an irresponsible bank teller leaves my social security number on her desk, It's OK for someone to snap a picture of it? We have these laws for a reason. Granted, i'd never go back to the bank, but i'd like my information protected any way that is feasable.
Pleased (Score:2)
Pleaded at the quality of the proofreading as usual. Keep up the good work, editors.
impairment of a "protected computer"..? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, yeah. "Protected" means protected by the law, not technical measures.
Re: (Score:2)
Suprise! (Score:2)
The real danger (Score:2)
I just hope some of the wiser ones will still be around to help fight the forces of evil (and that ain't a video game console company, FFS).
Re: (Score:2)
They give pro (facist / police state / surveillance / corporate) forces the perfect justification to slowly destroy the most important source of freedom and information since the printing press: the Internet.
I just hope some of the wiser ones will still be around to help fight the forces of evil (and that ain't a video game console company, FFS).
Lulzsec went about things in the wrong/dumb way. Lulzsec should have never existed as it has diminished the reputation of Anonymous. If you believe in protecting internet freedom then I can understand that you will have something ideological in common with Anonymous, most of us do. But the current form of Anonymous does not do a very good job, as it's run as a headless vigilante organization without any direction. Many of it's ops actually damage it's credibility, such as doing DDOS attacks on sites (censor
Would It Be The Same Penalty (Score:2)
Most of the sentences these days that have to do with computer related crimes seem outrageous.
I'd understand if it got people killed. But what Sony has is banking information. Most banks have mechanisms to mitigate dama
Re: (Score:2)
There is a different.
We have Anonymous and LulzSec as partially organized organizations. There is a particular group of criminals that can do the attack on.
The "War On Drugs" is trying to stop the supply of a product that is in demand. The US can crack down on the big Drug Lords, but won't stop the flow of drugs because there will always be the smaller ones shipping the same product.
Big attacks like Anonymous and LulzSec have a loose organization structure going enough to get a targeted attack... That mean
Re: (Score:2)
"When one rapist falls, three more will rise to take his/her place", So lets declare surrender and stop wasting money capturing them. What dump mentality these days
Re: (Score:2)
Where one falls, three more will rise to take his/her place. Locking up LulzSec will be an exercise in futility much like the American "War On Drugs"
No, that was never true. LulzSec was too closed an operation to say such things, especially after they pissed off lots of Anonymites. In the end everyone hated the douche bags, and no one wants to carry their Flaming Asshole Torch.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to know where you get your figures. I would think that having been shown the very real risks of a lengthy stretch on prison, you'll find those willing to 'replacing' those who 'fall' are in the decline.
There will always be criminals, does that making locking up criminals futile? Should we just give up on doing that?
The "War On Drugs" is an example of what happens when you try to legislate against market demand. There is a demand for drugs, there will always be those willing to sell to that mark
Re: (Score:2)
This post was brought to you by the FBI.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Sabu is selling out his former comrades for the lulz.
See, information is free, including information on who his accomplices are.
Re: (Score:2)
Sabu is selling out his former comrades for the lulz.
I doubt lulz come into it. I'm sure he is scared into submission and will do whatever he is told to.
It's the FBI's turn to have lulz now.
Re: (Score:2)
Sabu is selling out his former comrades for the lulz.
I doubt lulz come into it. I'm sure he is scared into submission and will do whatever he is told to.
It's the FBI's turn to have lulz now.
And that is what is what he should have thought about before starting Lulzsec and getting all these others involved in it. As far as I'm concerned Lulzsec looked like a honeypot from the very founding of it. The ideology was always directly opposed to law enforcement, Antisec was just ridiculously stupid to the point of just asking to be arrested.
Of course it's Sabu's work (Score:2)
I wonder if that's another arrest they made thanks to Sabu's cooperation, if so, that coop was the best thing the FBI could have done in this whole mess of so-called "hacktivism"
The thing here is it's not like Sabu is the good guy. Sabu is the worst of the worst here because he ruined the lives of the people who trusted him with their lives. Hackers are motivated by money, ideology, coercion or contraband and ego. This is the MICE motivation and in general all human beings are motivated the same way.
So in this case it's not money because these hackers weren't being paid. It was either IDEOLOGY or EGO. What that means is most of these young adults were brainwashed, or psychologicall
Re: (Score:2)
SQL injections? You mean those things I learned from YouTube when I was 12?
No, SQL injection IS WHAT YOU ARE, little Bobby Tables!
Re:I love my country (Score:4, Insightful)
In the US, generally the maximum penalty for killing someone is death, which I think most agree is more severe than 15 years.
As a matter of course, most people convicted of killing someone else don't get the death penalty, and neither is this man is likely to face 15 years in prison. Those are both the maximum penalty.
Re:I love my country (Score:4, Informative)
Depending on the type of killing, more than 15 years can be the minimum. For example the federal sentencing for 1st degree (premeditated) murder is a minimum of life without parole, maximum of the death penalty. States tend to be similar. For second degree murder it varies, but life sentences are usually allowed. For example you may hear the expression "25 to life". What that means is a life sentence, but with the allowance for parole at 25 years.
The only cases where killing someone starts to have less severe sentences is manslaughter and negligent homicide. These are cases where you caused someone's death, but didn't mean to. Since intent matters in the law, punishments are less severe in cases like that.
Re: (Score:2)
Next time, embezzle a few billion bucks from pension accounts, you pay a few millions back as "punishment" and go out as a rich and free man.
While it made me laugh, you should add that they should first get a white collar job or at least take the exams to become a licensed stockbroker.
That's where the free pass comes from: Whether you're associated with a mainstream "business" or not.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a great way to go through life, and of course always works out well for everyone. One hell of a lot of blodd has been shed over time because of people with that idiotic philosophy.