BF2S Forums US wants a hacker to get 70 years in Cuba? (that guntonmo bay)

He should get a medal for finding the holes.  If you got burgled because you left your front door open then what excuse have you got to whine and bitch about it?

In a fair world it would be Microsoft facing charges for leaving the door open in the first place.

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

He should get a medal for finding the holes.  If you got burgled because you left your front door open then what excuse have you got to whine and bitch about it?

In a fair world it would be Microsoft facing charges for leaving the door open in the first place.

I guess if you accidentally left your back door open and someone broke in and stole your computer while you were away, leaving a note on the desk that read, "at least you now know about your security flaw. Hope you don't mind your Athlon's missing," you wouldn't be upset in the least.

If you want to expose backdoors and security holes, just go get a job in the network security field. Break into government systems at your own risk, 'bumbling nerd' or not. He was caught, so he had no business being there...even if it was just to find out about Wookies, Ferengi and E.T.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-04-16 18:52:45)

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I guess if you accidentally left your back door open and someone broke in and stole your computer while you were away, leaving a note on the desk that read, "at least you now know about your security flaw. Hope you don't mind your Athlon's missing," you wouldn't be upset in the least.

I wouldn't be able to claim I'd taken adequate measures to prevent the theft, and so I couldn't claim the loss on my insurance.  Also, if the front door was open anyone could have walked in and done whatever they wanted, they could easily plant a few hairs of someone elses DNA to incriminate someone else for the crime.  Of course I'd be pissed off that I'd lost my PC, but mainly at myself for gross stupidity.  I think the guys lawyer sums up the reasons they are pursuing the case:

"The US government wants to extract some kind of species of administrative revenge because he exposed their security systems as weak and helpless as they were."

guantanomo bay is an awful place, u americans should be ashamed of yourselves.

Major_Spittle wrote:

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I guess if you accidentally left your back door open and someone broke in and stole your computer while you were away, leaving a note on the desk that read, "at least you now know about your security flaw. Hope you don't mind your Athlon's missing," you wouldn't be upset in the least.

I wouldn't be able to claim I'd taken adequate measures to prevent the theft, and so I couldn't claim the loss on my insurance.  Also, if the front door was open anyone could have walked in and done whatever they wanted, they could easily plant a few hairs of someone elses DNA to incriminate someone else for the crime.  Of course I'd be pissed off that I'd lost my PC, but mainly at myself for gross stupidity.  I think the guys lawyer sums up the reasons they are pursuing the case:

"The US government wants to extract some kind of species of administrative revenge because he exposed their security systems as weak and helpless as they were."

Go to your neighbors houses tonight and see if anyone left their door unlocked, if they did walk in and start going through their drawers looking at stuff.  If you think this is legal, do it. I support you in your stupidity. If the hacker thought he had a right to be in the governments system, why didn't he just log on properly??? Oh he hacked, thus criminal intent, knownly breaking a law.  Hmm, you can go to jail for that. Why would anyone have a problem with him going to jail for that, unless they are retarded and don't understand logic??? Are you a liberal, that would explain it.

So if a person doesn't lock their door it gives anyone the right to walk in, huh???  Try doing it at my house and not only will you get time, my dog just might kill you. 

Welcome back to reality.

I agree with you except for

Major_Spittle wrote:

Are you a liberal, that would explain it.

Are you a fucking asshat? You speak so rationally then BOOM that fucking comment. Im not even a liberal and i totally disagree with that.

Last edited by Snipedya14 (2006-04-17 12:35:36)

Major_Spittle wrote:

Go to your neighbors houses tonight and see if anyone left their door unlocked, if they did walk in and start going through their drawers looking at stuff.  If you think this is legal, do it. I support you in your stupidity. If the hacker thought he had a right to be in the governments system, why didn't he just log on properly??? Oh he hacked, thus criminal intent, knownly breaking a law.  Hmm, you can go to jail for that. Why would anyone have a problem with him going to jail for that, unless they are retarded and don't understand logic??? Are you a liberal, that would explain it.

So if a person doesn't lock their door it gives anyone the right to walk in, huh???  Try doing it at my house and not only will you get time, my dog just might kill you. 

Welcome back to reality.

Erm, did I say I had a problem with someone going to jail or that it wasn't a crime?  No, I said it would be easy to frame someone else for the crime, as the door is open and anyone could plant any evidence they liked.

70 years for hacking?  Fuck that reality.

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

He should get a medal for finding the holes.  If you got burgled because you left your front door open then what excuse have you got to whine and bitch about it?

In a fair world it would be Microsoft facing charges for leaving the door open in the first place.

I would like to find where you live and steal all your shit. Afterwards i would say "I found the holes. Where's my medal, oh thats right, I stole it from your ass." How fucking dumb are you?

If, for instance, I had a thumbprint recognition lock on my front door which opened when anyone touched the door I would complain to the manufacturer if I got robbed because of it.  I would also understand that proving who had been in the house while the faulty lock was installed would be basically impossible. 

Here's a more relevant question:  How fucking dumb are the people running these computers, and the people trying to send this dude to Guantanamo?  Is he rich because of it?  No.  Did he find any information worth sharing?  No.  Can they really prove it was his actions that caused the alleged damage?  No, but even so that would be grounds for a mild jail sentence, not life imprisonment.  Were these systems critical to the operation of the military?  I fucking seriously hope not, or it should be the government facing charges for using Microsoft products to run them.  Did his actions result in upgrades of the security to a sufficent level?  Almost certainly.

Flecco, you make the exact point I'm trying to get across.  Glad not everyone on this thread is snorting Ajax for breakfast

Edit:typo

Last edited by UnOriginalNuttah (2006-04-17 13:11:27)

Major_Spittle wrote:

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I guess if you accidentally left your back door open and someone broke in and stole your computer while you were away, leaving a note on the desk that read, "at least you now know about your security flaw. Hope you don't mind your Athlon's missing," you wouldn't be upset in the least.

I wouldn't be able to claim I'd taken adequate measures to prevent the theft, and so I couldn't claim the loss on my insurance.  Also, if the front door was open anyone could have walked in and done whatever they wanted, they could easily plant a few hairs of someone elses DNA to incriminate someone else for the crime.  Of course I'd be pissed off that I'd lost my PC, but mainly at myself for gross stupidity.  I think the guys lawyer sums up the reasons they are pursuing the case:

"The US government wants to extract some kind of species of administrative revenge because he exposed their security systems as weak and helpless as they were."

Go to your neighbors houses tonight and see if anyone left their door unlocked,

Are you serious?  I live in a city.  Do you think anyone in a city leaves their door open?

Major_Spittle wrote:

if they did walk in and start going through their drawers looking at stuff.  If you think this is legal, do it. I support you in your stupidity.

Of course it isn't legal.  But trespass is a civil crime here in the UK, so basically even if I got caught nothing would happen, perhaps they could sue me for damages if there was proof that I caused them.  But it would definately not be a crime punishable by jail time unless I actually broke something (e.g. window/door/lock) to get in.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort 

Major_Spittle wrote:

If the hacker thought he had a right to be in the governments system, why didn't he just log on properly???

For all we know they left the password as "password"...

Major_Spittle wrote:

Oh he hacked, thus criminal intent, knownly breaking a law.  Hmm, you can go to jail for that.

But there is a word for a government who wants to lock someone up 70 years for a minor crime:  Fascist

Major_Spittle wrote:

Why would anyone have a problem with him going to jail for that, unless they are retarded and don't understand logic??? Are you a liberal, that would explain it.

I approve of appropriate punishment to the crime in question.  70 Years?  Are you a facsist, that would explain it.

Major_Spittle wrote:

So if a person doesn't lock their door it gives anyone the right to walk in, huh???  Try doing it at my house and not only will you get time, my dog just might kill you. 

Welcome back to reality.

Do you seriously leave your fucking front door unlocked?  When you are out?  Do you have a car?  Do you leave the engine running and keys in the ignition while you walk into a shop?  I know, perhaps you are an inbred hermit/hillbilly living 200 miles from the nearest shop with nothing but a few shit stained sheets, a rocking chair and a dog/wife/mother all-in-one combo-meal?  For the rest of us with shit worth stealing locking up is routine. 

Just like installing all the latests patches and updates for a computer, and running an up to date antivirus and firewall.  Welcome to the reality of the 21st century.

P.S. I know he claimed to find a plans for an anti-gravity engine and get access to a system controlling nukes, but he's more of a nuttah than me, so what does that prove?  Only that if he did there should be a significant number of high profile trials of members of the US government for allowing such a lapse to occur.  If it is true then he's a patsy for serious crimes within the government and military, plain and simple.

Flecco wrote:

Tealeaf1980 wrote:

It says he caused $700,000 worth of damage, in other words it cost them that much to fix the flaws.

I never thought of that, makes alot of sense though....

Think about this.. to fix the FLAWS... as in problems which already existed due to the extreme criminal negligence and required fixing anyway.  The people of America should be bringing a class action against those who were really responsible.  I say throw Bill Gates in Guantanamo.

He mentions when he ran NetStat he saw evidence of other hackers in the system:

http://insight.zdnet.co.uk/internet/sec … 862,00.htm

Q: Why do you think the US authorities behaved the way they did, with an extradition order?
A :Well, the reason they give is that I, on my own, closed down the entire metro district of Washington for a few days, including a weapons station, which I dispute. My thing was being quiet and not being seen and getting the information out. And also, when I was there, you do a NetStat routine and you see all the other connections to that machine and there is a permanent weakness for foreign hackers because their security is not even lax, it is non-existent. You wouldn’t believe it.

They might claim that by installing a remote control program, I opened them [the systems] up, but the access was already there. I didn't even have to crack passwords.

What about the damage you are said to have caused?
What they call damage is really just them realising that they have been accessed without authorisation. Then they say things like I deleted 300 users, deleted systems files and such. That was one instance when I did a batch file to clean up all my stuff. I think once and only once, though perhaps I ran it on the root drive of the "c:" drive. But it certainly wasn’t every machine I was on and, if you believe them, they talk about 94 networks being damaged.

I reckon he caused maybe $50 dollars worth of damage, and all the other damage was the result of hackers throwing a block party/hacker convention in the Pentagon systems.

Flecco wrote:

-EDIT-

Just adding that I agree with a four year jail sentence. Besides, he commited the crimes in the UK, therefore he should be tried and jailed within the UK... That is the way the legal systems of the West work...

I'd say that would be reasonable, if he had intended to cause the harm.  But I also think that should take account of that fact that he is clearly a fucking loon and suffering from psychosis, and was just trying to find evidence of coverups and lies which were clearly causing him severe mental torment.  Four years, if he is assessed and found to be of sound mind and body.

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

And you proved you are not dumb how? My whole point is that you are not condemning criminals for stealing because who they stole from was negligent. There is no negligent victims, only asshole criminals. Nobody should ever have to own a lock for anything in the first place. By blaming the victims and not the criminals, you are only proving yourself to be an idiot.

First you go say something like that and then insult me. Fuck off prick.

You think I care if you call me dumb or even feel the need to disprove your ignorant fuck-wittery? You go right ahead and think what you want, keep thinking I'm dumb and saying I said things which I didn't. 

Let me make this clear:  I believe that although criminals should be punished for stealing (provided there is solid evidence of the theft), it is still the responsibility of the property owner to take certain precautions.  Tell you what, next time you get burgled try and explain to your insurance company that you left the front door open, and see how much they give you.  Make sure you mention that "nobody should need locks" then see how politely they tell you to fuck off.  You lack the mental comprehension to understand anything else I've said so I expect you will continue ranting irrelevant, inaccurate bullshit.

It's time you faced facts: if you have an inferior security system on your house which let's anyone walk in anytime they want, you can't blame the only person you can prove went inside for stealing or breaking everything in the house.  But you can blame the manufacturer/installer of the security system for letting you down.  Why do you think the guy got acquited when he was tried in the UK for the same crime?

Let me just mention one slight fact which you seem to be unaware of:

Negligence is a fucking crime, you moron.  If you put a fucking gold bar in the vault of the bank and they left the door open to the bank all night and your gold got nicked, are there still no negligent victims?  No, of course fucking not.  Just because someone stole the gold, doesn't mean the victim of the robbery is blameless.  They were expected to lock the vault and keep your gold safe, they didn't so they disregarded the safety of the item you entrusted them with.  You really are naïve if you believe there is no such thing as a negligent victim.  Most are not, but that doesn't mean all are.

edit:typo

Last edited by UnOriginalNuttah (2006-04-18 00:31:41)

there are two sides to this:

1.) just because there is little security doesn't make the crime any less grave. If you steal something you are a thief, wether there is security or not. Same goes for illegally hacking into computers or networks, regarrdless of the level of security, it is still a crime.

2.) the negligence part has only meaning as far as compensation for losses by your insurance go. If you own something ( anything, really ) that is supposed to be covered by your insurance, the insurance company is going to demand that reasonable means of protection are implemented. For example, that you lock the doors when you leave the house unattended. Or that you lock your car when you park it somewhere public. That is most likely the minimum requirement. The higher the value of the assets in question, the higher the security level will have to be for any insurance to cover potential losses.

Now, as far as the specific case is concerned, 70 years is a bit too much. 4 years UK sentence seems OK to me. Also, since he is a british citizen, I don't know why he would be extradited (sp?).
Moreover, there is no evidence of a terrorist background. the guy was looking for footage on alien spacecraft and stuff. He maybe is mental, but he surely isn't a terrorist.

The UK government would be nuts to allow the guy to be sent to gitmo.

Flecco wrote:

Ajax, he is not trying to absolve the man of blame. He agrees with a FOUR year scentence as given by the UK government. What he is trying to say is that the US should be happy that a bumbling nerd got in and showed them the flaws, rather than a hacker paid by terrorists to do some real damage.

Thanks for summarising what I've been trying to get across so clearly... I tend to overcomplicate things... +Karma