Alleged NASA Hacker Granted Stay in UK

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

blackened144

Distinguished
Aug 17, 2006
509
0
18,930
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]Well, actually it is, however you want to play it with arguements about this is a form of Autism, or another branch of the same thing that Autism is, or the guy just has a serious case of ADHD or whatever.Fact is.This guy is mentally ill.No one got hurt.He should be kept under observation by UK authorites and the US should be told quite plainly that this extradition agreement is a good idea for things like pedophiles, murderers and terrorists.It is not to be used to punish retards who are looking for UFOs.[/citation]
If he was that mentally ill he should have been locked up with no internet access to begin with. He was sane enough to do the crime and knew that when he was hacking into the computer he was breaking the law when he did it. Aspergers or no, he was convicted of the crime and should be put in jail.
 

tommysch

Distinguished
Sep 6, 2008
648
0
18,930
[citation][nom]Hupiscratch[/nom]The question is: did he found some UFO cover-up scheme?[/citation]

Jail his ass up. He will found some in the showers.

To answer your question, isn't it obvious he didn't found anything? Damned the military cannot be rude to a few Muslim extremists without someone leaking some god damned pictures... Do you expect them to keep UFOs secret for 60 years? I can name you dozens of CIA operations, which I shouldn't be able to do if they were efficient.
 

potatolord

Distinguished
Oct 14, 2009
52
0
18,580
Extradite him. He's admitted he broke into their files, so he's obviously guilty. His defence seems to be that he found some really, really SUPER SECRET STUFF, but he lost it. His second defence is that he has Asperger's syndrome, which is no defence at all. His third defence sems to be that perpetrating a crime in another country should not mean extradition.

There was a very similar case a few years back re: etradition. The "NatWestThree"-bankers who committed a large fraud, denied it, said the US government was mean and picking on them, they were innocent, woudl get hugely long punitive sentences, it was a cover up etc etc. once they were extradited they pleaded guilty, admitted they were frauds and liars and got a fairly light sentence. Here's a link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natwest_three

They had the same PR company working for them as Gary McKinnon does.
 

techguy911

Distinguished
Jun 8, 2007
251
0
18,940
Sounds like the military is spinning a bunch of yarn none of what they said happened,if anyone knows anything about hacking looking for information does not do what they said also all files on server are backed up so if anything was deleted it could be put back in a minute.
Sounds like they want to make an example of him, thing is there was no security on nasa's computers a boy in a town near where i lived hacked into it as well, they claimed the same thing.

Also to people who think we are the only life in the universe the world is not flat and the sun does not revolve around the earth, there are trillions upon trillions of planets in universe that could support life.
 

Hilarion

Distinguished
Feb 12, 2008
152
0
18,630
The problems that this man exposed are likely still not fixed and they would rather spend huge amounts of time and money prosecuting instead of fixing their systems so they can't be broken into.

Why do they always focus on the wrong things?
 

swamprat

Distinguished
Apr 20, 2009
108
0
18,630
[citation][nom]potatolord[/nom]Extradite him. He's admitted he broke into their files, so he's obviously guilty. His defence seems to be that he found some really, really SUPER SECRET STUFF, but he lost it. His second defence is that he has Asperger's syndrome, which is no defence at all. His third defence sems to be that perpetrating a crime in another country should not mean extradition. [/citation]

It's a good point that the defences used are fairly pathetic - but then again I'd say the main trouble is that (at least in the eyes of the tabloid reading public) 1. the extradition treaty is one-sided and rather biased; 2. everyone knows (remember this is stereotype based / tabloid reporting) that the US will just convict and probably execute any foreign person that has embarassed them, mainly on the grounds of not being an American patriot etc.

Is it actually a crime to guess someone's password and log on to their systems? (it'd seem obviously yes, but I'd wonder what the crime would be - some sort of data protection act? copyright violations?)
If there wasn't much security then any claim for damages would be rather limited by the lack of preventative / damage limitation action I'd have thought - especially if the 'damage' as such was caused by a panicking IT chap in the US pulling out wires to try and cut UK bloke off.
 

olin9

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2008
159
0
18,660
Is it actually a crime to guess someone's password and log on to their systems? (it'd seem obviously yes, but I'd wonder what the crime would be - some sort of data protection act? copyright violations?)

Unauthorized access, I can have a account with no password, and it is illegal for anyone not authorized to use the account.
 

Dkz

Distinguished
Oct 16, 2009
92
0
18,580
First, there is no way they have the real deal on a computer, much less connected to a network that would be just being dumb. I'm sorry to say, but what they are after is to know HOW this guy did it, and I guess that they might want to punish him to heal their EGO. I'm sorry for all the American's who read this comment but I know is harsh and I'm not trying to offend anyone but, It's true that your(American's) Nationalism is your best/worst partner. It's the best excuse for everything, and if you put into perspective Nationalism it's the same madness who drove Germany into world domination. It's a tool for courage, but also a political ace to justify all their own dirty deeds.
Go ahead hung me with negative points.
 

rpenri

Distinguished
May 25, 2010
9
0
18,520
Dkz

You have no idea how the US military works, so why are you even commenting on their internal practices?

First of all, he did damage to the US by deleting critical files. Just like a company would lose money, time, effort from the loss of data, the US military would also lose.

There are people whose jobs depend on that data to be there and when its not, it creates problems that branch out to other departments because a problem in one area inevitably leads to slowdowns and other problems in other areas.

The data may not have been SCI level (Sensitive Compartmented Information--which is higher than Top Secret), such as nuclear weapons targeting information or anything dealing with cryptology, but it nevertheless creates a situation in which the US has lost a potential asset because whatever data may have been compromised must be purged or recreated to destroyed because its unknown whether such data has been leaked to the public, or enemies of the US or its allies. Depending on what the data may be, it may cost nothing or the damage may be immeasurable.

For instance, in a hypothetical situation, if the North Koreans knew which cities would be targeted first in a nuclear attack, they could launch an attack on the US and then immediately evacuate those cities and move their missiles surreptitiously or immediately after the attack for a second volley. While the US sends nukes to cities that are empty, New York, D.C., Boston and other large cities may be obliterated off the map while N. Korea launches another devastating attack. Because North Korea knew the US had knowledge of where they kept their missiles, they moved them at the last minute to avoid our nukes destroying them and in turn can launch even more nukes at us while we're shooting blind. The potential to damage to the US from this security breach can be catastrophic.

The US military has to plan for any and all scenarios and doing so requires intelligence and other assets that cost a lot of money to acquire and would be useless if the enemies knows it.

If an American were to hack into MI6 and start deleting data, I'm willing to bet you'd change your position pretty damn fast.
 

knutjb

Distinguished
Jan 11, 2009
27
0
18,580
[citation][nom]Dkz[/nom]First, there is no way they have the real deal on a computer, much less connected to a network that would be just being dumb. I'm sorry to say, but what they are after is to know HOW this guy did it, and I guess that they might want to punish him to heal their EGO. I'm sorry for all the American's who read this comment but I know is harsh and I'm not trying to offend anyone but, It's true that your(American's) Nationalism is your best/worst partner. It's the best excuse for everything, and if you put into perspective Nationalism it's the same madness who drove Germany into world domination. It's a tool for courage, but also a political ace to justify all their own dirty deeds.Go ahead hung me with negative points.[/citation]

OK

Try to logon to ANY government's website around the world and read what the rules are. They ALL have similar rules, that is, anyone not authorized to be on said site is breaking the law with a number of penalties.

I hold IT guys partially liable but they are only part of it. McKinnon broke into a system he had no right to enter. This is a serious problem worldwide.

Your political tripe of Nationalism is moronic. Blame America for all the worlds woes. Whatever country you live in I'm sure I can fault it in a myriad of ways. Faulting others is easy, dealing with the current host of internet crimes is not. You might be ok when someone breaks into your bank and empties your account from the other side of the planet, I'm not. This crime is really no different from that. The constant blaming of IT guys as the fall guy is only part of the story. Yes IT plays a major part but the only safe computers are the ones disconnected from the internet.

The US is always someones bad guy, maybe if the US military hadn't created the internet you might be happier?
 

drutort

Distinguished
Aug 30, 2007
90
0
18,580
im more then sure they want to give him a position, cause i mean all those in charge of the security failed obviously, and if one guy can get into so many systems its best to have him on the team instead and learn from him :p

im sure they would keep him under some kind of house arrest, but that would still be better, they prob would want him to hack other systems or countries LOL
 

rpenri

Distinguished
May 25, 2010
9
0
18,520
[citation][nom]drutort[/nom]im more then sure they want to give him a position, cause i mean all those in charge of the security failed obviously, and if one guy can get into so many systems its best to have him on the team instead and learn from him im sure they would keep him under some kind of house arrest, but that would still be better, they prob would want him to hack other systems or countries LOL[/citation]


The US doesn't need him to work for them. This isn't in the same scenario as Leo DiCaprio from "Catch Me If You Can" where nobody has tried bank/check fraud before.

First of all, the guy has personal/mental issues...how are you sure he'll keep his mouth shut? Two, a good hacker doesn't get caught or let people know he was ever there.

I'm sure they'll analyze his attack to gauge how he got through, to shore up the defenses against similar attacks.

Two, its not the fault of ALL ITs. Its mainly the security expert that is supposed to prevent those types of things. Security experts as opposed to ITs are paid HANDSOMELY to prevent attacks on systems...most companies cannot even afford to have a full time security expert on their staff because of the high salary costs. The average security consultant makes over $250,000 whereas an IT with 5 years experience makes less than half of that.
 

righteous fury

Distinguished
Mar 26, 2009
9
0
18,510
You are all missing the obvious. IF this gentleman had indeed caused the level of harm some of you are indicating, or HAD seen things too sensitive to be trusted with, he would, very conveniently, have had a "perfectly normal" car accident, or some such, that would have ended his life. Nuf Sed.
...and for those of you who might try to argue that "the cold war is over, that sort of thing doesn't happen anymore" may I suggest you try out for stand-up comedy? You're absolutely hilarious.
 

eddieroolz

Distinguished
Moderator
Sep 6, 2008
3,485
0
20,730
As far as I know, this guy had a motive, and it doesn't matter what syndrome he suffers from. He should not be treated as mentally ill at all.

Cry human rights all you want. Truth hurts. He is very capable of knowing what he did. And he committed a crime.
 

rpenri

Distinguished
May 25, 2010
9
0
18,520
[citation][nom]righteous fury[/nom]You are all missing the obvious. IF this gentleman had indeed caused the level of harm some of you are indicating, or HAD seen things too sensitive to be trusted with, he would, very conveniently, have had a "perfectly normal" car accident, or some such, that would have ended his life. Nuf Sed....and for those of you who might try to argue that "the cold war is over, that sort of thing doesn't happen anymore" may I suggest you try out for stand-up comedy? You're absolutely hilarious.[/citation]


First of all, the guy is a British subject. As far as I know, the UK is allies with the US. We don't murder each other's citizens without due process. And even if they intend to "assassinate" him, they wouldn't do like that. He is a threat, but not similar to Zarqawi or other terrorist ilk. At the very most, he'd get a Hellfire shot at him from a MQ-9 Reaper UAV drone. But since the UK doesn't allow US spy drones flying in their sovereign air space (only US F-15s from the 48th Fighter Wing based at RAF Lakenheath to support NATO operations---yes, the UK requires US assistance in protecting their own airspace). I'm willing to bet an F-15 flying CAP over the UK just happened to have a weapons malfunction that resulted in a 2,000 lb. laser guided bomb falling on dude's house, if the US really wanted to "assassinate" him.
 

mac_angel

Distinguished
Mar 12, 2008
41
0
18,580
okay, I've got osteoarthritis and it really acts up when it rains. Does that mean I can go over to England, shoot the fuck out of a bunch of people and come home and then say, "you can extradite me, it rains too much over there and my arthritis will act up"
 

techguy911

Distinguished
Jun 8, 2007
251
0
18,940
[citation][nom]rpenri[/nom]DkzYou have no idea how the US military works, so why are you even commenting on their internal practices?First of all, he did damage to the US by deleting critical files. Just like a company would lose money, time, effort from the loss of data, the US military would also lose.There are people whose jobs depend on that data to be there and when its not, it creates problems that branch out to other departments because a problem in one area inevitably leads to slowdowns and other problems in other areas.The data may not have been SCI level (Sensitive Compartmented Information--which is higher than Top Secret), such as nuclear weapons targeting information or anything dealing with cryptology, but it nevertheless creates a situation in which the US has lost a potential asset because whatever data may have been compromised must be purged or recreated to destroyed because its unknown whether such data has been leaked to the public, or enemies of the US or its allies. Depending on what the data may be, it may cost nothing or the damage may be immeasurable.For instance, in a hypothetical situation, if the North Koreans knew which cities would be targeted first in a nuclear attack, they could launch an attack on the US and then immediately evacuate those cities and move their missiles surreptitiously or immediately after the attack for a second volley. While the US sends nukes to cities that are empty, New York, D.C., Boston and other large cities may be obliterated off the map while N. Korea launches another devastating attack. Because North Korea knew the US had knowledge of where they kept their missiles, they moved them at the last minute to avoid our nukes destroying them and in turn can launch even more nukes at us while we're shooting blind. The potential to damage to the US from this security breach can be catastrophic.The US military has to plan for any and all scenarios and doing so requires intelligence and other assets that cost a lot of money to acquire and would be useless if the enemies knows it. If an American were to hack into MI6 and start deleting data, I'm willing to bet you'd change your position pretty damn fast.[/citation]

Ever hear of a thing called a backup? they actually use them and no the damage they claim did not happen , he did not have to delete any files, they kept default passwords on the routers ect.
using this information he removed the blocks allowing him access to the files.
The only damage was they had to hire someone to find out how he got in and plug up the holes, if they would have set up the network right the first time this would have never happened.
And yes i am a security expert over 25 years in the field.
Bypassing security to look at information is a matter of using exploits in the os , i can bypass windows/linux password system with a simple kernel patch on the fly that deletes nothing on a computer and to gain access i just hit enter on the password prompt and im in after the program deletes itself leaving no trace or damage.
I use this method to gain access to customers machines that forget to tell me the password so i can clean viruses and malware off the system.
Every time they catch a hacker they claim damage any real hacker/security expert knows this is bs its all about exploits.
 

rpenri

Distinguished
May 25, 2010
9
0
18,520
[citation][nom]techguy911[/nom]Ever hear of a thing called a backup? they actually use them and no the damage they claim did not happen , he did not have to delete any files, they kept default passwords on the routers ect.using this information he removed the blocks allowing him access to the files.The only damage was they had to hire someone to find out how he got in and plug up the holes, if they would have set up the network right the first time this would have never happened.And yes i am a security expert over 25 years in the field.Bypassing security to look at information is a matter of using exploits in the os , i can bypass windows/linux password system with a simple kernel patch on the fly that deletes nothing on a computer and to gain access i just hit enter on the password prompt and im in after the program deletes itself leaving no trace or damage.I use this method to gain access to customers machines that forget to tell me the password so i can clean viruses and malware off the system.Every time they catch a hacker they claim damage any real hacker/security expert knows this is bs its all about exploits.[/citation]


The damage they claim didn't happen? What, you just happen to know exactly what happened? Were you there to confirm there was no damage done? You have inside info that no one else outside the investigation knows? How are you so sure no damage was done? I'm sick of hearing people like you who view situations like this from the outside and make blatant statements about it in which its impossible for you to know what happened.


How is shutting down an Army and Navy network not causing damage? People who rely on the network to perform their JOBS cannot fulfill their missions if they don't have access to the network. If you really are a security expert, then you wouldn't respond with such a stupid remark regarding the damage. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that damage comes in many forms. The inability to do work because of disruptions is just as bad as losing data because some things are time critical in nature.

PS...it's not about whether actual damage was done or not. Having backups is not an excuse to go into someone's system. You may not cause lasting damage, but your presence in of itself is disruptive. Do you think ANY company appreciates intruders in their systems? Would you like someone with unknown intentions poking in your home network? No...why do you think the US does?
 

techguy911

Distinguished
Jun 8, 2007
251
0
18,940
[citation][nom]__-_-_-__[/nom]even if he deleted I'm sure the information could be recovered. it's very hard to erase COMPLETELY the information from an HDD[/citation]
You are 100% right the damage he is accused of they have no proof it is fabricated, files cannot be really deleted over a network unless there is some type of file shredding utility in place, any deleted file can be un-deleted in seconds.
The $370,000 of damage they claim he did is bogus and what is really funny he is not the first, there is a teen 15 miles from where i live they claimed the exact same thing word for word the chances for that happening is very slim.
The military backs up all there servers there is no way he could have done any permanent damage, i have been following his case and the teen from canada.
Why if he was looking around at data would he delete data on a server that has nothing to do with the server he was looking at they are separate machines.
They are using misinformation and using peoples lack of computer knowledge to make him look guilty of causing damage.
Besides i know for a fact that the network was not setup properly in the first place and that at the time people could go in and look at the data without doing any hacking they were caught with there pants down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQhF6lApr8E
 
Status
Not open for further replies.