[citation][nom]Genny[/nom]Because, as the article indicates, it's unlikely he had any direct involvement with actual 'hacking'. They just need a name a face to publicly crucify right now. /not saying he's innocent[/citation]
Yeah, i typed in a hurry; for clarity, i was implying that the actual hackers/leaders would do well to offer ten minutes of instruction on how to obfuscate ones actions, as when the underlings are caught it damages the root intent of illustrating the ineffectiveness of government/industry.
Also everything i say is under the assumption that he is actually affiliated with lulzsec or any other group(or moniker in anons case), and didnt just dl the listings from twitter; and lets face it, anyone with reading aility and google can set up a vm, and just having a vm isnt exactly incriminating.
The way the article reads it simply says he was in possession of freely available listings and had some vm's running, with a freely available temp email service running; you dont need to be in a special club to meet any of that criteria. Sounds like a shaky case unless they can prove he was actively participating.
Anyone know what kind of charge possession of private account info carries?
(btw sorry if I ramble or repeat, listening in on a conference call atm)