Slashdot Log In
Teen Phone Phreak Targeted by the FBI
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Fri Feb 29, 2008 02:27 PM
from the asking-for-trouble-and-giving-the-rest-of-us-a-bad-name dept.
from the asking-for-trouble-and-giving-the-rest-of-us-a-bad-name dept.
Wired has an interesting editorial on the latest resurgence of the old days of phone phreaking and the latest phreak that is rising into the FBI crosshairs. The most recent hoax, "swatting", involves malicious pranksters calling police with reports of fake murders, hostage crises, or the like and spoofing the call to appear as though it was from another location. "Now the FBI thinks it has identified the culprit in the Colorado swatting as a 17-year-old East Boston phone phreak known as "Li'l Hacker." Because he's underage, Wired.com is not reporting Li'l Hacker's last name. His first name is Matthew, and he poses a unique challenge to the federal justice system, because he is blind from birth. If he's guilty, the attack is at once the least sophisticated and most malicious of a string of capers linked to Matt, who stumbled into the lingering remains of the decades-old subculture of phone phreaking when he was 14, and quickly rose to become one of the most skilled active phreakers alive."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
What's the point...? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What's the point...? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:What's the point...? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:What's the point...? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:What's the point...? (Score:5, Funny)
Nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
Parent
No kidding (Score:5, Insightful)
A sociopath, a criminal.
Parent
Re:No kidding (Score:5, Insightful)
A sociopath, a criminal.
Parent
Only works for a few asses. (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course, the government getting one or two asses is one thing. Thousands, or tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or millions of asses - that's a bit harder to contain.
Ask the Vietnamese. Or the Mogadishuans. Or the Iraqies.
Parent
Double Standards for Geek-a-like Sociopaths (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because there are holes in a system that he's inadvertently exposing through his exploits doesn't make him a hero any more than the Russian mafia are heroes for exposing flaws in the credit card system.
Morally, this tosser is no better than the scum who make phoney calls to the fire brigade and throw stones and objects at them. The consequences have the potential to be just as- and possibly more- serious.
Of course, this guy's a hacker- one of us, right. He's not some antisocial ned [wikipedia.org] or chav [wikipedia.org] from a council estate [wikipedia.org] (who'd probably attack you and film it on their mobile phones [wikipedia.org]). So that makes his actions alright, doesn't it? Way to go with the double standards.
Is he clever and talented? Probably, yeah, but since he's using his "skills" to fuck about with mostly decent people for his own amusement, fuck the prick and let him rot in prison.
Parent
Re:No kidding (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Thuggery (Score:5, Insightful)
When you get caught you are not released to the custody of your parents, they make sure you go to ass-pounding school.
Parent
Nope, SWAT teams do this all the time. (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.cato.org/raidmap/ [cato.org]
Hell, a 80-year-old grandmother was killed dead because the cops could just bust in with no warning and start shooting. Too bad the scum got the wrong fucking house. Makes me sick.
Parent
Re:What's the problem? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's funny that the posts saying that the police are frequently not comporting themselves professionally get modded down, while the obvious "donkey porn" troll does not. I really wish I had mod points today. Fact is, police teams rely on career criminal informants, and thanks to Tricky Dick and the Drug War, no-knock warrants are increasingly common. Police are happy to take shortcuts, since they're people just like everyone else. Problem is, that ends up with a greater number of innocent people being shafted.
"-1, Troll" is not a substitute for "I don't agree with you." Get over yourself.
Parent
Challenge? Why (Score:5, Insightful)
The justice system should be blind, so who cares if he broke the law.
For this he will (rightfully) be tried as an adult because this kind of behavior can cost real lives. (I'll get modded down for being a troll)
Re:Challenge? Why (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Challenge? Why (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Challenge? Why (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Challenge? Why (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Challenge? Why (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Hmm (Score:5, Insightful)
No, not really (Score:5, Interesting)
So while the telcos should work towards a better identification system, it isn't necessarily the easiest thing in the world to develop and deploy, especially since the phone switches aren't the world's most extensible architecture (new features often mean adding hardware, not just changing code). We have to accept that virtual security is just like physical security: It cannot be perfect and impenetrable. We can have better and worse, but just because a failure is found doesn't mean the security is necessarily bad.
Besides, I see a bigger problem in kids who think this sort of thing is ok to do.
Parent
i really don't mind (Score:5, Insightful)
but please don't target the local law enforcement guys. you're actively denying some poor shlub 911 resources who might need them in a real emergency
that makes you worse than anything you say you are opposing
That's not the problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Cops always think that way... (Score:4, Informative)
They had a warrant, it was just obtained with false information from information provided by an informant who was know to be not credible.
The grandmother? She shot at the cops after they broke into her house. The cops were returning fire.
Yeah, the people that falsified information to get the warrant should be put under the jail. But don't lump all cops in with a few genuine baddies. Generally, they have a shitty job that pays poorly, and are doing their best to protect you and me.
Parent
Re:Cops always think that way... (Score:5, Insightful)
Um, slow down there buddy. If someone breaks into your house, its totally reasonable to shoot at them to defend yourself. How is she to know if they are cops or not?
Parent
Re:Cops always think that way... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Cops always think that way... (Score:4, Insightful)
What do you think should happen? Ask them politely to leave? Do you think they break in to throw you a suprise birthday party?
Please, wake up. You're only as safe as YOU make yourself.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2007/12/02/2007-12-02_grandma_killed_and_grandson_stabbed_in_l.html [nydailynews.com]
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2007/12/02/2007-12-02_grandma_killed_and_grandson_stabbed_in_l.html [nydailynews.com]
http://www.nypost.com/seven/02042007/news/regionalnews/l_i__home_invasion_slaying_regionalnews_frank_ryan______and_c_j__sullivan.htm [nypost.com]
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/cops-arrest-suspect-in-attempted-home-invasion/3555644578 [aol.com]
Parent
Re:Cops always think that way... (Score:4, Interesting)
That being said, I think they are using when it isn't necessary. And I think they are overly careless with it by getting the wrong houses and all. I don't think I read about the grandmother being shot down but I do remember a situation in Arizona (I think) where not only did they get the wrong house, but managed to catch it on fire and made the family watch their dog trapped on the second floor get burnt alive while hand cuffed and mocked on the front yard. A neighbor over heard a cop ask another if they should call the fire department in yet, and the reply was they don't deserve to have their shit saved.
This tells me that the cops did the swatt approach with the intent of somehow punishing the suspect in the process of his capture. They didn't even have enough competence to get the right house in the process. So yes, there is abuse. But I think instead of taking the tool away from them, they should have strict guidelines in when to use it, how it is used, with accountability for getting it wrong and hurting or damaging an innocent person. I don't think a telephone book lawsuit is enough, criminal charges and loss of job should be on the line for abuses and wrong houses and all.
Parent
Re:Cops always think that way... (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately the police thing they are the military, and they are not. There not trained nearly as well, their situation is different, there job is different and they are not in the military.
You hand cuff and and secure someone, you don't keep pointing guns at them, you have no reason to scream obscenities at them(this under NO circumstance can help anyways, it only confuses the situation by adding noise that gets in the way of actual informative communication.
When you are wearing no clear identifing marks, storm into someones home and get killed, that's YOUR fault, not the person who thought they were being robbed.
So you need accountability, and in the case where procedure was violated, or a procedure is deemed unreasonably, the law enforcement officer should go to court, and the dept. should be held liable of monetary damages.
make them think, and make the dept. think. Before being allowed to go, perhaps there should be someone whose job it is to review the information?
Parent
Re:Cops always think that way... (Score:5, Insightful)
You are missing the point. This has nothing to do with cops power, even if I agree that it might be excessive. This has everything to do with a person finding a way to direct that power in an illegal and dangerous manner. It'd be like finding a way to send powerful surges of electricity to your house and damaging your electronics -- you wouldn't blame the electric company for the problem, even if they were responsible for a system in which such a surge was possible.
Parent
Thank Ma Bell (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Thank Ma Bell (Score:4, Insightful)
If the caller ID were not available, or were from a cellphone, or didn't make sense, or whatever else, the 911 responder would still have been obliged to send emergency personnel. If a call sounds legit (and often even if it doesn't), the police will respond, regardless of what caller ID says. Ultimately this was a dangerous prank and should be treated as such.
The caller ID spoofing merely means that it took a bit longer to track down the prankster. You might argue that the insecurity of caller ID gave the prankster the guts to make a fake call in the first place. But then again, pranksters can use pay phones if they want anonymity. In any case the police will respond to the call.
Parent
Yikes! (Score:5, Insightful)
When I was a kid and used to phreak..... um, I mean, when I heard about people doing this..... it was all about connecting to long-distance BBSes for free and downloading games. What this kid is doing is just sick.
There's hackers/crackers/phreaks, and then there's people who are just plain assholes.
Re:Yikes! (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyways, a common recurring theme I took from that and found it to be true with a lot of stuff is that the first generation doing something, whether that is separated by a few years of age or a real generation, the second seems to take it to an extreme and never gets the point of the fist right in practice. I mention this because the "plain assholes" are typically people who don't get it but want to participate in some way. It is usually what results in insane laws being made about things.
Parent
Oh christ. This is NOT phreaking... (Score:5, Informative)
Even spoofing Caller ID, while a possible phreaking tool, is now common enough today that it's trivial for almost anyone to do.
This is just some stupid punk kid making an ass out of himself and cost the police time and taxpayers money.
This is equal to screaming fire in a crowded theater.
Again, making prank calls to the police and emergency services is stupid, not phreaking.
Re:Oh christ. This is NOT phreaking... (Score:5, Informative)
E911 doesn't use Caller ID. It uses the same set of signals that the phone company uses for billing, which are much harder to spoof.
Parent
Re:Oh christ. This is NOT phreaking... (Score:5, Interesting)
Having toyed with the telephone networks, back when it was "cool" to do when you were bored with irc... I know the difference between learning something new about the latest release of audix and making prank phone calls.
A decade later, as a volunteer fireman; looking at the weather report for tonight - forecast 10inches... I would like to think that the calls I go out on tonight are legit and not some punk kid making prank calls. Yes, my fridge is running. As a lieutenant, too, I would like to think that my men (and one manly woman) are rolling for legit reasons, too.
Parent
At least... (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems to me that there is a big difference between phone phreaking to get free long-distance calls and spoofing phone numbers to bring SWAT down on an innocent family.
Identifying Juvenile (Score:5, Insightful)
Wired is so kind not to identify the juvenile...
Thanks to this reporting, anyone who knows him now knows what he did. This will follow him around forever.
Wired could have at least left the first name out and kept the story intact.
Re:Identifying Juvenile (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Identifying Juvenile (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Identifying Juvenile (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
The good ole days (Score:5, Insightful)
Sending a SWAT team to someone's random house is not a juvenile prank, someone could easily get shot.
Now having a gay 1-900 line call a buddy back and thank him for his business, now that is a prank.
Stick to free 1-900 calls and messing with phone switches. Think before sending heavily armed, trigger happy police into a perceived hostile environment.
...the Matrix has you... (Score:5, Funny)
It could have been worse.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Years ago a friend's stepdad was killed in Kansas City. The cops followed his stepdaughter (my friend) home from a party where drugs were present. An hour after she went home the cops busted into her house with flashlights and guns. Their uniforms were black. Well, the step-dad hears the ruckus and comes out with his handgun that he kept near to his bed. Without warning the police shot and killed him. AND, there were no drugs in the house and my friend had LEFT the party because drugs had been present. The cops busted into their house for NO legitimate reason. The family won a large lawsuit against the city and the police department for a wrongful death.
What if something similar to this happened after the blind kid called the SWAT in on somebody? I'd sue the crap out of this kid's family, their cousins, their cousin's cousins and anyone else whose name I had. I'd sue the folks that make the technology that allow 'spoofing' of the calls origin. I've read about phreaking and it could be stopped instantly if telecos went all digital.
This kid should have the privilege of prison cell for a few years.
This AIN'T PHREAKING (Score:5, Insightful)
Geez, you would think that on slashdot people would know the difference, this is prank calling, NOT phreaking. Phreaking is about getting free phone calls, not about causing a nuisance and most certainly NOT about sending swat teams out to third parties. A real phreaker would absolutly at no point consider causing harm to others (other then the phone company offcourse :P ) as even acceptable, let alone for it be the only goal.
This guy and others like it are at best doing prank calls and at worsed doing real harm to the people around them. How would you like to be really need the emergency services and find that they are out because some lunatic send them on a wild goose chase? How would you like it if swat stood on your doorstep.
What next, smashing somebodies face in and stealing their mobile is phreaking too?
Put this guy in jail, and if he is blind, well I am sure he can find a cellmate to show him the ropes. I am sick to death of the bleeding hearts, you do wrong, you go to jail. Just remember the thing about equality, all people should be equal for the law, and that means being blind or whatever doesn't get you out of jail.
So... (Score:5, Insightful)
I am just trying to understand here, because on
Parent
Ok but then (Score:4, Insightful)
So are you going to go and sue Kwikset or Schlage or whoever makes your lock if I break in? Should your insurance refuse to pay because you got a normal lock, instead of a high security one? Again I ask: Do you hold physical security to the same standard as virtual security (which like most geeks seems to be perfection), or is it different? If so, why?
Parent
Re:Skillz! (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Here's an idea (Score:5, Insightful)
You would think so - if your source of information is Hollywood or tinfoil hat websites. In reality, they don't.
You know what happens when they do that? People die. Either the cop, or people involved in the struggle, or innocent bystanders.
Parent