LulzSec Leader Sabu Unmasked, Arrested and Caught Collaborating 511
Velcroman1 writes "Law enforcement agents on two continents swooped in on top members of the infamous computer hacking group LulzSec early this morning, and acting largely on evidence gathered by the organization's brazen leader — who sources say has been secretly working for the government for months — arrested three and charged two more with conspiracy. Charges against four of the five were based on a conspiracy case filed in New York federal court, FoxNews.com has exclusively learned. An indictment charging the suspects, who include two men from Great Britain, two from Ireland and an American in Chicago is expected to be unsealed Tuesday morning in the Southern District of New York. 'This is devastating to the organization,' said an FBI official involved with the investigation. 'We're chopping off the head of LulzSec.'"
He was arrested (Score:5, Funny)
...For the lulz
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:2, Insightful)
Charges against four of the five were based on a conspiracy case filed in New York federal court
Hey, that's a double standard!
... we all know people with money and power are happy people with good feelings who'd never do that...
Whenever you have reason to think there are conspiracies within government, why you're paranoid and that's absurd, no I won't look at your evidence because that just can't be so, *plugs ears* nana nana nana I can't hear you
But when government says they found a conspiracy among private individuals, why that's just law enforcement.
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Hmm.... I think I just came up with the internet conspiracy formula.... patent pending!!!
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:5, Insightful)
I am in no way defending LulzSec or anyone who commits crime for any reason. But if you honestly haven't learned yet that crime for corporate profit or expansion of government power is completely ignored while anyone who challenges the status quo is given life in Federal PMITA prison, you are naive and blissfully childish, and I only wish I could enjoy your blasé sense of morality.
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:5, Interesting)
I can see things like bitcoin "challenging the status quo." Could you explain how defacing websites, breaking into systems, and releasing private information challenges the status quo?
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:5, Interesting)
It made people realize just how shit the security at most companies is and that perhaps they shouldn't share their private information with them. It exposes a fair bit of criminality and general corporate and political evil. It gave us an insight into the inner workings of our corrupt law enforcement agencies and an idea of their true level of incompetence.
Above all it gave us hope that individuals can still fight back against the corruption and expose it. Manning is a hero but also an opportunist, Lulzsec proved that if needs be people can take the fight to them.
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:4, Informative)
if you honestly haven't learned yet that crime for corporate profit or expansion of government power is completely ignored while anyone who challenges the status quo is given life in Federal PMITA prison
"Completely ignored", really? I find that this level of hyperbole detracts from one's credibility, and that's a shame because I agree with your underlying concerns. Honest question: are you aware that there have been an increasing number of successful prosecutions for fraud in the financial sector, particularly insider trading? It just doesn't make great news copy, so maybe it's been off your radar. Even the Raj Rajaratnam case, as major as it was, didn't get all that much coverage.
Is every guilty & corrupt person currently at risk of arrest? Of course not. But it is actually a rather difficult process to investigate and prosecute these kinds of crimes. It requires a lot of resources, expertise, time, and taxpayer money. I get the sense that you'd be very troubled to see the expansion of the justice department that would be necessary to obtain a higher rate of successful prosecution.
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:5, Insightful)
depending on which facts you choose to follow, the GP can be very correct. I wouldnt disparage someone for believing crazy ass conspiracies when we can watch bankers and wall street knowingly manipulate a system that causes massive harm, and the firms they work for get very minor punishments, while at the same time the FBI finds it enormously important to destroy a group because they embarrassed SONY.
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:5, Insightful)
It should be no surprise that he who pays the piper calls the tunes.
As long as we have the best government money can buy, we have to accept that they're bought and paid for. They are not corrupt as long as they stay bought.
Don't like it? Don't vote for a politician who is bought. Or buy your own politician.
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with your comment is that you overlook important details.
Bankers have accountants and lawyers that provide cover for them in terms of actual criminal wrongdoing. That's why the bankers aren't being prosecuted yet, because it's hard to prove criminality rather than incompetence. It's not like people haven't been trying and the AG of NYS is still trying and will probably get them *for something* the same way we got Al Capone *for something* (, in his case, income tax evasion.
LULSEC is just outright breaking the law, no chaser. That's called "mooning the giant" in the business world. The giant is going to notice you and do something about you.
Do well connected companies do blackhat things for large contractors businesses and politicians? We all have the feeling that they do, but there has to be specific allegations and specific cases, not just a general feeling of corruption.
The child sex slavery incidents are usually a reference to Dyncorp, details on Wikipedia and here:
Cari Lynn titled The Whistleblower: Sex Trafficking, Military Contractors And One Woman's Fight For Justice.
In Bosnia, they had immunity from prosecution- itself a ridiculous notion but there it was.
In Afghanistan they were investigated but you have to pin crimes on individuals doing specific acts and this is not so easy.
But to your point, the greater reality seems to be this: not many companies do why Dyncorp and Xe do. When push comes to shove, the government feels it needs these companies to do things. Thus the immunity from prosecution clauses and thus the invigorous investigation (what no hidden cameras and months of undercover work???? ).
Don't like this state of affairs? Then do what I do and stop voting Republican. It was Rumsfeld under Bush who wanted to downsize the military to save costs (and upsize private contracting by a cost equal to , oh, ten times that amount or more) .
No one is starting a competitor to Xe or Dyncorp. For this reason alone, they should not exist- monopoly power on necessary services to the government on the government dime should never be permitted to exist. Government should perform the services that fit anything like that description.
You cry about the end results, but do you vote? Do you express anything like the concerns I expressed to your congresscritter? Once the gun is loaded and trigger is pulled, the bullet IS going to fly to its target. You have to stop the action before it gets to the point of inevitability. Permitting Xe and Dyncorp to exist in the capacity they do was ABSOLUTELY going to lead to just what we see here, along with the lackluster prosecution in the name of "the greater good" .
LULZSEC on the other hand were just a bunch of lawbreaking joyriders shoving their bare asses out their car window as they drove by the chief of police's house.
Just because there's an unsolved armed robbery in a town doesn't mean vandals aren't prosecuted anymore.
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:5, Insightful)
CNN has it's brain washed followers.
Truly free and open minded people have the ability to watch both (and admit it), put the various pieces together and come up with their own opinion.
I myself like and hate both Fox and CNN. You on the other hand, if I had to guess, you're in with the CNN followers, but that's just my guess.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Personally, I just watch the daily show. I probably won't be any better informed, but since it's entertaining I at least get SOMETHING out of the time. Arguably, since the DIS-information in the Daily Show is made deliberately obvious, I do end up somewhat better informed since I am at least not DIS-informed.
Actual information tends to come form various nearly random places on the web.
Re: (Score:3)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Would you characterize an atheist as one who denies the existence of god outright, or someone who, in the absence of proof, does not allow himself to accept the positive claims of others?
The former is an atheist. The latter is an agnostic. How, exactly, is this relevant though?
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:5, Insightful)
Both are atheists. "Agnostic" was a term coined by a man who admitted that the term "atheist" applied to him but didn't want to be lumped in with other people the term also applied to.
[citation needed]
atheist - a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
agnostic - a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
When I reached intellectual maturity and began to ask myself whether I was an atheist, a theist, or a pantheist; a materialist or an idealist; Christian or a freethinker; I found that the more I learned and reflected, the less ready was the answer; until, at last, I came to the conclusion that I had neither art nor part with any of these denominations, except the last. The one thing in which most of these good people were agreed was the one thing in which I differed from them. They were quite sure they had attained a certain "gnosis,"–had, more or less successfully, solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble. So I took thought, and invented what I conceived to be the appropriate title of "agnostic." It came into my head as suggestively antithetic to the "gnostic" of Church history, who professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant. To my great satisfaction the term took. - Huxley, Thomas. Collected Essays. pp. 237–239. ISBN 1-85506-922-9 (via Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]).
Re: (Score:3)
You're a gnostic atheist. I, who don't believe in the non-existance of god(s), am a agnostic atheist.
Here's a nice diagram and explanation: http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/09/25/8419/ [freethinker.co.uk]
Re: (Score:3)
No. A gnostic atheist is someone who says "there are no god(s)".
An agnostic atheist is someone who says "I don't believe in gods, but I can't assert their non-existance either".
Then there are the ignosticists, who say "before I answer, define 'god'."
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe not Lulzsec, but Megaupload's Kim Dotcom was arrested in the conditions you described (helicopters and all) in the first half. As for the second half, look at what happens in Gitmo and other secret CIA prisons. Unless you're one of those people who think waterboarding is not torture.
Yes, one happend in Australia and the other in the States (Cuba technically). But Megaupload was done at the behest of the U.S. government and their industry cronies. Don't think that it couldn't happen here, in the land of the free and home of the brave.
Re:Hey wait a sec (Score:4, Informative)
Technically, guantanamo is in US, not Cuba. Generally speaking its on the Cuban island, but if you want to be technical, please specify that it is US.
No, if you want to be technical, it's Cuban.
United States leases the Guantanamo Bay base area from Cuba. It's under US jurisdiction, but Cuban souvereignty.
That it's not on US soil is precisely what Donald Rushfeldt used as a sleazeball argument for bypassing US laws.
Re: (Score:3)
According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org], some progress has been made in this case, with over a dozen people arrested and charged. I'll grant that they have not been convicted, but most of them have only been arrested recently. We'll just have to see if anyone actually gets convicted, and, furthermore, how many of them turn out to be influential and powerful.
Re: (Score:3)
I hate to break it to you, because you seem to be really enjoying wallowing in your cynicism, but if it were illegal, they'd be punished regardless of the circumstances. Now is it legal for the United States to conduct Cyber Warfare against another country? I am not sure.
The only powers of war lies with congress. The constitution tells us so.
So to get around this, don't call it a war. Vietnam started as a "police action". Similar with Iraq.
Re: (Score:3)
Personally, I think your post is pretty accurate. The last couple of "terrorists" that I've read about didn't seem to be smart enough to plan an attack, let alone to build a bomb. One need look no further than the fact that they trusted an "undercover agent" to supply the bomb to find proof they ain't smart.
I can picture the hill country from the movie 'Deliverance'. A black car pulls up to the gas pumps, guy gets out, pumps some gas, pays for it, and starts talking to the inbred bunch of hillbillies lo
Re:He was arrested (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
You've got to justify your budget somehow.
Re: (Score:3)
Not tinfoil, see the RC plane bomber. Also many houses have been raided because a pedo used that house's open AP. In one case the pedo used a cantenna while on a boat.
Also the guys in LulzSec love to frame people they don't like to get them "v&." See the British guy who was arrested on suspicion of being LulzSec member Topiary while the real Topiary was in Sweden.
Re: (Score:3)
what last laugh? that remains to be seen.
the laughs still on the couple of big hacks they put through. besides it was the most interesting and hilarious thing in tech-ug-scape last year.. (besides arab spring, which wasn't so much full of hilarity aspect you have to admit!).
because really, what can the gov do? throw them in the jail to read books while they'll have to feed them, while they're under medical services vs. being unemployed outside. as far as hilariously stupid things how to spend your time with
Re:He was arrested (Score:5, Insightful)
We do. Those of us reading this article.
We got to laugh as LulzSec went on a 50-day rampage through the Internet. And today, when the arrests come in, we get to laugh and say "Well-played, FBI". (Seriously - if the article is accurate, they played it by the book: find one person, flip them to their side, and use that compromised person to compromise the rest of the group. They hacked meat, not computers, but what they did to LulzSec is no different than what LulzSec did to the systems it attacked. They won fair and square.)
Good guys? Bad guys? What do good and bad have to do with any of this? It's entertainment!
Re:He was arrested (Score:5, Insightful)
There will come a time before long when NO-ONE will be laughing, as the terror which has been wrought upon us by our government and the banks is revealed for what it really is.
They won't care as long as they're offered a 15% discount on their car insurance. You overestimate humanity's desire for freedom. Civil liberties are a historical anomaly. Invariably, cultures that have them are conquered by those that do not, usually because cultures that have them are affluent and wealthy and cultures that don't have a whole lot of bodies they can throw at the problem until said culture is overrun.
Re:He was arrested (Score:5, Insightful)
Roman Historian Sallust: âFew people prefer liberty, most people would settle for a fair masterâ(TM)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"Freeze punk! You're under arrest..*puts on shades*...for the loooolzuh"
it's a mole! (Score:5, Funny)
mole mole mole mole! (read it like Austin Powers)
Seriously... they scored the head of the organization as a mole? Either blatant luck, or someone knew what they were doing.
Or option C, said head has little scruples.
Re: (Score:3)
Or they made him an offer he couldn't refuse, a la Agent Smith
Re:it's a mole! (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that any time you're involved with someone engaged in criminal enterprise, you should probably assume they're not exactly the most ethical person.
Re:it's a mole! (Score:5, Insightful)
Someone who knows the difference between legality and ethics is far more trustworthy than someone who doesn't.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Their antics were harmless. Show me a victim and then maybe you'll have a point. No victim = no crime.
Re:it's a mole! (Score:5, Insightful)
No victim = no crime
So, attempted murder should not be a crime? Say, you know, if you miss with the gun you use, and just hit the brick wall next to the person you were trying to kill? No victim! No crime.
... there's a victim, and thus a crime, right? But when you just aren't technically good enough to completely ruin them, but try your hardest to do so ... no crime?
So, deliberately setting out to destroy a business (say, by DDoSing a seasonally traffic-spikey web site during the one week a year when they make all of the cash they need to pay for the year's payroll and other's costs) and actually succeeding
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, because the Underground Railroad totally helped slaves escape because it was fun, and that is in no way a terrible analogy that degrades the actions of people who risked life and property to help slaves escape by comparing them to people who, by their own admission, caused random havoc "for teh lulz."
I do have to say, though, props for not actually Godwinning the thread. You could have, too, oh so easily.
Re:it's a plea deal (Score:4, Insightful)
Reading comprehension should be the next thing you learn about. They identified and arrested the guy and flipped him. The article even says that - he plead out and he became a confidential informant.
He turned his guys over to the feds in exchange for the lulz. No wait, not for the lulz, but for lesser punishment. As previously stated, anyone simply in it for the lulz is not to be trusted. We should expect them not to be trusted, and they should have expected themselves not to be trusted.
Re:it's a plea deal (Score:4, Funny)
We should expect them not to be trusted, and they should have expected themselves not to be trusted.
But they knew I wouldn't trust them - they expected that - so clearly I cannot drink from the cup in front of me.
Re: (Score:3)
These guys underestimated the resources of the various law enforcement agencies ability to find them and vastly over estimated their own abilities to remain hidden.
We have transitioned to a digital age and a lot of our existing laws were not written for this type of environment. New laws are being formulated, old laws are being modified or held inapplicable but it doesn't happen overnight. One of the most glaring examples is the law against receiving stolen property. If I steal a car and give it to you and
Re:it's a mole! (Score:4, Insightful)
Cold as ice, this Sabu (Score:3)
He stopped, collaborated, and listened!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
On the other hand, it's probably best to just ignore whatever Fox news says. After all, 7 studies have now confirmed that Fox viewers are among the worst informed Americans [thinkprogress.org]. Any time someone says "I saw this on Fox News", my first response will likely be "Do you have a credible source to confirm it?". That should be a source that is not also owned by Rupert Murdoch. There's just too much disinformation on Fox News for it to be worth my time to sort out what's true, what's half-true, and what's out and o
Careful! (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
That's kind of what I was thinking. After they raised a few eyebrows in the beginning, they could have been simply wandering through honeypots while the FBI closed in.
Shameful and Orwellian on so many levels (Score:5, Interesting)
This is why any kind of Hacking intent should never be combined with monetary interests.
That is true, but since the source is Fox News (Rupert Mudoch), as another poster pointed out we need to take this with a huge dose of salt.
If, however, this should turn out to be true, I find it disturbing on so many levels. Is anyone reminded of 1984 at all? The government running an underground resistence organization, to attract and arrest "revolutionaries." I'm not a fan of lulzsec at all, but this story, if at all true, is one of the more overtly Orwellian things I've seen, and living in an age of Orwellian behavior, with western democracies perched on the precipice of right-wing fascism, the middle east largely given over to their brand of sectarian fascism, and authoritarianism on the rise in Russia, China, and elsewhere, that is saying a lot.
What is even more telling, is how blase people are about the idea of a countercultural "leader" inciting criminality and then handing those he's managed to influence over to the authorities for "processing." Too many of us don't even seem to know enough to be ashamed, or appalled, by this kind of thing, so few in fact, that the GOP mouthpiece is essentially bragging about using such methods to take down a group they've found so easy to demonize. A process made easier no doubt, if the story is true, by the very behavior their mole incited and coordinated in the first place. Agent provocateur on steriods.
If this turns out to be at all true, and if we were a healthy democracy, the "leader" and his handlers would be facing serious jailtime, while those incited into this behavior would see a blackmark on their record and probation, hopefully scared straight. But those days died out sometime in the early naughties, and things have only gone downhill from there.
What the fuck is this bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, I am staring to think we need to bludgeon people with a copy of 1984 every time they make a stupid statement about something normal being "Orwellian."
This right here? How they do criminal investigations for criminal organizations. They locate someone involved, catch them committing a crime, arrest them, and then try to get them to turn state's evidence. They use that person to attempt to shut down the entire organization.
This is how they run mob cases and all that kind of shit. If you aren't aware of it, your ignorance is the problem. It is not "Orwellian".
Seriously I think some people on Slashdot are anarchists, they don't think the government should be allowed to enforce ANY laws. Of course then something will come up with a company doing something and they go all communist and demand that the government not so much enforce the law and just get extremely punitive on the company. To me that speaks of a very poor understanding of the concepts of justice and fairness.
Chopping off the head... (Score:2)
They're chopping off the head of an organization that's hasn't operated as a discrete entity for around 9 months?
Or have I missed something? Has Lulzsec operated as Lulzsec (and not part of the overarching Anonymous movement) recently?
Re: (Score:2)
He was arrested about 9 months ago.
Re: (Score:2)
He was arrested about 9 months ago.
Talking about a decapitating strike... for the lulz.
Stop the presses! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
reputable source [washingtonpost.com]
Mmm, delicious yellowcake.
Re:Stop the presses! (Score:4, Insightful)
Fox News editorials are bullshit, but their news reporting is no less accurate than WaPo. I can imagine a known conservative news outlet being able to establish deeper sources within law enforcement than their more liberal counterparts, hence their scoop on the exclusive info. I'm not a conservative btw, and posting anon for obvious reasons.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
but their news reporting is no less accurate than WaPo.
Yeah... I remember how they accurately reported the space shuttle re-entering the atmosphere at 17 times the speed of light too. Anyway... since you couldn't be bothered to google for some non-editorial examples of Fox News 'facts', here's what I found just punching in "fox news facts" into _google image search_.
http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/fnc-an-20110725-ss-facts.jpg [mediamatters.org]
http://isviral.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Fox-News-Chuck-Norris-facts.jpg [isviral.com]
http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/stat [mediamatters.org]
Re:Stop the presses! (Score:5, Interesting)
Fox News went to court to fight for the right to legally lie [projectcensored.org].
Re: (Score:3)
I didn't even read the Fox News article. I trusted those lying bastards in their coverage of Iraq--WMD. THEY BURNED ME BAD. I avoid all Rupert Murdoch lying scum news. They are continually slanting stuff.
The FBI is always cutting off the head of some criminal organization or another. After you've heard it for the nth time, it gets old . . .
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I trusted those lying bastards in their coverage of Iraq--WMD
Which lying bastards, now? The BBC? CNN? NPR? The AP? The state departments of several nations? CBS? MSNBC? The Clinton administration? Nancy Pelosi? Reuters? The NYT? In what fevered, Fox-fetishist way are you imagining that only Fox reported what was being said by people from all sorts of governmental organizations? Are you saying that Saddam was allowing free inspections of the sites where he used to keep tons of VX gas (for example), but that Fox was saying otherwise?
The FBI is always cutting off the head of some criminal organization or another. After you've heard it for the nth time, it gets old . . .
So, something that law enforcement
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Stop the presses! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Watch the daily show. Then you can see Fox news credibility laid bare. However, I do agree one shouldn't but much more faith in any of the competitor's options ("Liberal" as you illiterate "Americans" mistakenly call it.)
Should be interesting to follow... (Score:5, Interesting)
This should be interesting to follow. They may have cut off the head of LulzSec but is this going to be like a hydra?
Certainly there are already other "LulzSec wannabes" out-there following in Sabu's wake.
I have split feelings about this. Lulzsec didn't do anything to directly harm my interests- although, theoretically they could have at any time- yet having rogue groups like LS was a threat to all people in one way or another. On the other hand- a world with no LulzSec would be a threat to us too. When governments can quickly lock down groups like this- government has too much power.
It is probably just and right that Sabu go to jail- but it's also good they couldn't catch him too quickly... if you understand what I mean.
Re: (Score:3)
If you think I'm sympathetitc to the individual- you're wrong. I'm not. They hurt a lot of people and caused a lot of damage. For the Lulz.
I'm sympathetic to the idea that I am glad it is still possible for civilians to be anonymous and be able to look in on some government activities without being immediately caught. It's scary that civilians can do this- it would be even scarier if they couldn't.
Law enforcement knows that there is a potential for them too to be targeted- and that has to give them the
Interesting: (Score:5, Informative)
If it's the same Jeremy Hammond, he's a known item in Chicago for some time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Hammond [wikipedia.org]
The talk page is interesting as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You're making the assumption their activities have been interrupted.... hell this may just piss them off and increase their aggressiveness.
Like kicking a beehive.
Learning from history (Score:4, Insightful)
I wonder if they'll have as much success as Hercules.
A bit more detail here (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/03/06/exclusive-inside-lulzsec-mastermind-turns-on-his-minions/?intcmp=related [foxnews.com]
From Sabu's Twitter account: (Score:5, Interesting)
"They read your mails. Listen to your calls. Break into your wireless routers+sniff your traffic. GPS cars. I'm not talking about terrorists." https://twitter.com/#!/anonymouSabu/status/176683665919721472 [twitter.com]
I guess he really knew what he was talking about.
Re:From Sabu's Twitter account: (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
So he sung like a stool pigeon when they caught him, loudly and urgently enough that they agreed to be lenient with him in exchange for his help catching the others--which he happily gave them--but then he goes to Twitter to explain how he got caught so other people can get away with it?
No, that doesn't add up. That would take more of a spine than he has.
Amazing how everything ceases to be lulz-y when consequences catch up with a person.
Great, Can you say BANKSTERS now? (Score:3, Insightful)
Now that the world is safe from LulzSec, how about some cuffs for the real criminals and their official enablers who have free reign still to this day.
Banksters and officials who enabled them
Fast and Furious
Oath breakers of the US Constitution
Ought to be a full time job right there, no time to screw with medical cannabis, milk farmers, or guitar manufacturer's.,
old article! (Score:3)
from cnet.com, an alternate link:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20072906-17/lulzsec-suspect-arrested%20-in-u.k-reports-say [cnet.com]
LulzSec suspect arrested in U.K., reports say
by Don Reisinger June 21, 2011 6:28 AM PDT
A 19-year-old U.K. man has been arrested on suspicion of hacking and online attacks, the U.K.'s Metropolitan Police announced this morning.
Last night's arrest was part of "a pre-planned intelligence-led operation" that also involved cooperation with the FBI, according to the Metropolitan Police. Following the arrest, the man was brought to a London police station where he is currently in custody for questioning.
Sky News reported early on that the teenager is the mastermind behind LulzSec, a prominent hacking group that has wreaked havoc on several companies and government organizations of late. However, the Metropolitan Police's e-Crime Unit stopped short of saying whether the man in custody might be connected to LulzSec.
"The arrest follows an investigation into network intrusions and Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks against a number of international business and intelligence agencies by what is believed to be the same hacking group," the Metropolitan Police said. "The teenager was arrested on suspicion of Computer Misuse Act, and Fraud Act offences."
For its part, LulzSec seemed bemused by the arrest, with a cheeky post to its Twitter account that it's still in operation.
"Seems the glorious leader of LulzSec got arrested," the group wrote on its Twitter account. "It all over now. Wait, we're all still here! Which poor bastard did they take down?"
foxnews? really? (Score:4, Informative)
Can't we cite a more respectable source for chrissakes?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17270822 [bbc.co.uk]
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/03/06/hector-xavier-monsegur-fbi-lulzsec-arrests_n_1323638.html?ref=uk [huffingtonpost.co.uk]
From a more reputable source: (Score:5, Informative)
'Lulzsec hackers' arrested in international swoop
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17270822 [bbc.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
Only people on the dole and school kids have time to do this shit, the rest of us have to earn an honest living.
Also I suspect he'll remain unemployed for a long time now whether he goes to jail or not. No sane employer will want him within a mile of their systems. There are plenty enough white hat hackers who can go on the payroll first.
He could always freelance as a comedian.
For the lulz...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Sabu is unemployed - what a surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
Only people on the dole and school kids have time to do this shit, the rest of us have to earn an honest living.
A little bitter and prejudiced are we? No, it's not just kids that do this kind of thing. All that malware leeching away your personal data was not designed by teenagers or unemployed people. Software like that is often designed and used by people who are well-educated, often have jobs, and are otherwise just like you except for one minor detail: They think your working class ethos means dick, and they want to actually get ahead in the world rather than working for The Man forever and ever for crap health insurance and a shot at that extra $0.30 raise at the end of the year after using up their "generous" 11 days of vacation for the year... which also counts as their sick days... which means the average person spends their "vacation" being sick, and then gets written up and denied that $0.30 raise for taking too many days off. You might have heard of the most successful malware currently in use: It's called Facebook, and it's a scam that's become so popular that it has been incorporated and now has its own laison with the government (you know how much they hate competition in these kinds of things...)
I know Slashdot is in love with the idea of some lone samurai learning to hack in some temple somewhere, then bravely venturing forth fully versed in the art of code-fu, but it's just as fictional as those samurai movies: The overwhelming majority of people these days learn their trade on the job, or in school, and then they do this kind of stuff on the side. You just hear about the unemployed and school kids a lot more because (a) they're more likely to have deficits in their understanding of how to do this without getting caught and (b) if caught they're not going to be able to put up money for any kind of a legal defense.
No sane employer will want him within a mile of their systems.
You do realize that by denying people access to employment after their jail term has ended, you're leaving them only one option: Criminal activity, correct? The world of crime is a lot more amiable to a meritocracy than the corporate one; They don't try to hold onto weird beliefs like thinking how a person dresses is an indicator of potential, for example. It's just food for thought... not that I expect much thinking from you... you seem to be very narrow minded and prejudiced against the disadvantaged in general, so why would you ever stop and consider that maybe the problem is as much how we're treating them as their lack of ethics? Remember: You can't eat ethics. A very small number of people will be dicks just to be dicks, but the vast majority of people engage in unethical behavior because it has a benefit to them. That benefit is usually pretty basic too: Food, shelter, clothing, sex, etc. Of course, once they've gotten into the criminal world, it's hard to turn back because it's so goddamned profitable. So people wind up sticking a toe in the water and wind up getting pulled in deep. That's how it usually goes... no tricks, no arguments, no politics... just people who had some hard times, reached for the closest life preserver, and got sucked in.
We create the criminals when we allow social injustice.
Re:Sabu is unemployed - what a surprise (Score:4, Interesting)
The world of crime is a lot more amiable to a meritocracy than the corporate one; They don't try to hold onto weird beliefs like thinking how a person dresses is an indicator of potential, for example
And this is why you're a girl in training and not a banker in training.
All sophisticated crimes are confidence tricks. How you dress is a significant indicator of potential.
"Meritocracy" rarely has substantive meaning: it is usually applied when someone without full understanding of a hierarchy fails to appreciate the full set of qualities required of an individual. For example, loyalty in business to an "Old Boys' Club", guaranteeing that personal friends will further each others' interests, is far more important than e.g. who got the highest grade in some stupid aptitude test or who managed to increase profitability most at their previous job.
But it's fortunate that we don't have meritocracy, because it's a euphemism for "might makes right".
Re: (Score:3)
You get a 50% on this one. You have insight on the first half, then fall off a cliff.
No sane employer will want him within a mile of his systems. This is true. He showed blatant disregard for the law, leaked confidential information, and has international connections. While you are correct that taking away legal avenues leaves little other option, this does not in any way change the fact that no one will hire him for a lot of IT jobs. There is a small chance of getting on as a white hat, but this guy s
Re: (Score:3)
And it can be surprisingly effective, Canada's recidivism rate is 3% over the felon's lifetime while the U.S. rate is 66% in the first 3 years.
Re:Sabu is unemployed - what a surprise (Score:4, Informative)
Also I suspect he'll remain unemployed for a long time now whether he goes to jail or not. No sane employer will want him within a mile of their systems.
Yeah.
Kevin "Condor" Mitnick, Author, computer consultant
Kevin Poulson, News Editor, Wired
J-P Assange, no further intro needed. Sold rights to his memoirs for a cool mill.
Mark "Phiber Optik" Abene, successful security consultant
John "Captain Crunch" Draper, wrote EasyWriter for Apple while in jail, later jobs included CTO and company founder.
Sure, convicted black hats have no way to make a living.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh suuure. After all , companies were lining up to hire Mitnick after he came out of prison.
Not.
Re:Sabu is unemployed - what a surprise (Score:4, Informative)
When Mitnick came out of prison he was out of the loop for a while so that's knid of an unfair comparison. Besides, Mitnick used his position to start his own company - and being a famous hacker is a damn good selling point. Still, in a strange twist he made awful decisions for his own company: http://www.2600.com/news/view/article/1531 [2600.com] . And if I was at all security related this is the first kind of person I'd be looking for. I mean think about it, who would you hire to do a security audit: someone who's broken into tons of systems or someone with an MCSE who took a weekend seminar about how to make IIS suck less?
Re:Sabu is unemployed - what a surprise (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Well, well, well. (Score:5, Informative)
I think you're getting LulzSec mixed up with Anonymous. Although there's some crossover between the two, they're generally regarded as separate entities.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I find it endlessly hilarious that you're posting as an Anonymous Coward.
Re:Well, well, well. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is it that when opposition to jail-rape is discussed, an immediate accusation of wanting the accused to live a 'life of luxury' is made? I think we can prevent jail-rape without giving criminals daily massages and pedicures.
Re: (Score:3)
It's a common belief that justice = making a guilty party suffer in kind, but that is *exactly* the mentality that turns prisons into nothing more than graduate school for criminals.
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Insightful)
You do realize that those people you want to see brutalized and tortured in prison regardless of what their crime was are eventually going to get out of prison and be back on the street. With you. Are you sure you want that? Think about it for a second. I already know you have no empathy, but how's your sense of self-preservation? A society of enthusiastic torturers is a society with some seriously bad karma.
Re: (Score:3)
This is where you're wrong. The justice system isn't meant to dole out punishment. It's meant to deliver justice. That's why we have (what's supposed to be) impartial judges and a jury of our peers.
Punishment is the result of the justice system, but it's not the purpose. The purpose of the justice system is to right the wrongs of society. It is to identify the elements in society that need fixing and to fix it.
You set rules to put a value on each criminal act (robbery will cost you 5 years). It doesn't proh
Re: (Score:3)
Rape is considered cruel and unusual punishment - which is in the constitution that you hard liner conservatives love to quote but never seem to understand in full.
When you think about the costs of simple incarceration, without the rape and beatings and so forth thrown in, it's pretty high.
One loses one's family, in many cases, one's possessions (can't take care of them); one loses one's future possibilities, and one loses time that can never be regained.
And you want to throw ass rape on top of it?
Re: (Score:2)
I pretty much knew that that was the case. But I am surprised that the US government is admitting it in national news. Talk about brazen arrogance of power...
Arrogance of power, what the heck are you talking about?
Re: (Score:2)
I pretty much knew that that was the case. But I am surprised that the US government is admitting it in national news. Talk about brazen arrogance of power...
What might actually get slightly interesting is the case of any of the lulzsec victims during the period when the feds had some degree of control... I remember there being a bunch of litigation surrounding victims of various mob groups that the FBI had significantly infiltrated/compromised; but allowed to continue 'business as usual' for a period of time in order to gather evidence or similar. The relatives of those killed were less than pleased to learn that the FBI had sacrificed them for the case. It wou