Path: utzoo!telecom-request Date: Sun, 16 Jun 91 05:55:25 GMT From: Karl Denninger Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Well Len, Was it Worth a Prison Term? Message-ID: Organization: Macro Computer Solutions, Inc., Wheeling, IL Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 462, Message 1 of 7 Lines: 166 In article telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) writes: > The Len Rose saga came to an end this past week when a federal judge > considered the circumstances involved and chose to impose punishment > by placing Len in the custody of the Attorney General of the United > States, or his authorized representative for a period of one year. Of course, the court did NOT find Len guilty. He pled guilty after being browbeat and otherwise harassed to the point where he likely decided that there was no way to win -- even if he was to defend himself successfully against the current charge(s), the government would have found more. That is, he had object examples that they weren't going to leave him alone until and unless they managed to make an example out of him. Note too that his violation (copyright violations primarially as I understand it) is normally a CIVIL matter, not a criminal one. Corporations who do this kind of thing (software piracy) are sued and forced to pay damages -- NOT jailed! > Speaking of the kids, I wonder if Len has explained all this to them > yet. I wonder if they know, or are old enough to understand their dad > is going to prison, and why ... Yeah, I'd explain it to my kids all right. The fact that "my" government decided for reasons unknown to turn a civil matter into a criminal one, that they hounded me from state to state until they finally wore me out, and the insanity of the "Crime" which I was accused of in the first place. The fact that they couldn't manage to find a shread of evidence of the violation they wanted to pin on me, so they kept looking -- and confiscating equipment in an unconsti- tutionally-broad search procedure until they managed to find something they could "use". I'd explain to them the reasonableness of being held essentially at gunpoint in our own home during these search proceedings when I was (and am) no danger to the officers doing the search. And I'd explain to them the insanity of a corporate presence which has gotten so large that it commands the powers of the government of the USA itself. Yes, I would have a lot to explain. I wonder if my kids would decide to be revolutionaries when I was done. Anyone want to take bets? Shall we talk of Steve Jackson Games? A company that was (and is) persecuted for no valid reason at all? A search warrant that was unconstitutionally vague? A company (a RBOC again) that perjured itself in front of more than one court, yet has not been charged with that perjury or punished? Perjury is a CRIME! Not a petty little crime, but a real one with real penalties! I would like to see justice for all -- and those penalties imposed. It'll never happen -- as long as the guilty party works for a quasi-governmental organization like the almighty "phone company". Thank the Gods that Steve Jackson Games has finally decided to file a nice fat lawsuit against the government and all individuals involved. This time, the government and all who were participants in that fiasco deserve to get nailed to the wall. > The point is, some of us are simply getting very tired of the > break-ins, the fraudulent messages, the fact that in order to telnet > to a different site we can no longer do so direct from dialup servers > without a lot of rig-a-ma-role because computer (ab)users have stolen > all the trust which used to exist between sites, and the increasing > scarcity of 'guest' accounts on various sites because the sysadmins > are tired of being eaten alive with fraudulent and destructive usage. Well, I'm glad of that. Now let's apply the law with some consistency. Let's take the case of Bill Vajk, who allegedly CAUGHT a person snooping around on his system not long ago. He's reported it on the net and to the people he believed responsible for that person's behavior. They weren't interested in persuing the matter, although he believed that it was one of their EMPLOYEES who was doing the snooping. Yes, there was a REAL LIVE hacker -- which is, as we all know, ok as long as the hacker is a government ... oops, I meant corporate stooge! Or shall we discuss the case on ddsw1 about three years ago -- I caught an AT&T employee (so he said) on another user's account -- a person who had obviously STOLEN a valid user password. I caught him red-handed I might add. I called the user in question and kicked the phony person off the system -- and changed the real user's password. That person said they were "investigating improper use of a dialout". Oh really? Investigating it by tapping the line, recording the password, and THEN USING IT TO BREAK INTO MY MACHINE? Too bad that wasn't a felony then, as it can be now. I was unable to get the call traced -- and I did try. What I would have given for a valid trace back to someone's desk! Today I would certainly insist on prosecuting the person(s) responsible, and possibly file a civil suit as well. Yes, I think hackers should be punished -- IF they are actually guilty of some crime. My difference of opinion lies in the fact that I think ALL hackers should be punished, including the corporate ones. > Users had better wise up to one fact: the federal government is going > to continue to crack down on abusers of the net and this media. And > please, none of your hysterical freedom of speech arguments in my > mail, thank you. No one gives an iota what you write about, but when > you get your hands in the password file, rip off root or wheel > accounts, run programs deceptive to other users designed to rip off > their accounts also and generally behave like a two-bit burglar or > con-artist, expect to get treated like one when you get caught. See above. I want to see some equity in the law. I've had my equipment abused by those same people, and so have others. I want to see ALL of them prosecuted -- including those hooligans who wear the government's insignia. A thief or assailent does not become less of one due to having on a uniform of some "power and authority". > out of the penitentiary a better person than when he went in. The > penitentiary can be, and frequently is a therapeutic experience, at > least for the people who think about what it was that caused them to > get there in the first place. The penitentiary can be, and frequently is, a place when men get gang-raped (without recourse) and exposed to all kinds of "wonderful" influences. It's rarely a theraputic experience. Look at the recidivism ratios and reconsider your statement. Your "head-in-the-sand" knowledge level is showing, Mr. Townson. > socially irresponsible behavior (which some people who call themselves > 'socially responsible' seem to condone or wink at) has to stop. Now. Yes it does. Including what appears to be libel of a person who is in no position to defend himself right now. > And a knowledgeable sysadmin who is quietly cooperating with the > government tells me a federal grand jury is to returning > another cycle of indictments. Need I say more? Yes, you MUST say more. Since you want to fly this flag, here is what you must do: 1) Name your source. We all ought to know just who this "cooperating" sysadmin is. After all, we all saw just what happened to the last "cooperating" sysadmin, didn't we (Jolnet)? Or what kind of false accusations and pretenses the last "cooperating" company had to do with this (SWBT in this case). There are groups, the EFF being one, which are trying to stop this kind of fraudulent use of the criminal system. How about it, Pat? Name your source! (I could take a likely guess, but that might constitute libel or slander -- so I won't. I could easily be wrong on this one). 2) If you know who is under investigation, name them too. Same reasons here. If the people in question have really done something wrong, the government ought to be able to prove it easily -- it's a historical fact, right? If not, let's get the machinery rolling to protect them against more unwarranted intrusions. Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, !ddsw1!karl) Public Access Data Line: [+1 708 808-7300], Voice: [+1 708 808-7200] Anon. arch. (nuucp) 00:00-06:00 C[SD]T, req: /u/public/sources/DIRECTORY/README