British Hacker Fights Extradition

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by CardinalSin, Feb 16, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:


    I'm not going to debate the ethics of hacking, as opposed to any other crime but what the hell is going on with our extradition policies? A British bloke can be extradited to the US and face 45 years for exploiting poor security and hacking into their networks, meanwhile American A10 pilots can casually kill our soldiers with complete impunity, not even a disciplinary hearing? US prosecutors threatened him with incarceration in Guantanamo Bay as a terrorist. They also threatened him with 70 years in nick, along with millions of dollars in fines. The US claimed that he caused about 700k worth of damage, but I suspect they're talking shiite and that the only damage was political embarassment along with some overtime for their blokes to apply the appropriate patches and do some auditing. A bit mental to do it right after 9/11 though. The bloke must be a right 'dime bar' (anyone remember that advert?)

    It just shows how "equal" we are in the partnership doesn't it? Whatever happened to the Natwest Three? Are they still banged up in prison in the US waiting trial, meanwhile that A10 crew are tucking in to another tasty steak. Bunch of arrse.
  2. Got to agree with you there. They can't release even a video tape yet the British are expected to bend over backwards to apease the big boy in the playground.
  3. They're quite likely tucking into a tasty steak themselves. The trial date is set for September, in the meantime, they're out and about in Houston. They're not allowed leave town, but neither are they in jail right now.

  4. 45 years!? He's hardly a child rapist.

    If the security is that sh!t on US computers that a hacker in Scotland can access them and cause 700k in damages (no doubt the bill for improving their security), maybe they should be thanking him for highlighting their weaknesses.

    If he'd approached the Iranian gov. and attempted to sell the information, for example, there may be more of a case, but in my opinion the government should sign out a backbone and tell the yanks to get fcuked.
  5. I would have conducted a trial here, behind closed doors, no SPAMs or press allowed.

    This trial would have found him innocent, on the grounds that if the 97 computers were that fcuking easy to break in to, it was like leaving your car running outside your house.

    ie. You leave your car running outside your house, it gets pinched, insurance don't pay out as it was your fault.

    Send back an e-mail to George W saying, "nah, we've found him innocent and are now covering the whole thing up" With a PS "America Get FCUKED!!!"
  6. Ord_Sgt

    Ord_Sgt RIP

    You got a link to that CS?

    If true no way on earth should he be extradited.
  7. If we don't send back rapists and murders to countries where they may face abuse of their human rights, why do we send people back to America?

    They also abuse human rights, Guantanamo Bay, and have the death penalty. In fact as their head of state they have a man who is a legend in his own lunch break for sending more people to the chair than any other. (I think, amongst Texan governers or something)
  8. Surely when it comes to cases like this, we as a country should "look after our own" to some extent (and I don't mean he should be let off, just that he should be punished fairly by us). It seems to me like another case of the government selling us down the river to appease someone else.
  9. Ord_Sgt

    Ord_Sgt RIP

    Thats a good point RFUK. They can present the evidence and try him here.
  10. If they can't lock their computers up, it isn't his fault.

    Private trial, found not guilty, whitewash the whole thing.


    Or tell it to 'em straight.

    No pilots at coroners course you can all get to fcuk.

    Yes, my emotions on this subject do run my life at the moment.
  11. what would happen to a signals type who wired up a server to the net with the password set to er "password?
    bit like leaving a car with engine running and the key in it don't be suprised if someone goes joy riding in it.
  12. As the yanks have not signed their part of the treaty for sending UK/US bods back and forth for trials, we should not comly until they do!

    Althought this was set up orginally so we could deport "suspected" terrorists to them, the wording was crap so the yanks are using for everything, and as usual our government bend over and take it like Rio rent boys!
  13. I agree with Beerfunts first comment.

    However, even if the guy wan't an anti war bod who destroyed lots of data, or even some bonehead who did it for fun, the fact that he entered the DoD computer means that a huge amount of money has to be spent cleansing the system. Such tasks as finding the entry point, locating off the shelf and bespoke back door entry programs, checking for damage - from virus' set to go off at a later date to just the hackers 'tag' - and not least, seeing if any information has been stolen.

    Further, it may not be a case of insecure systems - we have all heard of programs that will enter different passwords into an entry page of a website - even if You have a three goes and You're out login system which checks an IP address there are still ways round it. The only secure computer is one not connected to a telephone line. Imagine having all those Recruiting Centres, forts and Washington offices to have a tilt at.
  14. No, it's a super secure system that a lone hacker can get into. :shock:

    Imagine what the large teams of hackers employed by other countries intelligence agencies could manage.
  15. Could, RFUK - or do?