5 ms·

What's scary to me is that the crime doesn't fit the punishment. We're going to take a genius away from civilization where he could use his potential in constru

by zelon88 10y ago

What's scary to me is that the crime doesn't fit the punishment. We're going to take a genius away from civilization where he could use his potential in constructive ways, and lock him up for something that, realistically, isn't as bad as when bankers launder many millions of dollars, or when identity thieves steal. So we will probably give this guy a life sentence for being smarter than 90% of the American workforce and almost uncovering secrets that shouldn't be being kept anyway. Why can't we throw the book at corrupt politicians and businessmen this hard?

tptacek 10y ago
He's a genius? I thought the US was embarrassed by how dumb the vulnerabilities he exploited were. Which is it?
- lvs 10y ago
  Lame astroturf rhetoric. The poster has a legitimate point and didn't write the BBC article.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    What's "astroturf rhetoric"?
    - throwanem 10y ago
      You being called an NSA shill again.
    - justratsinacoat 10y ago
      I assume he's referring to your intentional conflation of two different peoples' claims (namely, 'zelon88 ("[w]e're going to take a genius away from civilization" [0]) and the writer of the article ("Earlier, his lawyer said his alleged hacking had "embarrassed" US authorities")): >He's a genius? I thought the US was embarrassed by how dumb the vulnerabilities he exploited were. Which is it? [0] Probably assumed you were an astroturfer and/or troll, because, hey, that's pretty shitty behaviour. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515199 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515199 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515231 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515231
      - lvs 10y ago
        Spot on.
      - tptacek 10y ago
        You think he's a genius? Can you flesh that argument out a bit?
        justratsinacoat 10y ago
        Do I think he's a genius? Go read my comment again and see if you can understand my very simple position against your conflating different people and their different arguments. Mods, please read this exchange, including 'tptacek's initial reply to 'zelon88. If this style of trolling is accepted on HN, I'd appreciate knowing about it -- I dearly love it and would like to ply it in these digital halls. Do you have to be as well-known a user as 'tptacek in order to get away with it?
        tptacek 10y ago
        No, I acknowledge that you might not think he's a genius --- in fact, I'd be surprised if you thought he was, hence my request. What I don't acknowledge is that it's reasonable to comment about the "shitty behavior" of someone who makes a civil statement you happen to disagree with --- or, worse, a civil statement you actually do agree with, but don't want to acknowledge. If you want to ask the "mods" something, the best way to do that is to mail hn@ycombinator.com. It's unlikely they're going to see your comment (this thread is old, and this part of the thread is buried pretty low in it).
        justratsinacoat 10y ago
        >What I don't acknowledge is that it's reasonable to comment about the "shitty behavior" of someone who makes a civil statement you happen to disagree with --- or, worse, a civil statement you actually do agree with, but don't want to acknowledge. Whether I disagree with you is immaterial. I merely refuse to stand by while some popular bully puts words in others' mouths. You can go on all day about how very, very civil you are, but it's clear to me that replying with a totally unsubstantive comment like >He's a genius? I thought the US was embarrassed by how dumb the vulnerabilities he exploited were. Which is it? [0] when the only the first three short words are relevant to the parent's actual statements [1]. The others were from the article, which you demonstratively either a) believe 'zelon88 wrote or b) have chosen to conflate with 'zelon88's statements. "Which is it?" You're obviously not interested in discussions with people who don't agree with you -- I can tell by the way you choose not to engage with their arguments. You've obviously calmed down now, but hiding behind claims of civility shows a shocking lack of self-awareness, particularly in light of what's actually happened. Hope you're doing OK! Keep trolling! [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515231 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515231 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515199 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515199
- s_q_b 10y ago
  Well, in fairness he is somewhat smart. Most people don't successfully hack the FBI and the Federal Reserve.
- popmystack 10y ago
  The U.S. wasn't as smart as it should have been. Let's put it that way.
- lhnz 10y ago
  Are they mutually exclusive?
s_q_b 10y ago
The CFAA is too blunt of an instrument. At the very least it should have options for lesser charges. But for some reason every politician's reaction to cyber events is to make the CFAA more draconian. President Obama is actually in favor of adding more provisions by amendment this year. I'm not sure of the correct way to handle cybercrime laws, but I know the CFAA isn't it.
- micaksica 10y ago
  > But for some reason every politician's reaction to cyber events is to make the CFAA more draconian. I forget who said this, but it's because to a lot of this generation of politicians, a lot of "hacking" and "cybercrime" is a modern-day witchcraft. Aside from a few allies in Congress, technological aptitude (and those that actually understand cybersecurity) will likely lag until a lot of these older career politicians are replaced by "digital natives". It's not just politicians, either. Some execs at non-tech companies respond to penetration tests in the same way. "How did you do that?" "Why is this possible?" It's just completely outside of their realm of knowledge, and they trust their systems to be as failsafe as most mechanical ones.
  - watwatwatwat 10y ago
    And this is our fault as programmers. We build crappy systems.
    - xj9 10y ago
      No, its their fault as executives. Secure systems are expensive and they take time to build properly, which is fully at odds with, "I need this done yesterday". Unfortunately (for them), since they cut the checks, the also get what they pay for.
swayvil 10y ago
we need to send a clear message to all the other geniuses. Don't even look at the Man sideways. Keep your head down and hope he walks on by.
dahdum 10y ago
I don't think he was uncovering any secrets that shouldn't be kept, he sure seemed to target credit card and identity data. Reading the indictment he comes across to me as a credit card thief wrapping his crimes in activism. https://regmedia.co.uk/2016/05/10/lauri_love.pdf https://regmedia.co.uk/2016/05/10/lauri_love.pdf "LOVE and his conspirators unlawfully obtained information the victims identified in thisIndictment morethan 100,000 employee records, including names, social security numbers, addresses, phone numbers, and salary information, and more than 100,000 financial records, including credit card numbers and names, and caused loss aggregating in excess of $5 million" "On or about July4, 2013, LOVE wrote the following in an IRC chatroom using the online nickname "peace": "it worked ... we have... easily 5-10k contractor and gov credit cards " "That same day, LOVE uploaded to a computer server a spreadsheet containing information obtained from iq.govwin.com, including names, job titles,addresses, phone numbers, and approximately 23,000 credit cards numbers with expiration dates and items purchased. Other members of the conspiracy obtained copies of the spreadsheet from the server on or about January 24,2014, and on or about March 10,2014" In other chats published in the indictment, Love is alleged to have said: "You have no idea how much we can fuck with the US government if we wanted to," and, after describing the data as "really sensitive", adding: "It's basically every piece of information you'd need to do full identity theft on any employee or contractor for the [government agency]." https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/28/us-briton-hacking-charges-nasa-lauri-love https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/28/us-briton-hack...
dandelany 10y ago
How can you compare the crime to the punishment when we don't know his punishment yet? He hasn't been convicted, let alone sentenced, and he won't get anywhere near 99 years.
mSparks 10y ago
whats annoying to me is this nonsense while the us employs people to hack into other government systems - including the uk, with impunity. (nsa hacking tools leak). UK should be giving lauri love a new identity and a fat paycheck. Not pandering to the administration of a country soon to be run by either a crazed sickly war hawk or a full retard that gets all his world news from fox.

by zelon88 10y ago

tptacek 10y ago

He's a genius? I thought the US was embarrassed by how dumb the vulnerabilities he exploited were. Which is it?

lvs 10y ago
Lame astroturf rhetoric. The poster has a legitimate point and didn't write the BBC article.
- tptacek 10y ago
  What's "astroturf rhetoric"?
  - throwanem 10y ago
    You being called an NSA shill again.
  - justratsinacoat 10y ago
    I assume he's referring to your intentional conflation of two different peoples' claims (namely, 'zelon88 ("[w]e're going to take a genius away from civilization" [0]) and the writer of the article ("Earlier, his lawyer said his alleged hacking had "embarrassed" US authorities")): >He's a genius? I thought the US was embarrassed by how dumb the vulnerabilities he exploited were. Which is it? [0] Probably assumed you were an astroturfer and/or troll, because, hey, that's pretty shitty behaviour. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515199 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515199 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515231 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515231
    - lvs 10y ago
      Spot on.
    - tptacek 10y ago
      You think he's a genius? Can you flesh that argument out a bit?
      - justratsinacoat 10y ago
        Do I think he's a genius? Go read my comment again and see if you can understand my very simple position against your conflating different people and their different arguments. Mods, please read this exchange, including 'tptacek's initial reply to 'zelon88. If this style of trolling is accepted on HN, I'd appreciate knowing about it -- I dearly love it and would like to ply it in these digital halls. Do you have to be as well-known a user as 'tptacek in order to get away with it?
        tptacek 10y ago
        No, I acknowledge that you might not think he's a genius --- in fact, I'd be surprised if you thought he was, hence my request. What I don't acknowledge is that it's reasonable to comment about the "shitty behavior" of someone who makes a civil statement you happen to disagree with --- or, worse, a civil statement you actually do agree with, but don't want to acknowledge. If you want to ask the "mods" something, the best way to do that is to mail hn@ycombinator.com. It's unlikely they're going to see your comment (this thread is old, and this part of the thread is buried pretty low in it).
        justratsinacoat 10y ago
        >What I don't acknowledge is that it's reasonable to comment about the "shitty behavior" of someone who makes a civil statement you happen to disagree with --- or, worse, a civil statement you actually do agree with, but don't want to acknowledge. Whether I disagree with you is immaterial. I merely refuse to stand by while some popular bully puts words in others' mouths. You can go on all day about how very, very civil you are, but it's clear to me that replying with a totally unsubstantive comment like >He's a genius? I thought the US was embarrassed by how dumb the vulnerabilities he exploited were. Which is it? [0] when the only the first three short words are relevant to the parent's actual statements [1]. The others were from the article, which you demonstratively either a) believe 'zelon88 wrote or b) have chosen to conflate with 'zelon88's statements. "Which is it?" You're obviously not interested in discussions with people who don't agree with you -- I can tell by the way you choose not to engage with their arguments. You've obviously calmed down now, but hiding behind claims of civility shows a shocking lack of self-awareness, particularly in light of what's actually happened. Hope you're doing OK! Keep trolling! [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515231 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515231 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515199 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515199
s_q_b 10y ago
Well, in fairness he is somewhat smart. Most people don't successfully hack the FBI and the Federal Reserve.
popmystack 10y ago
The U.S. wasn't as smart as it should have been. Let's put it that way.
lhnz 10y ago
Are they mutually exclusive?

s_q_b 10y ago

The CFAA is too blunt of an instrument. At the very least it should have options for lesser charges. But for some reason every politician's reaction to cyber events is to make the CFAA more draconian. President Obama is actually in favor of adding more provisions by amendment this year. I'm not sure of the correct way to handle cybercrime laws, but I know the CFAA isn't it.

micaksica 10y ago
> But for some reason every politician's reaction to cyber events is to make the CFAA more draconian. I forget who said this, but it's because to a lot of this generation of politicians, a lot of "hacking" and "cybercrime" is a modern-day witchcraft. Aside from a few allies in Congress, technological aptitude (and those that actually understand cybersecurity) will likely lag until a lot of these older career politicians are replaced by "digital natives". It's not just politicians, either. Some execs at non-tech companies respond to penetration tests in the same way. "How did you do that?" "Why is this possible?" It's just completely outside of their realm of knowledge, and they trust their systems to be as failsafe as most mechanical ones.
- watwatwatwat 10y ago
  And this is our fault as programmers. We build crappy systems.
  - xj9 10y ago
    No, its their fault as executives. Secure systems are expensive and they take time to build properly, which is fully at odds with, "I need this done yesterday". Unfortunately (for them), since they cut the checks, the also get what they pay for.

swayvil 10y ago

we need to send a clear message to all the other geniuses. Don't even look at the Man sideways. Keep your head down and hope he walks on by.

dahdum 10y ago

I don't think he was uncovering any secrets that shouldn't be kept, he sure seemed to target credit card and identity data. Reading the indictment he comes across to me as a credit card thief wrapping his crimes in activism. https://regmedia.co.uk/2016/05/10/lauri_love.pdf https://regmedia.co.uk/2016/05/10/lauri_love.pdf "LOVE and his conspirators unlawfully obtained information the victims identified in thisIndictment morethan 100,000 employee records, including names, social security numbers, addresses, phone numbers, and salary information, and more than 100,000 financial records, including credit card numbers and names, and caused loss aggregating in excess of $5 million" "On or about July4, 2013, LOVE wrote the following in an IRC chatroom using the online nickname "peace": "it worked ... we have... easily 5-10k contractor and gov credit cards " "That same day, LOVE uploaded to a computer server a spreadsheet containing information obtained from iq.govwin.com, including names, job titles,addresses, phone numbers, and approximately 23,000 credit cards numbers with expiration dates and items purchased. Other members of the conspiracy obtained copies of the spreadsheet from the server on or about January 24,2014, and on or about March 10,2014" In other chats published in the indictment, Love is alleged to have said: "You have no idea how much we can fuck with the US government if we wanted to," and, after describing the data as "really sensitive", adding: "It's basically every piece of information you'd need to do full identity theft on any employee or contractor for the [government agency]." https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/28/us-briton-hacking-charges-nasa-lauri-love https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/28/us-briton-hack...

dandelany 10y ago

How can you compare the crime to the punishment when we don't know his punishment yet? He hasn't been convicted, let alone sentenced, and he won't get anywhere near 99 years.

mSparks 10y ago

whats annoying to me is this nonsense while the us employs people to hack into other government systems - including the uk, with impunity. (nsa hacking tools leak). UK should be giving lauri love a new identity and a fat paycheck. Not pandering to the administration of a country soon to be run by either a crazed sickly war hawk or a full retard that gets all his world news from fox.