7 ms·
$600k for 6 years of legal battle and facing felony charges? no bueno
by lgats 8mo ago
$600k for 6 years of legal battle and facing felony charges? no bueno
- Aurornis 8mo agoThe 6 year, $600K lawsuit was something they initiated against the county. The initial charges against them were initially dropped to misdemeanors and then dismissed entirely, but that was a separate matter resolved earlier.
- giantg2 8mo agoEven being charged without conviction can result in a serious reduction in job opportunities.
- tptacek 8mo agoProbably not in this case though.
- giantg2 8mo agoIt's hard to say if they would be able to gain security clearances in the future. Not to mention automated application systems will drop them from the system immediately with a prior arrest.
- tptacek 8mo agoOne of them went on to start their own physical pentest firm. I think they're doing fine. I also think if they'd lost clearances, or ran into later clearance problems, that would have made it into their complaint. I don't know, maybe you're right. It's not like I disagree with them about suing.
- cartoonworld 8mo agoI mean it was fine for these guys because they got huge press and happen to be in an industry that can handle this. They've got experience, current employment, industry contacts, and there's really barely a functional college curriculum, or certification track for this. You #1 need to be trusted to break in since you know, they teach each other how to break into high-security facilities. I really just wanna point out that getting contracts for government administrative building is already like, way in and near the top of the game, this could have set them back 9 months or none at all, still, someone has to be held accountable when there is an obvious miscarriage like this. I mean they called their boss! They had a special letter! Why didn't shitty sheriff just like demand that the security chief come out and make some calls? 600k sounds fair I suppose but 6 years sure doesn't when its an elected official!
- tptacek 8mo agoCivil litigation takes for-ev-er.
- LadyCailin 8mo agoTHIS should be illegal. If you are arrested and have all charges dropped, you should not show up on any database whatsoever, nor be required to answer “yes” to “gave you been arrested.”
- tptacek 8mo agoThe SF86 has a 7-year lookback on arrests. Clearance is fundamentally discretionary, though; it's a risk assessment. I don't think you have even a due process right to it. I say all this but --- knowing that the principals in this story might read this thread and drop in and correct me, which would be awesome --- I think it's actually more likely that their careers benefited from this news story, and that they probably didn't lose any cleared business from it. I can't say enough that these two became industry celebrities over this case.
- dragonwriter 8mo ago> Clearance is fundamentally discretionary, though; it's a risk assessment. I don't think you have even a due process right to it. Security clearance is subject to due process protections (at least, insofar as it is a component of government hiring and continuation of employment), because government employment is subject to due process protections and the courts have not allowed security clearance requirements to be an end-run around that.
- tptacek 8mo agoAre you sure about this? I looked into it, but only for about 45 seconds, and there are cases like Navy v. Egan that basically say the opposite. (I'm going to keep saying: this is just an abstract argument; I don't think there's any evidence these two pentesters had any clearance issues.)
- dragonwriter 8mo agoNavy v. Egan (1988) acknowledges a due process protection but limits it to procedural due process, not review of the merits of the clearance determination (i.e., the due process protection does not extend to substantive due process.) Subsequent cases (mostly at the Federal Circuit, I can’t find the Supreme Court getting involved much since) like Cheney v. DOJ (2007) and Cruz-Martinez v. DHS (2020) have developed what that requires. For cases outside of government employment, though the decisions so far are only at the trial level, Perkins Coie LLC vs. DOJ (2025) and Zaid v. Executive Office of the President (2025) are worth checking out in this regard.
- red-iron-pine 8mo agoprior arrests mean nothing and most ATS won't flag you; you could be innocent and they let you go. prior convictions are a different story. in most cases our ATS won't even ask, instead it'll come up in a background check after you clear the first HR hurdles. even then arrests may not show up.
- hn_throwaway_99 8mo agoIs that accurate? Being charged with a crime but then having charges subsequently dropped shouldn't show up in a background check. Plus, given their line of work, I think in their profession it would basically be a badge of honor.
- xvector 8mo agoIt does show up in background checks unfortunately, and it is considered.
- giantg2 8mo agoYou'd have to get it expunged for it to not show up. Even then, it will still show up for security clearances and such.
- jimt1234 8mo agoCan confirm. I needed a security clearance for government contracting work when I was in my mid-30s. The background check flagged a dismissed charge from when I was a teenager.
- port443 8mo agoYes it absolutely matters. My brother was charged with three felonies in his only arrest, all of them dropped. It shows up in his background report and no company has cared (or taken the time to notice) that they are dropped charges and not convictions. He's basically treated like a felon and effectively got bumped out of his career.
- ryandrake 8mo agoAlso, I've seen many job applications that ask a question like: "Have you ever been arrested for a crime, regardless of the outcome?" Presumably mere involvement with law enforcement (even if acquitted or charges dropped) is some kind of signal in these guys' risk formulas.
- treebeard901 8mo ago
- jongjong 8mo agoIt seems like a lot. It's not like they were in court full time.
- red-iron-pine 8mo agohow much did those lawyers cost to get the criminal charges dropped? 600k would certainly be on the high end, but 50k wouldn't be crazy. and then impacts for their career, sheer ineptitude of the gubmnt, etc.
- edm0nd 8mo agoI'd gladly take such a payout. Split 2 ways, that is still 300k. Parked in an investment at 5% a year, that's an easy +$15,000/year for the rest of your life.
- nofriend 8mo agoOnce the lawyers take their cut, you could probably split a ham sandwich between the two of you.
- adrr 8mo agoHow much did they spend on lawyers?
- jiveturkey 8mo agoI would guess this would be a contingency case, which would typically be 40%.
- tptacek 8mo agoThis isn't a felony case. In fact, I'm not sure it ever was? It's not clear from their amended complaint, but they were ultimately charged with simple trespassing, a misdemeanor. Those trespassing charges were themselves dismissed a few months later. What we're talking about today is the resolution of what looks to me (not a lawyer) mostly like a defamation case. Were they defamed? Absolutely. The problem is, to get anything useful out of a defamation case, you need to demonstrate damages. They were accused of a crime --- per se defamation --- but the point of the suit is to recover damages. I don't want to be glib, and I'm very prepared to be wrong, but the Dallas County Courthouse Incident is likely one of the top 3 world events to have happened to both these pentesters. They've been cause celebres in the field for years and years. It might be pretty tricky to actually demonstrate damages.
- lazyasciiart 8mo agoLost clearances at least must count for something.
- tptacek 8mo agoDid they lose clearances? If they did, it's not in their civil complaint.
- lazyasciiart 8mo agoI didn’t see how long it took for the charges to change from felony to misdemeanor before being dropped. It would be standard for clearances to be suspended for investigation when you get charged with a felony. (You have to report even an arrest or misdemeanor, but it’s less likely they’ll suspend it while investigating you for those).
- tptacek 8mo agoTheir lawyers issued a press release that sketched out the timeline.
- sophacles 8mo ago