5 ms·

Free Jeremy Hammond

85 points by sinak 13y ago

bcl 13y ago
The only mention of him on the EFF site is from June. Are they involved at all? https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/jeremy-hammond-case-demonstrates-draconian-nature-cfaa https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/jeremy-hammond-case-de...
taspeotis 13y ago
Can someone please educate me on what the need for a "time served" sentence is? According to Wikipedia, this guy was (in part?) responsible for hacking Stratfor which resulted in a bunch of credit card fraud [1]. > [posted] stolen credit card data, one containing 3,956 items and the other with 13,191 items. Next they posted a set of over 30,000 items > ... > The hackers said they used the credit card data to make donations to various charities, including the Red Cross, Save the Children and CARE. However, one security expert stated that the charities will never receive the payments, claiming that instead, customers will report the fraudulent transaction, and the credit cards will return the money to the customer using a charge back. Ironically, this will most likely be a minus for those charities as they lose out on the fraudulent donations, along with the nominal bank service charge that customers typically must pay simply for processing/re-processing. As someone whose VPS provider was "compromised" and a few weeks later had fraudulent transactions appeared on my credit card, it's stressful to be arbitrarily out of pocket $500 and then stressful/annoying to go through the chargeback process and get a new card and update your billing details everywhere. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratfor#2011_hacking_incident http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratfor#2011_hacking_incident
- acomjean 13y ago
  This happened to my Cousin a year ago. A small donation to the PBS in NY. Oddly he was a PBS member but knew he wouldn't put any membership on the card that was charged. Apparently these small donations are just used to check if a stolen cred card is valid.
btilly 13y ago
I know nothing about him. So before jumping up and down and cheering, I went to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Hammond http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Hammond to look it up. He sounds like a fairly radicalized activist who did some seriously questionable stuff, and will do it again given a chance. I applaud him for being true to his ethics. But can see why the government goes after him. Other than the solitary (we shouldn't do that at all the way we do), I cannot support not punishing him for illegal acts he knowingly did.
- heyadayo 13y ago
  Interesting: In February 2013, the defense filed a motion asking presiding Judge Preska to recuse herself from the case on the basis that Preska's husband, Thomas Kavaler, had an email address released in the Stratfor disclosure and works with Stratfor clients that were affected by the hack. Hammond’s legal team stated that Kavaler’s status “as both a victim of the alleged crimes of the accused and an attorney to many other victims creates an appearance of partiality too strong to be disregarded, requiring disqualification”.[48][49] On February 21, 2013, Judge Preska denied the request for recusal because her husband did not recall subscribing to Stratfor's mailing list.[50]
  - tptacek 13y ago
    And? He admitted he hacked Stratfor. He wrote a short essay after his conviction congratulating himself for doing so. I'm not sure I even understand the innuendo. What, if someone hacks the Washington Post, no judge in the country can hear their case?
- 59nadir 13y ago
  > He sounds like a fairly radicalized activist who did some seriously questionable stuff Most of his arrests are either for stuff I don't care about (i.e. possession of marijuana, which is just a stupid law) or for things I'm, to some extent, happy someone is doing even if I wouldn't ever do them myself. The most misguided one seems to be storming a restaurant and harassing the guests, which is just misdirected bullshit even if you do dislike the owner. The guests hadn't done anything wrong. Beating the shit out of an anti-gay protester I couldn't possibly care less about, though. Going to a pride parade and protesting against homosexuality should get your ass kicked, even if it's against the law. The law isn't "what's right" so while I'm not a violent person myself I can't see an issue with that one.
carlosdp 13y ago
So am I to understand that it should be completely fine to compromise systems illegally as long as they belong to a company that can be construed as "evil"? Would this campaign exist if he had physically broken in to Stratfor instead of electronically? Not every hack-tivist is a victim of the system, imho.
- tptacek 13y ago
  Yes, that is what you are to understand from this page.
rdl 13y ago
Advocating for comparable sentencing between online crimes and physical crimes seems a lot more supportable than advocating repeal of all online/computer crime laws.
chrsm 13y ago
Speaking as someone who was familiar with Jeremy many years ago, I feel compelled to say that despite his more "radical" nature (as some have noted), he really is a great person. I'm not happy that he is currently facing a long time in prison (again). But he's as truer to his beliefs than anyone I've ever met. Unfortunately, his ideals aren't an excuse for breaking the law. Nonetheless, I wish him the best of luck with his case.
ballard 13y ago
The problem is that even one poorly behaving (h)activist sets a precedent for average people against all other activists including those that perform a societal good in a very ethical but technically illegal manner (Snowden). It also sets a poor example for others coming of age. How things are accomplished is of more importance than what is accomplished. Activists should plan carefully by seeking out likely anticipated consequences before pulling the trigger. Otherwise, it's just reactive, aggressive chaos that doesn't go very far.
noptic 13y ago
>"In November 2012, after being held for eight months without trial, Hammond was denied bail ..." So he is already in prison for 1 1/2 years without being sentenced? Sounds like an interesting "justice" system. I understand you can not let him walk, but eight month without a trial? And then he was denied bail? And why solitary confinement?

85 points by sinak 13y ago

bcl 13y ago

The only mention of him on the EFF site is from June. Are they involved at all? https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/jeremy-hammond-case-demonstrates-draconian-nature-cfaa https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/jeremy-hammond-case-de...

taspeotis 13y ago

Can someone please educate me on what the need for a "time served" sentence is? According to Wikipedia, this guy was (in part?) responsible for hacking Stratfor which resulted in a bunch of credit card fraud [1]. > [posted] stolen credit card data, one containing 3,956 items and the other with 13,191 items. Next they posted a set of over 30,000 items > ... > The hackers said they used the credit card data to make donations to various charities, including the Red Cross, Save the Children and CARE. However, one security expert stated that the charities will never receive the payments, claiming that instead, customers will report the fraudulent transaction, and the credit cards will return the money to the customer using a charge back. Ironically, this will most likely be a minus for those charities as they lose out on the fraudulent donations, along with the nominal bank service charge that customers typically must pay simply for processing/re-processing. As someone whose VPS provider was "compromised" and a few weeks later had fraudulent transactions appeared on my credit card, it's stressful to be arbitrarily out of pocket $500 and then stressful/annoying to go through the chargeback process and get a new card and update your billing details everywhere. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratfor#2011_hacking_incident http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratfor#2011_hacking_incident

acomjean 13y ago
This happened to my Cousin a year ago. A small donation to the PBS in NY. Oddly he was a PBS member but knew he wouldn't put any membership on the card that was charged. Apparently these small donations are just used to check if a stolen cred card is valid.

btilly 13y ago

I know nothing about him. So before jumping up and down and cheering, I went to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Hammond http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Hammond to look it up. He sounds like a fairly radicalized activist who did some seriously questionable stuff, and will do it again given a chance. I applaud him for being true to his ethics. But can see why the government goes after him. Other than the solitary (we shouldn't do that at all the way we do), I cannot support not punishing him for illegal acts he knowingly did.

heyadayo 13y ago
Interesting: In February 2013, the defense filed a motion asking presiding Judge Preska to recuse herself from the case on the basis that Preska's husband, Thomas Kavaler, had an email address released in the Stratfor disclosure and works with Stratfor clients that were affected by the hack. Hammond’s legal team stated that Kavaler’s status “as both a victim of the alleged crimes of the accused and an attorney to many other victims creates an appearance of partiality too strong to be disregarded, requiring disqualification”.[48][49] On February 21, 2013, Judge Preska denied the request for recusal because her husband did not recall subscribing to Stratfor's mailing list.[50]
- tptacek 13y ago
  And? He admitted he hacked Stratfor. He wrote a short essay after his conviction congratulating himself for doing so. I'm not sure I even understand the innuendo. What, if someone hacks the Washington Post, no judge in the country can hear their case?
59nadir 13y ago
> He sounds like a fairly radicalized activist who did some seriously questionable stuff Most of his arrests are either for stuff I don't care about (i.e. possession of marijuana, which is just a stupid law) or for things I'm, to some extent, happy someone is doing even if I wouldn't ever do them myself. The most misguided one seems to be storming a restaurant and harassing the guests, which is just misdirected bullshit even if you do dislike the owner. The guests hadn't done anything wrong. Beating the shit out of an anti-gay protester I couldn't possibly care less about, though. Going to a pride parade and protesting against homosexuality should get your ass kicked, even if it's against the law. The law isn't "what's right" so while I'm not a violent person myself I can't see an issue with that one.

carlosdp 13y ago

So am I to understand that it should be completely fine to compromise systems illegally as long as they belong to a company that can be construed as "evil"? Would this campaign exist if he had physically broken in to Stratfor instead of electronically? Not every hack-tivist is a victim of the system, imho.

tptacek 13y ago
Yes, that is what you are to understand from this page.

rdl 13y ago

Advocating for comparable sentencing between online crimes and physical crimes seems a lot more supportable than advocating repeal of all online/computer crime laws.

chrsm 13y ago

Speaking as someone who was familiar with Jeremy many years ago, I feel compelled to say that despite his more "radical" nature (as some have noted), he really is a great person. I'm not happy that he is currently facing a long time in prison (again). But he's as truer to his beliefs than anyone I've ever met. Unfortunately, his ideals aren't an excuse for breaking the law. Nonetheless, I wish him the best of luck with his case.

ballard 13y ago

The problem is that even one poorly behaving (h)activist sets a precedent for average people against all other activists including those that perform a societal good in a very ethical but technically illegal manner (Snowden). It also sets a poor example for others coming of age. How things are accomplished is of more importance than what is accomplished. Activists should plan carefully by seeking out likely anticipated consequences before pulling the trigger. Otherwise, it's just reactive, aggressive chaos that doesn't go very far.

noptic 13y ago

>"In November 2012, after being held for eight months without trial, Hammond was denied bail ..." So he is already in prison for 1 1/2 years without being sentenced? Sounds like an interesting "justice" system. I understand you can not let him walk, but eight month without a trial? And then he was denied bail? And why solitary confinement?