Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government Security News

CEO Indicted for DDOSing Competitors 521

ruland writes "It turns out there was a reason the hosting company CIT/Foonet was raided in February. SecurityFocus.com reports that the CEO of a web-based satellite T.V. retailer has been indicted for allegedly paying Foonet's administrator to arrange denial of service attacks against his competitors, causing outages as long as two weeks at a time, and $2 million in losses. Now he's skipped out on $750,000 bail, while the five packet monkeys who worked for him are left facing felony charges of their own."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

CEO Indicted for DDOSing Competitors

Comments Filter:
  • wtf (Score:5, Insightful)

    by micronix1 ( 590179 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:31AM (#10087517)
    what a bunch of retards.
    • Re:wtf (Score:5, Insightful)

      by strictfoo ( 805322 ) <strictfoo-signup AT yahoo DOT com> on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:52AM (#10087744) Journal
      Don't know how this is a troll. It's pretty much right on. Those guys are absolute idiots and deserve everything they have coming. Just because the guy who hired them fled doesn't mean they shouldn't get in trouble.
      • Re:wtf (Score:5, Informative)

        by RDosage ( 694318 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:05AM (#10087870)
        From the article:
        ee Walker, known online as "Emp," "Rain," and "sorCe" respectively. Each of the three apparently had sizable "botnets" at their disposal, meaning they could each command thousands of compromised PCs to simultaneously attack a single host -- Walker alone had control of between 5,000 and 10,000 computers through a customized version of the Agobot worm, according to the FBI affidavit.

        I would say that these guys had it coming.

        • Re:wtf (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Uber Banker ( 655221 )
          There may be bad guys involved in these things, but that doesn't exclude any one of us from acting morally and ethically: Recently times have been hard, but if the temptation to act immorally, unethically or illegally enters anyone reading this, you should reject it. It is better to put a more modest meal on the family's table and to be proud you are, and to provide, an honest and decent role model than to give material and unnecessary consumer goods for short-term materialistic desires.

          If you don't ha
      • Re:wtf (Score:5, Insightful)

        by dasmegabyte ( 267018 ) <das@OHNOWHATSTHISdasmegabyte.org> on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:15AM (#10087974) Homepage Journal
        My question is, will we now see a number of apologies from everybody who posted to the last article with Big Brother complaints and privacy concerns?

        Here's an example of the FBI doing its damn job and doing it well, shutting down a major example of a new type of crime. Maybe we should give the FBI a little fucking credit sometimes, man. I mean, sometimes it's more than Hoover spreading rumors of homosexuality and harassing Black Panthers. Sometimes, they stop ACTUAL crimes, too.
        • Re:wtf (Score:5, Insightful)

          by jrexilius ( 520067 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:30AM (#10088156) Homepage
          Agreed, and as a contrast the DoJ raided some kids houses to stop them from trading music. You get some good with some bad and no system is perfect but that doesn't mean you shouldn't demand better.

          The good examples (which is the majority) of the FBI doing their job should only serve as examples of how they have strayed in other areas. Along with that is the understanding that we are setting higher standards for our federal agencies and should be given respect, resources, and support for meeting them.
        • Re:wtf (Score:5, Insightful)

          by DM9290 ( 797337 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @12:09PM (#10089217) Journal
          My question is, will we now see a number of apologies from everybody who posted to the last article with Big Brother complaints and privacy concerns?

          Just because someone commited an actual crime, you are suggesting Big Brother complaints are unwarranted?

          I'm not sure which is the "last article" you referred to. So I can only comment generically.

          Are you suggesting that this type of crime would have been impossible to investigate prior to Patriot Act (ect) removing judicial oversight and giving broad discretionary (read: arbitrary) powers to law enforcement. Or did the FBI abuse its power and happen to actually arrest someone by luck.

          Or perhaps you are operating under the premise that prosecuting a handful of criminals is all that is necessary to justify the absolute infringment of the rights of all of society?

          Here's an example of the FBI doing its damn job and doing it well, shutting down a major example of a new type of crime. Maybe we should give the FBI a little fucking credit sometimes, man. I mean, sometimes it's more than Hoover spreading rumors of homosexuality and harassing Black Panthers. Sometimes, they stop ACTUAL crimes, too.

          Did the FBI shutdown an actual crime based on probable cause? Because this is absolutely nothing new to law enforcement. Probable cause has been the traditional standard required for an arrest/warrant or just about anything for years and years.

          Or did the FBI shutdown a operation on the basis of a mere possibility. or out of plain malice. This is certainly worth criticism, and just because something turns out to be a crime after the fact does not and can not justify the original intrusion.

          At least.. not without hypocracy in a country which purports to be free.

          The FBI is not the only law enforcement agency which sometimes stops "actual" crimes. That is no reason to turn the entire country into a police state.

          If you could post a link to the "last article" you were concerned about, that would be good.

          In any event. before breaking out the champaign, it would be reasonable to wait for a conviction.
          For all we know the FBI are yet arresting another innocent person.
      • Re:wtf (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Not as retarded as those criminals at this company [wired.com] who bribed competitors janitors to steal documents. Oh. But is retarded the right word - that company's doing well. Sad that sometimes these techniques do pay.
    • by SatanicPuppy ( 611928 ) <Satanicpuppy.gmail@com> on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:55AM (#10087765) Journal
      Mod parent up, that's exactly what I thought.

      What kind of moron doesn't think a big DDOS like that is going to be traced? The reason everyone gets away with it with MS and SCO is because everyone hates them, so there are too many suspects...But when its your biggest competitor? You're going down.
      And then to skip bail? "Noooooo please don't send me to white collar CEO prison for a week. Waaaaaaah."

      This is almost too dumb to make a Dilbert strip.
    • Re:wtf (Score:3, Insightful)

      Hey mods - I came to post that exact sentiment here. How did these imbeciles think they could get away with it? Any group of cretins who try to beat the competition with slimey business practices rather than a superior product deserve this type of rebuke, as well as the label "bunch of retards". The parent deserves a cookie.
  • by the Man in Black ( 102634 ) <jasonrashaad&gmail,com> on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:33AM (#10087532) Homepage
    Here's to hoping the term "packet monkeys" enters the lexicon as soon as possible. For some reason that made me laugh, imagining a NOC full of monkeys flinging poo at one another.

    Actually, I guess that pretty much describes most NOCs nowadays...
    • This is too funny! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ScottGant ( 642590 ) <scott_gant@sbcgloba l . n etNOT> on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:12AM (#10087950) Homepage
      I remember this story back in Feb with all the conspiricy people coming down on how the "FBI has overstepped their bounds again" and calling it another Ruby Ridge or Waco.

      Click on the original story and even THAT makes it seem like they were just innocent people being unfairly picked on by the evil overlords known as the FBI.

      If FBI agents showed up at your data center bearing a warrant, would you be able to provide them prompt access to customer data? BZZZZT! I'm sorry, but you've taken too long to answer. We'll be confiscating all the hardware you use, er, used to use, to run your business. But we'll get it back to you 'real soon now.' Thank you for playing.

      Now it turns out the people raided were in fact "the bad guys" and the warrent (remember, the FBI HAD a warrent) was legit AND...er...warrented.

      It's funny how everything changes when more facts are thrown in...and I'm sure not all the facts are even in yet!
      • by dougmc ( 70836 ) <dougmc+slashdot@frenzied.us> on Friday August 27, 2004 @11:02AM (#10088445) Homepage
        Now it turns out the people raided were in fact "the bad guys" and the warrant (remember, the FBI HAD a warrant) was legit AND...er...warranted.
        [ spelling corrected :) ]

        As a general rule of thumb, the FBI and similar organizations don't go around raiding the `good guys'. It does happen sometimes ( one good example [wikipedia.org]), but it's not the general rule. But the thing that tends to be forgotten is that even the `bad guys' have rights, and the FBI (and similar organizations) tends to violate these rights, and that's what people tend to get really upset about. And then there's things that aren't really `rights', but should happen anyways. For example, if they take all your hardware, and don't charge you with a crime, you should get your hardware back QUICKLY and UNDAMAGED. But I digress ...

        As for Waco [rotten.com] and Ruby Ridge [rotten.com], the people involved were definately `bad guys', but the government wasn't exactly being `good guys' either.

        As for the FBI going after these DDoS monkeys, good for them. It's about time.

        • steve jackson games were raided by the Secret Service, a completely different organization than the FBI.
        • As for Waco and Ruby Ridge, the people involved were definately `bad guys'...

          How so? Or are you just repeating what the government tells you because we all know that the government doesn't lie?

          And all the children burned alive by the FBI & ATF were 'bad guys' too?

          For more info on the raid go here [whatreallyhappened.com]. I warn you that some of the pictures are not for the faint of heart.

      • by Tangurena ( 576827 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @11:13AM (#10088588)
        When the story first came out, many folks, myself included, were thinking about Steve Jackson Games. They published games and novels on their bulletin board system. The Secret Service confiscated all their gear and never returned it, nor charged them. It would be equivalent to raiding a local newspaper and siezing everything because one classified ad was placed by one crook. The SS even refused to obey a court order for the return of the gear. When the gear was finally returned, several years later, all of it was broken.

        Or maybe you might remember Ruby Ridge or Waco. Or maybe you might remember some of the excesses since 9/11. Was this a good bust or bad one? It looks more like a good one. Don't automatically think that they are the evil jackbooted minions of the evil overlord [eviloverlord.com]. Nor should you automatically presume that they are the good guys.

        • What I never understood about this is why the SECRET SERVICE, of all agencies got involved.

          Is publishing a few games and novels on your BBS a big enough crime to warrant the attention of the PERSONAL GUARD of the PRESIDENT OF THE US? Come ON!! This sounds like the sort of thing the FBI should handle... Or even local police with an order from the FBI.

          The way some of these people were treated is absolutely abominable, when you consider how benign the crime is. All they really need is the information on the
          • The Secret Service also are also responsible for all fraud cases involving counterfeit U.S. currency and credits, not just guarding the current and past presidents.

            Secret Service was part of the Department of the Treasury until they got transfered to Homeland Security.
    • The works of Shakespear: 1000 monkies, 1000 typewriters, 1000 years.

      Microsoft Systems Management Server: 1000 pacxet monkies, 1000 copies Visual C++, 100,000,000 boxes of chocolate Ex-Lax.
  • by tkrotchko ( 124118 ) * on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:33AM (#10087537) Homepage
    If your boss tells you to do something illegal, they'll arrest him *and you*. When he skips bail, you'll be left holding the bag.

    • by Doesn't_Comment_Code ( 692510 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:38AM (#10087590)
      I've been in that situation before... where the boss is hinting/saying that he wants to do something illegal and unethical to gain the upper hand. It is a terrible feeling. Follow orders or not... you're screwed either way. I got lucky: the boss got talked out of it. But honestly, that situation sucks!

      It's like the soldier who's ordered to commit war crimes. What do you do? It's in no way you're fault - but you're in a lose - lose situation.

      The best thing to do is refuse, and if you lose your job... there could be worse things. But still, it sucks.
      • by utlemming ( 654269 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:54AM (#10087758) Homepage
        Not if you want to be a little Machiavellian. Simply pick up the phone and dial the nearest police/FBI/whoever station and arrange a possible whitsle-blower agreement. You follow the orders while collecting information, your boss gets canned and sent to jail and when you get fired you file a whistle-blower lawsuit. Then it is a lose/lose for your boss and a win/win for you. And the best part is that you have covered your ace.
        • by plover ( 150551 ) * on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:09AM (#10087911) Homepage Journal
          In a small shop situation like this, if the boss goes down the shop closes. You may not go to jail, but you won't be going to work the next day, either.

          Regardless, CYA is still the best advice to follow if you're ever put into this situation. (Homelessness somehow seems a lot better than two to five years, even with time off for good behavior.) And your nearest FBI agency is indeed the right call to make -- they take this very, very seriously. If you do, though, be completely honest and thorough from the start. They will not be kind to you if they discover a lie halfway through their investigation.

          • by peragrin ( 659227 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:57AM (#10088401)
            Even if it is for a huge corp. It's not a good Idea to go back to that particular company. You shouldn't be working there anymore anyway.

            Of course the difference between being fired, and quiting is very different. Quiting can give you a recommendation.

            • if its a large company and they fire you, you are up for a rather large settlement in a whistle-blower/wrongfull termination lawsuit...

              nothing to loose there.

              a small company may would likely dissapear and would be more likely to leave you screwed...

          • by jellomizer ( 103300 ) * on Friday August 27, 2004 @11:09AM (#10088537)
            Well it the company goes out of business, Hire a New CEO to handle the paperwork and stuff and start your own business and keep all the customers from the old one, just do it quitly and keep the same name.
          • Homelessness somehow seems a lot better than two to five years, even with time off for good behavior.

            Don't bet on it. There are a lot of prisoners who, as soon as they get out, commit a crime with the intention of getting back into prison. At least in prison, they have food and shelter.
        • That's all well and good except for this guy [newstandardnews.net].

          Imagine that, report that something bad is happening and people want to kill you for being honest and responsible.

        • You follow the orders while collecting information, your boss gets canned and sent to jail and when you get fired you file a whistle-blower lawsuit. Then it is a lose/lose for your boss and a win/win for you. And the best part is that you have covered your ace.

          And the media picks up your story mid-lawsuit, gaining you a big award. Which gets drastically reduced on appeal. And, now every HR rat in the country knows that you're "the snitch" -- you'll never work in a decent job again.

          Real win-win.

        • My wife went through something like this. At the time, we were just dating, but the situation was the same. She had seen some "accounting irregularities", contacted the FBI and discovered her boss was into all sorts of illegal crap. So she brought in the papers to them over the course of several months.

          She wound up getting another job not too long after, and we didn't have to go into something weird like witness protection or some such. But it was a little freaky, and it's probably the reason why I wou
        • Actually the best thing to do is keep stum, start documenting everything and then leak the information. There's a good article, The Whistelblower's Dilemman [ieee.org] written by one of my colleagues about dealing with this kind of siutation. Some excerpts:

          Among the other mistakes Martin cites are that people don't collect enough evidence of the problem they're trying to expose, don't build support among colleagues and others, and don't wait for the right opportunity to come forward. "My advice to most people i
      • by alexre1 ( 662339 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:57AM (#10087784)
        I hate to tell you this, but following orders is no excuse for committing war crimes.

        Or do you want to agree with one of the main Nazi defence points in Nuremberg? They claimed this too, you know, that they shouldn't be held accountable for any of their actions because they were ordered to do so. Should Nazi soldiers not be held to account for torturing and murdering millions of Jews and other 'undesireables' simply because they were following orders? How about atrocities in the civil wars all over Africa?

        If a commanding officer tells a soldier to rape women, torture innocent children, etc, then is that soldier is completely innocent of any crime, simply because he was ordered to do so?? I should hope you don't think that. Warfare is supposed to be calculated violence, not a series of uncontrolled bestial impulses.
        • I only think you are enforcing the dilemma, not eliminating it. I think the one with the power should be held more accountable because the power meant having different forms of coersion. I don't think the ones that followed it shouldn't be unaccountable, I don't think it is fair to punish the trigger more harshly than the one that ordered it to be pulled.

          I really don't know what the military procedure is on illegal orders. In totalitarian regimes, disobeying an illegal / immoral order probably means dea
      • by revscat ( 35618 ) * on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:57AM (#10087786) Journal

        It's like the soldier who's ordered to commit war crimes. What do you do? It's in no way you're fault - but you're in a lose - lose situation.

        Yes, it sucks, but ultimately you AND your superiors are responsible. It is better to be punished for doing the right thing than to do the wrong thing and be rewarded. Cowardice and fear are no excuse for committing injustices or allowing them to be committed.

        Oh, and regarding your sig: al Qaeda endorsed Bush [foxnews.com].

    • by timmyf2371 ( 586051 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:40AM (#10087616)
      Common sense really - if you do something illegal you should always expect to be arrested/prosecuted if you're found out, whether doing it as a result of your own wishes or someone else's wishes.
    • by beacher ( 82033 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:41AM (#10087629) Homepage
      Get revenge too.. When your boss asks you to DDoS a website, make sure you post his website on /. ;)
    • Put it on Paper (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Detritus ( 11846 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:45AM (#10087665) Homepage
      If a manager asks me to do something that is morally or legally questionable, I ask them to send me a signed memo with their request. That usually makes them go away and drop the subject.
    • by grendelkhan ( 168481 ) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (sttekcirttocs)> on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:25AM (#10088096) Journal
      A good friend of mine recently quit her job because she was asked to do something illegal, and when she refused, she was told that this situation would arise again, and she would have to do it. She quit, and finally, almost a year later, she's now getting unemployment for the seven months she was out of work.

      Oh, and the company she worked for is now the target of a class action lawsuit for commiting the act she quit over. This, plus the results of her unemployment hearing, are making it very easy to recover her 401k money she was forced to cash out to have something to live on.

      Moral of both these stories, don't do it. And if you stick to your guns and do what's right, you will be okay in the end.
      • She quit, and finally, almost a year later, she's now getting unemployment for the seven months she was out of work

        What if she couldn't hold out for the year? Say she was homeless after the first two months. Where would they send the unemployment check ten months later, and would she still be in any emotional/psychological state to be able to receive and cash it?

        Your friend got a fair deal. Not everyone does.

    • I watched "The Great Escape" the other night. On the second DVD there's a recreation of the investigation of what really happened.

      There was a recreated interogation of a young german officer who had received orders to shoot the escapers in the back of the head during a pee break (orders which came from Hitler). He questioned his orders, and was basically told do it, or we shoot you.

      After the war he was captured, tried for murder, and hanged.

      Obviously that was a different time, and a different place, but
  • Tin Foil Hat Brigade (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Tarwn ( 458323 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:34AM (#10087540) Homepage
    I seem to recall quite an uproar surrounding the seizure before. People yelling about the government raping the constituion, etc.

    Glad I was one of the people that decided to wait and see what it was all about instead of taking it as a sign that our government was overextending itself. Not that they don't, but I'm guessing this isn't one of those times if everyone on staff got felony charges.
    • by Doesn't_Comment_Code ( 692510 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:40AM (#10087617)
      Yeah, but they were all innocent!

      The CEO just had hotel reservations, and if he didn't go to Morocco, he'd lose his deposit (the bastards make you leave a credit card number you know).
    • by B'Trey ( 111263 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:43AM (#10087645)
      From what I understand, the authorities marched in and took down systems which hosted a great many people's data. Whatever the administrator might have done, the vast majority of the people hosting sites on the hardware were innocent. They lost data and money. Perhaps the collateral damage was necessary to prevent evidence from being altered or destroyed, and perhaps it was a question of uneducated, incompetent and/or overzealous authorities. Just becase an actual crime was being investigated doesn't mean that any and all actions taken by the investigators are summarily justified.

      • by jebell ( 567579 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:50AM (#10087715) Journal
        Perhaps the blame should lay not with the authorities, but with the people who committed the crime.

        Let's say I steal $1000 and put it in my business's client trust account. The cops figure it out and put a freeze on my account. Now the rest of my clients can't get their money. Who's to blame?

        • by B'Trey ( 111263 )
          Too many "what if's" to be reasonably encapsulated in a half dozen sentences in a /. post. However, I will say this. The cops are given special authority to do their job. Along with increased authority comes increased responsibility. One of the responsibilities is to minimize collateral damage caused by an investigation. It can't always be eliminated but it can be minimized, and I'm not certain that was the case in this instance.
  • Extradition? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gclef ( 96311 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:34AM (#10087541)
    According to the article, they think the CEO's skipped town to Morocco. Don't we have an extradition treaty w/them? If so, it shouldn't be that hard to get him back, assuming Morocco's police play along.
  • by SpooForBrains ( 771537 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:35AM (#10087557)
    Dalnet's a Satellite TV retailer? Who knew?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:36AM (#10087572)
    At least the CEO had the class to not outsource the packet monkey work to Russia or India. ;)
  • fools (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:36AM (#10087573)
    Everyone knows the perfect crime when it comes to DDoS is to post your opponent's URL on slashdot...
  • ABOUT TIME (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AcmeShells.com ( 722366 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:38AM (#10087594) Homepage
    My company was a direct target of these assholes. It is about time the FBI finally did something. They are the reason I am paying more for my servers than any other IRC shell provider.
  • by plover ( 150551 ) * on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:39AM (#10087601) Homepage Journal
    From the SecurityFocus article:

    RackSpace fought back, but the attackers proved determined and adaptive. In mid-October the simple SYN flood attacks were replaced with an HTTP flood, pulling large image files from WeaKnees.com in overwhelming numbers. At its peak the onslaught allegedly kept the company offline for a full two weeks.

    Wouldn't it have made more sense to host these files from a tarpit? If you know you're under attack by zombie hordes that are going to repeatedly ask for a file, why not give it to them s--l--o--w--l--y? Although I suppose that since the attacks were being watched and changed frequently, the attackers probably would simply have switched tactics again.

    Anyway, is it possible or practical to use the logs of the http flood to go back to the zombified PC owners and "fix" them? HTTP requires a real connection, which is traceable. Or should that list just be delivered to their ISPs and have the ISPs shut them down until they're virus free?

  • by maximilln ( 654768 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:44AM (#10087651) Homepage Journal
    Now he's skipped out on $750,000 bail, while the five packet monkeys who worked for him are left facing felony charges of their own.

    Executives pulled this stunt with stockholders quite heavily over the last 5 years. I imagine that he didn't actually pay out $750k but probably put up "collateral" with an appraised worth of $750k. It doesn't mean much if he's been cutting his own salary, stock options, and other investments at several million/year.
    • The article mentioned, he put his house up for collateral for the $ 750k. With the $ 2M damages, his house would have been gone anyway.

      So economically, his best action is to jump bail, go back to Morocco and leave the courts and banks to fight over the house. That's always better than going to jail and having nothing when he's released.
  • by drunkennewfiemidget ( 712572 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:47AM (#10087682)
    I'd rather be unemployed and searching for a job for a good long while than being in federal PMITA prison for PACKETING someone. The packeters deserve whatever they get, because frankly, I know how much of a pain in the ass it is to get DDoSed. If you can't get the upper hand through legitimate tactics and methods, then you don't deserve to be in business. Go flip burgers or something.
    • PMITA prison

      Packet me in the ass?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:50AM (#10087719)
    I remember back when it was published ... all about how the FBI was just oppressing innocent geeks, it was all Bush and Ashcroft's fault, and the FBI were violating the 1st amendment etc.
    Now maybe slashbots can realise that not every 'hacker' is a hero who's been oppressed by Da Man.
  • by jathan ( 646039 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:59AM (#10087800)
    According to the article:

    The company's hosting provider, Lexiconn, responded by dropping WeaKnees.com as a client, sending the company to more expensive hosting at RackSpace.com.

    Does this make any sense? I can see if your legitimate traffic is exceeding a bandwidth limit that you might get dropped/forced to pay more. But a denial of service attack? Wouldn't most service providers want to help their customer with this kind or problem?

  • by The I Shing ( 700142 ) * on Friday August 27, 2004 @09:59AM (#10087801) Journal
    Should they call it 'packeteering'?
  • by AndroidCat ( 229562 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:02AM (#10087847) Homepage
    UPDATE: "Our long national nightmare is over" - Foonet raided, shut down.

    Definitely stinky-cheese spammers [spews.org] too!

  • Please tell me (Score:5, Interesting)

    by onyxruby ( 118189 ) <onyxrubyNO@SPAMcomcast.net> on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:05AM (#10087866)
    Someone please tell me why I should feel sorry for the poor "monkeys" that were helping him commit felonies? This isn't a digital rights issue, this isn't a case of big guy trampling little guy. They partook in organized crime and gave computer people a bad name, why should we care that they are left hanging?
  • Easy money? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Snorklefish ( 639711 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:06AM (#10087884)
    1. Short company Y.
    2. Initiate DDOS campaign intended to temporarily cripple company Y and drive its stock price down.
    3. Cover at the depressed price.
    4. Profit.
    Certainly the SEC would look askance at short-sales before a coordinated DDOS attack, but if a nebulous entity in Eastern Europe is doing the dirty work while a nebulous entity in East-Asia is doing the shorting, it could be extremely difficult to prove a connection.

    No this isn't a recommendation or some novel idea. In fact, I'm certain that organized crime is well ahead of us in the nefarious schemes department.

  • by beef curtains ( 792692 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:08AM (#10087900)
    I checked their "News" section: still no "Deadbeat thug CEO jumps bail, flees country" headline. Looks like their webmasters are slacking.

    I actually was expecting to see some sort of "new interim CEO" announcement, but couldn't find anything like that either.
  • by Ricdude ( 4163 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:15AM (#10087973) Homepage
    From the article:
    Echouafni allegedly paid Ashley $1,000 to snuff out two competing websites that he claimed had stolen some of his content and were staging DDoS attacks against his company.
    he quietly subcontracted the job to Richard "Krashed" Roby, who allegedly took the assignment in exchange for a free shell account.
    $1000 and a Free Shell Account. Cheaper than kneecaps...
  • perfect sense (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Archalien ( 197877 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:18AM (#10088007)
    I actually got attacked by one of these guys' botnets (Krashed I believe) when a friend IRCing from my connection pissed him off. I traced him to Foonet thinking "great, I know the head admin from being an IRC junkie back in the day" and when I told him what was going on he acted like it was no problem. I thought he should have been a little more concerned about some punk kid attacking people from his net. Figures.
  • by AndroidCat ( 229562 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:48AM (#10088313) Homepage
    Before going to that retailer [orbitsat.com] link in the article, make sure that your browser is locked up tight. They try to run an awful lot of VBscript and copy/paste to your clipboard. (Not sure what it all does, but I wouldn't trust them.)
  • by LilMikey ( 615759 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @10:52AM (#10088353) Homepage
    ...he's a CEO that knows *something* about technology. That's an improvement.
  • Log of emp (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AcmeShells.com ( 722366 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @11:12AM (#10088577) Homepage
    Here is a log of EMP just a few minutes ago. http://www.xbox-irc.net/log.txt
  • Their mistake (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mabu ( 178417 ) * on Friday August 27, 2004 @01:22PM (#10089916)
    RapidSatellite.com, which sells satellite TV receivers, was hit at the same time and with similar results. The company responded by quickly moving their electronic storefront to the distributed content delivery services of Speedera, only to be crippled three days later by an attack on that provider's DNS servers, which for an hour also blocked access to other Speedera-hosted sites, including Amazon.com and the Department of Homeland Security, according to the FBI affidavit. RapidSatellite then moved to Akamai, but were out again within a week when the attackers switched to an HTTP flood attack, running massive numbers of queries through RapidSatellite.com's search engine.

    I'm not being cynical, but realistic. How much you want to bet the FBI didn't really get involved until either Amazon.com or the Department of Homeland Security's resources got peripherally hit?

    Every day there are thousands of DDOS attacks going on, usually against small providers or companies that don't have enough political clout to get the authorities to care much. The perps biggest mistake was probably targetting a provider that had some more substantive clients.
  • by Performer Guy ( 69820 ) on Friday August 27, 2004 @01:50PM (#10090135)
    You just know it's a bad idea to DDoS the Department of Homeland Security servers :-). I suspect this investigation would never have gotten off the ground if they hadn't taken out an important government site in the collateral damage when they hit the name servers at one of the ISPs.

    This was a concerted and persistent attack on several sites, they didn't just SYN flood, they pulled masses of HTML data (slashdot attack :-) and then hit the name servers. I hope they throw away the key on these scumbags.

    However, when has this kind of case *ever* been investigated in the past? We've had any number of similar attacks but the DOJ sat on their lazy ass and did nothing about it. Let's hope this opens their eyes to this type of crime and they start chasing the perpetrators.

If you think the system is working, ask someone who's waiting for a prompt.

Working...