Wikileaks DDoS Attacker Arrested, Equipment Seized 429
kaptink writes "The self proclaimed hacker that waged a DDoS attack on Wikileaks has been arrested and has had all his equipment seized. What is interesting is that local police conducted the raid and not a federal authority such as the FBI. The Jester (th3j35t3r) who has a reputation for attacking websites he disagrees with is said to be trying to raise $10,000 in expected lawyers fees. If anyone is going to be alight in the whole Wikileaks debacle, its going to be the lawyers. Personally I think anyone who spells their nick with numbers in an effort to look 'leet' deserves to have their computer confiscated."
Trying to raise money (Score:5, Insightful)
Helping Law Enforcement (Score:5, Insightful)
Point (Score:2, Insightful)
"Personally I think anyone who spells their nick with numbers in an effort to look 'leet' deserves to have their computer confiscated"
This.
Re:Computer expert? (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, I’m not doing it to appear leet.
I’m actually doing it in a small sort of protest to the fact that it’s virtually impossible to get a descriptive username (on AIM, originally) without having a number tacked on the end. So I made the username as non-descriptive as possible and made the number extra big.
But I somewhat doubt anyone cares.
Real vigilantes do not (Score:5, Insightful)
2. Post about it on twitter
3. Make videos of the attack and blog
4. Try to recruit sidekicks
5. Brag about it on IRC and the interwebs
You do any or all of the above, and you are not a vigilante or a cracker. You are just another idiot you got his/her paws on a computer.
Re:Trying to raise money (Score:2, Insightful)
Only someone dumb enough to give him money would ask a question like that.
Re:I'm surprised. (Score:4, Insightful)
I honestly thought it was government(s) behind the DDoS.
Well, he was motivated by "patriotism" fueled by the FUD spread by government(s)... is it them doing it if they influence people without giving direct instructions? Philosoraptor knows...
Re:Summary Fail (Score:5, Insightful)
The nice thing about conspiracies is that they can be blamed for everything.
Re:On a related note (Score:5, Insightful)
Kudos to Amazon for knowing where their bread is buttered.
NO.. no kudos for them - now if they where presented with a court order to shut it down then by all means.
but this is a violation of due process if not, and as far as i'm concerned places Amazon out of what could be reasonably considered a common carrier on their EC2 platform..
which means they should be liable as assisting any illegal activity that happens on their EC2 platform.
Numbers in your handle? (Score:2, Insightful)
I think someone who uses the letter "k" instead of the letter "c" in their nickname to look kool deserves to have their komputer konfiscated. I'm looking at you kaptink.
Re:On a related note (Score:4, Insightful)
No doubt this somehow fell under ToS violations. Not so much a perversion of justice.
Re:On a related note (Score:2, Insightful)
Amazon license agreement says they can boot you if they determine that hosting you is a security concern. I am not saying there aren't more nefarious reasons, but its quite possible they were just getting sick of getting DDOSed. (Section #3.4.1)
http://aws.amazon.com/agreement/#3
Re:On a related note (Score:2, Insightful)
As a private corporation, Amazon isn't subject to due process. Only the government is subject to due process. (To be fair, that's because the government is the only one that is really allowed to take away your rights -- e.g., when imprisoning you. Amazon deciding to stop hosting your site doesn't infringe upon your rights.)
Re:Summary Fail (Score:3, Insightful)