FBI Cybercrime Director Comments On Hacktivism 254
bdcny7927 writes "In an exclusive interview with CIO.com, the FBI official in charge of cybercrime speaks for the first time with the media specifically about hacktivism. Here, Assistant Executive Director Shawn Henry describes the threats hacktivists pose, the challenges associated with investigating them, and the FBI's success disrupting these groups. He also delivers a special message to hacktivists."
The so-called special message: "My organization is a believer in civil rights and civil liberties, and the first amendment is something I hold very dear personally and professionally. I have no problem with people picketing and protesting in the street. I get all that. But the freedom for me to swing my arm ends where your nose begins. If you are impinging on others' rights, that's illegal."
the first amendment is something I hold very dear (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:the first amendment is something I hold very de (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, that was my thought exactly.
We had those amendments and civil liberties. They are in the process of being destroyed or made to be impotent often by the companies being attacked. Do you have any suggestions as to the correct course of action in the face of that Mr. Shawn Henry?
Actions speak louder than words (Score:5, Insightful)
And three letter agencies, hell, police in general, seem to want to ignore civil rights whenever it is convenient. They're the annoying things you need to work around, not uphold.
From TFA (Score:4, Insightful)
"in a dedicated denial of service (DDoS) attack" didn't read further.
*yawn* (Score:2, Insightful)
wake me up when the federal government stops using existing and new legislation to violate the rights of US citizens, including those who may have different religious or political views.
who watches the watchers?
who speaks when others can't speak for themselves?
who exposes that which is hidden by the government that has sworn to protect it's citizens?
who exposes that which is hidden by corporations actively paying politicians to pass legislation for the benefit of those corporations?
do your f-ing job you douche bag.
Re:the first amendment is something I hold very de (Score:5, Insightful)
"when your right to free speech conflicts with my sacred right to business profit and the unimpeded influence of politics and policy, then I must strenuously object to your material support for terrorism and your declared enmity toward America."
Old joke from former communist countries (Score:5, Insightful)
The director of KGB gives an interview and answers a question about freedom of speech: "Our country has complete freedom of speech. But freedom after speech, that's a whole different matter."
Re:That'll be a hit with Anon (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Actions speak louder than words (Score:3, Insightful)
"Those three letter agencies you despise have done more to uphold your freedoms to whine than you can imagine. "
[Citation Needed]
First Amendment? Wrong Document (Score:5, Insightful)
Mr. Henry mentions the First Amendment, but says nothing about the Declaration of Independence. The First Amendment specifies that free speech is not subject to the discretion of the government, and he swore an oath to defend that boundary of Federal authority. Saying he supports that is like saying he does not support interstate trafficking in illegal goods. That's just doing what he swore he would do -- he doesn't get a pat on the back for that beyond what we inherently owe him for his civil service. The First is not what is in question regarding hacktivism.
The Declaration is the closest thing we have to an official US document that covers what a hacktivist would claim gives him a legitimate mandate to act. Civil disobedience may often include elements of free speech, but it is the illegality of the action that define it as civil disobedience -- it is right in the name.
It is an easy topic to address from the official position of the FBI: "The role of the FBI is to enforce law, and the kind of civil disobedience embodied in the Declaration of Independence is unlawful activity. The Declaration does not make civil disobedience legal, and my job is to enforce the law."
The fact that he did not address it head-on implies one of two things to me: He may not have a deep understanding of the founding of this nation, and the reasons that it had to be founded as it was. Alternately, he may understand the disobedient nature of our founding, but be choosing not broaching the topic.
If a person in his position is not aware of the anarchic nature of this nation's founding, and the reason that disobedience resonates even with lawful patriots, he should be removed from office. He has to at least understand that mentality in order to fight it, if nothing else.
If he is just not broaching the topic, I guess I understand his pragmatic decision, but I find it sleazy. He is being disingenuous and trivializing the extraordinarily delicate balance of true democracy.
It is intrinsic in the nature of Western Democracy that civil disobedience both violates the law and is necessary to refresh the tree of liberty. It is also clearly the charter of the FBI to enforce the law including by arresting people who engage in civil disobedience. Even if he thought it was wrong to arrest such people he would still be obligated to do so -- he is in the executive, not the judicial. The fact that those things are true and also in tension is part of what makes the FBI's job such a difficult task for the men and women who serve. Ignoring that fact does us all a disservice.
Re:the first amendment is something I hold very de (Score:4, Insightful)
Board a plane without being sexually assaulted?
Re:Actions speak louder than words (Score:5, Insightful)
Yup. Shortly before Thanksgiving the DA of New York was speaking at a press conference about those alleged terrorists they caught, and while I can't remember his exact works, it was something along the lines of stating that his job was to stop the bad guys with a minimal sacrifice of civil liberties. In other words, as soon as he believes protecting civil rights is getting in his way, he's going to stop protecting them.
Fair and Reasonable (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hacktivists == Vigilantes (Score:4, Insightful)
And yet you do not question why this is, and go on to call them "kids who jumped onto the bandwagon for fun or to revolt." Ever think maybe this is a legitimate response to a government that does not respect the rights of anyone but the filthy rich?
If the laws were not made to protect me and people like me, I have no respect for them. It is as simple as that.
You're right that if SOPA is passed, it will lead to more of this. It will because that would prove we have passed the point where talking and voting works, and now we must move on to other means before the country becomes worse. Further, it will be the unquestionable duty of every single American, or even people from other countries affected, to disrespect laws like SOPA.
And there's no such thing as being truly anonymous (Score:5, Insightful)
If you started going after someone like the FBI systematically, they'd track you down. You aren't anonymous on the Internet. Everything you do can be tracked. Now usually it isn't because why would anyone bother? However if there was a reason, it could be done. If they continually attacked the FBI, you'd better believe that the FBI, and other government agencies, would work to track them down.
Basically when it comes to someone with the resources of the US government it is all a matter of if they care enough to spend the resources to make you stop.
The ultimate example would be Bin Laden. Here is a man who is skilled in guerrilla warfare, knowledgeable in intelligence and counterintelligence, protected by zealous followers, hidden in a foreign country, cut off from the outside world, using only a contact chain for any kind of communication. However the US found him, and killed him. Reason was they cared enough to go to the great lengths necessary to track him down.
Now in the case of a group of people in a "hacking duel" with them they wouldn't care nearly as much. However it wouldn't be nearly as hard. The /b/tards are not nearly as smart as they like to think they are and when you get down to it, your ISP can monitor everything you do, if they want, and will do so upon a wire tap warrant from the government.
All that aside, please remember the US owns the very best of the best in signals intelligence: the NSA.
Re:the first amendment is something I hold very de (Score:5, Insightful)
Those are just some of the things I've lost in the past 20 years. Some of those are related to the first amendment, some to the fourth. Some of them are rights we've always had, but are not specifically enumerated in the constitution. Some represent a weakening of first amendment rights due to the right being made useless for its intended purpose (like getting my representative to pay attention to me).
Hacktivism is Civil Disobedience (Score:5, Insightful)
That Shawn guy is all huffy because Anonymous and LulzSec break the law, as if legitimate political protest is on the same level as robbery or mindless vandalism.
During the Civil Rights Movement some white clergymen published an open letter thatvwhile ostensibly supporting equal rights for blacks, urged them to comply with The Whie Mans law during their protests, for example by not shutting down entire cities for days on end.
While spending some time in the slammer, The Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Junior wrote "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" on a few scraps of paper that he begged from the jailer, in which he said "One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws."
http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html [upenn.edu]
I regard that letter as King's most important written work.
My colleagues at Kuro5hin fault me for not being a Team Player because I regard raising Hell as the greatest contribution I can make to society. We would all be better off if there were fewer Team Players not more of them. Consider what happened when the "Guter Deutschers" - that was the German word for Team Player back in the day - failed to heed the dictates of their consciences and so encouraged Hitler's rise to power.
If you are not up to Hacktivism, don't just politely hand out some leaflets when you protest in meatspace. No, get yourself hauled off to jail by shutting down the entire business district of a city.
Mod parent up. (Score:5, Insightful)
Or to put it another way ... "But the freedom for me to swing my arm ends where your nose begins".
And when the "person" being affected does not have a nose?
Because said "person" is a corporation?
The property rights of corporations have become more important than human rights.
Corporations are not people. Despite what the law would say.
Re:That'll be a hit with Anon (Score:5, Insightful)
"while the majority of the people involved in a particular operation are merely script kiddies, there are often more competent people involved."
That's the part that few people understand. You get a thousand, or ten thousand, dummies worldwide to launch pointless annoyance attacks, while as few as a dozen competent people sit back and evaluate the responses and defenses. When they find a crack in the defenses, then they exploit it.
I'm fairly sure (can't be positive) that the FBI has some pretty sharp hackers among their ranks. But, Anon is a lot bigger than the FBI, and they have plenty of cannon fodder to keep the FBI's real hackers busy. The FBI can claim a "victory" when they bust a few stupid script kiddies, but they are only grasping at smoke and mirrors, while the real actors remain invisible behind proxy chains, and botnets.
The good old days. (Score:5, Insightful)
"better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone's_formulation [wikipedia.org]
Fascism begins when the efficiency of the Government becomes more important than the Rights of the People.
Seems you missed Dr. King's point (Score:5, Insightful)
Note that he's advocating disobeying unjust laws like, say, laws requiring segregation, laws treating people with a little more melanin in their skin as inferior.
So what are the laws "hacktivists" break? Laws like "You aren't allowed to DDoS someone's website," or "You aren't allowed to access someone's computer without their permission." Hmmm, those laws sound pretty just to me. I think when there's a victim, it is quite just to have a law against victimizing that person.
So if you believe that copyright law is unjust, and you distribute copyrighted works for that reason then ok I can understand that. However if you believe that the government doesn't respect your rights so you go and DDoS Amazon, I can't respect that. The first is like you refusing to obey a law banning breast feeding, because you believe it is unjust, by breastfeeding a baby in public. The second is like you burning down my house because you believe the city council isn't respecting your rights.
Something else to remember, something important: Those people involved in great acts of civil disobedience did so knowing the consequences, and putting their names on it all the same. They stood up publicly, and accepted the consequences they faced. Again look at Dr. King's letter you linked, that he wrote from jail, again with his name on it. He didn't try and circulate a manifesto anonymously, he was a public face for a movement and accepted the consequences for it. Or take the start of it all int he US, the Declaration of Independence. The founding fathers signed their names on it, knowing they were signing a death warrant for them if they lost the fight. They didn't write it anonymously and pin it to a tree then play dumb, they said "Yes this is us, we stand behind this with our lives if necessary."
This bullshit of random hacking and DDoSing of sites is not civil disobedience and is not the sort of thing people like Dr. King would respect.
They do, sometimes (Score:5, Insightful)
The FBI isn't all bad. they really do investigate corrupt politicians, such as the Portland, Oregon city official who now stands accused ofvtaking bribes from a parking meter company.
The problem we have is that it is not illegal to change your vote in response to a campaign "donation". I would like to see a Constitutional amendment that forbid any but individual live humans from contributing nonpolitical campaigns.
Something really wrong has been going on... (Score:5, Insightful)
Director Henry, could I please get your take on "Section 1031 of the National Defense Authorization Act". President Obama has already signed this piece of legislation and it declares the entire world including The United States of America as the battlefield. In short it give our government the authority to detain or assassinate American citizens, without due process, the right to an attorney, or even the dignity of informing our friends and families that y'all decided we should be shot.
Our government has just declared war on the American people, and how exactly would you expect that we deal with this? Tea and crumpets? A harsh dressing down of our political representatives... posh, you naughty boys have subjugates my civil rights and get off my lawn! Sir, our founding fathers fought and died to give us the rights we now cherish, and with the stroke of a pen, we've seen these rights obliterated by self serving sycophants.
You sir say you are a keeper of law, a protector of America's freedom, well then why have you not arrested the very people who have seen fit to rob every American of that which is most precious. We've seen this behavior before, in Germany in the 1930s. The rich and powerful building a mote around themselves to protect themselves from the havoc that followed. This is not the America of our Founding Fathers, and for myself, I protest, I protest to high heaven, and I demand that my government be returned immediately.
Re:Actions speak louder than words (Score:4, Insightful)
police are under NO OBLIGATION to protect YOU or your PROPERTY. The first modern police forces in the world were direct descendants of the Bow Street Runners, who were mercenaries for hire: someone doublecross you in a deal on a boat? Pay a Pound or two to send the BSR to track him down, put him in a stock for a few days, then break his kneecaps. Someone slit the throat of one of your slaves (a crime against property, not person)? Send the BSR to catch him and hang him off Tower Bridge.
Only difference between then and now is that the BSR wear uniforms and stab vests these days and the Corporation of the City of London, AKA the Crown, make the (commercial) Law that is the ONLY Oath obligation modern police have.
If you're looking to find someone to uphold Common Law (ie to investigate and prosecute robbery, rape and murder), you don't want a Police Officer, you want a CONSTABLE or a SHERIFF or a SHERIFF'S DEPUTY.
Re:the first amendment is something I hold very de (Score:5, Insightful)
You haven't paid attention in the last month.
NDAA has just eliminated due process.
If you are a "hacktivist" you will be accused of terrorism (this has already been bandied about by various politicians, so I'm not making it up) and you will simply disappear.
Not kidding.
Even the guy over at Bad Astronomy is highly upset. You should be too.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/12/19/a-public-letter-to-the-us-government-upon-the-passing-of-ndaa/ [discovermagazine.com]
--
BMO
Re:the first amendment is something I hold very de (Score:3, Insightful)
Posting AC because I moderated on this thread. There is a lot I am not allowed to do now that was acceptable 20 years ago:
1: Be treated as a paying customer when boarding a plane.
2: Ride a bicycle to the university campus without having it impounded as being unlicensed.
3: Walk in a local university building to use the bowling alley or bar without being threatened with criminal trespass (and no signs present stating this.)
4: Walk into the state capitol building anytime, 24/7.
5: Go on an open Army post to show a friend's kids a local museum and fallen soldier memorial.
6: Drive down a state highway at night with intersection lights flashing yellow. (These were replaced by stoplights with cameras and road sensors for increasing town revenues.)
7: Firing off model rockets in the air at a city park.
8: Use a jogging track at a nearby high school in the summer when school isn't in session.
9: Carrying a piece of electronic equipment in my vehicle and not being subject to searches at whim.
10: Being arrested for hacking actually required definite proof. Now, just a phone hunting for an open wi-fi connection is grounds for an electronic criminal trespass charge.
11: Drink a beer in public.
12: Piss on a building, or bush on the side of the highway. These days, one can rack up enough felonies for a life prison sentence under three strikes, as well as a sex crime registration for doing this.
13: Have a suitcase that had actual sturdy locks on it for checked baggage.
14: Ride Amtrak without having freight trains always have right of way, forcing you to end up having to take Greyhound buses for your intended trip instead.
15: Smoke. I personally don't care for this, but it definitely was a right that was utterly destroyed.
16: Make mistakes. One arrest (not conviction) for *anything*, and I'm talking PI, failure to identify, or anything, and one can never get a meaningful job. Almost every place of employment checks *arrest* records and not *conviction* records because they believe "you can buy your acquittal, but if a cop thinks you are guilty enough to yank out cuffs and do paperwork, you are guilty". I see people, with far more qualifications in IT than I ever will have, denied employment because they got arrested for something stupid like public intoxication when they were 21 and stuffed in the drunk tank for a few hours. Now because their fingerprints show "arrested for something", their resume gets shitcanned every place they apply.
17: Change opinions. What is posted is posted forever.
18: Actually be able to take a political side without having it affect your employment. In one company I worked for's HR department, part of a potential employee's employablity score is what politicians they donate money to for campaigns (this is public info). Too many donations to lefties, and that person's resume gets chucked for the guy who donates to the Tea Party candidates.
19: Actually fixing or dealing with deliberately broken products and not having to deal with DMCA laws so you can use third party ink in your printer for example.
20: If arrested, just shutting the heck up was enough to invoke the right to remain silent.
I really fear to see what life will be like in 20 years. I think we will be rendered into serfs because revolution is completely impossible in most First World countries like the UK and US.
Re:the first amendment is something I hold very de (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. We have always been at war with Eastasia. So do not be critical of things you claim are "new" for they always have been and always will be. Rest assured, Citizen, you will not be able to change things for the better.
I think that about sums you up.