Reuters' Matthew Keys Accused of Anonymous Conspiracy 127
B3ryllium writes "Matthew Keys, a Reuters social media editor, is accused of deliberately encouraging Anonymous to hack his previous employer, and even gave them access credentials to do it. An indictment appears to recommend charges that could result in up to 30 years in prison and a $750,000 fine. From the article: 'He is alleged to have identified himself on an internet chat forum as a former Tribune Company employee and then provided members of Anonymous with the login and password to the Tribune Company server.
The indictment alleges that Mr Keys had a conversation with the hacker who claimed credit for the defacement of the Los Angeles Times website.
The hacker allegedly told him that Tribune Company system administrators had locked him out.
Mr Keys allegedly tried to regain access for the hacker, and when he learned that the hacker had made changes to a page, Mr Keys is said to have responded: "Nice."'"
Minefield (Score:2, Interesting)
30 years. Now that US militarized the internet, any small mistake, or that looked from very far aggresive move will have that kind of punishment, as they see anything related as war crimes. Even falling in a social engineering trick puts you into the enemy of the state category.
Meanwhile bankers that steal billons or just screw the entire world economy, are too big to jail [rollingstone.com] or just gets even a lot more money from government.
And it's already to late to change anything of this. Any try to fix the system will get people 30 years of jail too.
Re:30 years for a non violent crime. (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually I feel it doesn't accomplish much except to further some prosecutors careers. Don't get me wrong, I am glad it was exposed, and some lgood lawyers out there have done some good work trying to fix the mess....
but the criminal side of things? Meh. Strict penalty...woo hoo. It doesn't actually fix anything. It clearly wasn't a deterrent. Meh.
I would rather he was sentanced to spend several nights a week in soup kitchens for as long as he is medically able, if you really need to sentance him to something... why give him a forced retirement in a cell? Have him do something useful for society. I mean, its not like anyone is going to trust the guy with investments again, and he certainly isn't a physical danger to anyone.
Re:30 years for a non violent crime. (Score:4, Interesting)
I would rather he was sentanced to spend several nights a week in soup kitchens for as long as he is medically able, if you really need to sentance him to something... why give him a forced retirement in a cell? Have him do something useful for society. I mean, its not like anyone is going to trust the guy with investments again, and he certainly isn't a physical danger to anyone.
Exactly. Put him to use in society. Why pay for his incarceration? Fines, wage garnishments, community service, supervision, even a short prison stint are all better. The man is a notorious convicted felon and can't possibly be a harm to society through financial scams - all jailing him does is make us feel better.