Prison Is For Dangerous Criminals, Not Hacktivists 337
In late 2011, defense contractor Stratfor suffered a cybersecurity breach that resulted in a leak of millions of internal emails. A few months later, the FBI arrested hacktivist Jeremy Hammond and several others for actions related to the breach. Hammond pleaded guilty to one count of violating the CFAA, and today his sentence was handed down: 10 years in prison followed by three years of supervised release. He said, [The prosecutors] have made it clear they are trying to send a message to others who come after me. A lot of it is because they got slapped around, they were embarrassed by Anonymous and they feel that they need to save face." Reader DavidGilbert99 adds,
"Former LulzSec and Anonymous member Jake Davis argues that U.S. lawmakers need to take a leaf out of the U.K.'s legal system and not put Jeremy Hammond behind bars for his part in the hack of Stratfor. 'Jeremy Hammond has a lot to give society too. Prisons are for dangerous people that need to be segmented from the general population. Hackers are not dangerous, they are misunderstood, and while disciplinary action is of course necessary, there is nothing disciplined about locking the door on a young man's life for 10 years.'"
The usual things we say: (Score:4, Interesting)
a) Nonviolent crimes get stiffer sentences than violent crimes "to send a message". That hard crime pays?
b) If there's any political motivation by the prosecution or court, expect to fare worse than a child rapist in sentencing.
c) I thought LulzSec and Anonymous were opposing gangs with the occasional common goal?
maliciously rogue bankers (Score:5, Interesting)
Name a banker that's actually gone to jail.
And no, Madoff doesn't count. He wasn't a banker, AND he turned himself in -- chances are; had he waited a bit more, he could have only paid a small fine and walked away.
Re:Sorry, but not here (Score:4, Interesting)
That would be less problematic if our prison system at present weren't operated in such a fashion as to make these individuals even more dangerous and damaged than when they came in, and then continually discriminate afterwards in ways that make it unlikely for them to be successful after release. We really need to take a look at which countries successfully release prisoners who go on to lead lawful, fruitful lives, and then emulate those systems.
so what if they are criminals? (Score:5, Interesting)
Our revolutionary fore fathers here the USA were criminals...but they weren't necessarily wrong. ...I could go on and on...
Kavorkian was a criminal for his assisted suicides, but now everyone is starting to do it.
Getting a blow job in a dozen states in the USA makes you a criminal, pure and simple. don't try to make excuses for your crimes.
Until 1969, letting a black man into a white establishment was a crime, pure and simple.
Drinking alcohol made you a criminal in the US for awhile. In many parts of the world, it still does.
Smoking up used to be totally fine in the US, but for the past 70-80 yrs suddenly you were a criminal for doing it.
Being a criminal as defined by your society and your actions doesn't mean you should be locked away forever
Your black and white, unwavering statements showcase your limited ability to empathize or see the larger way in which the world works. It's just childish.
Re:Sorry, but not here (Score:5, Interesting)
Prison serves multiple purposes. You can look at it as a place to try to institutionalize people, so they won't do whatever they did when they get out, because they, in theory, won't want to go back. You can look at it as punishment.
However it become blindingly obvious it does not work except in a few small cases. Some stats show nearly 63% of prison inmates cannot read. That would be crippling in our society. If they cannot read they probably cannot do simple math (also crippling). With little other choices in jobs they turn to crime. Because most jobs require at least that. All but the most menial of jobs require that and those will be replaced soon.
Yeah we want to make it so they do not want to go back. But lets also make it so they do not *need* to go back. I want an ROI for the billions we are spending.
Re:No, you fuck off (Score:5, Interesting)
How is putting this individual in prison going to
1) repair the damage they are accused of
2) improve society at large
3) cost effectively return them to society
I was a teenager in the 1990s and active in the computer underground, to the point where I was hacking systems, committing phone fraud, pirating warez, the whole nine yards. As I approached my 18th birthday, I was faced with a decision. Either I could continue breaking the law and face the consequences, or I could grow up. In my case, even a couple of decades ago, it was obvious that there were very real consequences to what I was doing. I was a known entity to the authorities, to the point where AT&T security had conversations with my parents and told them to get me under control, or they would. So I quit. I leveraged the knowledge I gained to get a job in IT. Now I make good money and manage a team of people.
By putting this guy in prison, my decision has been re-enforced as being the "right" decision. It probably will serve to dissuade a few others from engaging in serious crimes as well. It sucks to get 10 years, but there is no way that the guy did not know he was taking risks by doing what he was doing. "You roll the dice, you take your chances." fits in this situation.
In this day and age, "security researcher" is a valid career path. There are plenty of EASY and legal ways to do security research (virtualization, etc) that do not require doing pen tests on systems that you do not own, and do not have authorization to exploit. The whole mythos around the "harmless, curious hacker" is breaking down. Back in the day when the only systems out there were university systems or corporate systems, there was some validity to "having to" hack systems in order to learn. These days, with easy access to *nix systems, Windows boxes, browsers of all flavors, IDEs, compilers, etc, etc, etc... there is no "intellectual or educational" reason to go out and compromise other systems.
To turn the question around, what good comes from giving someone a free pass to hack Stratfor?