The FBI Is Arresting People Who Rent DDoS Botnets (bleepingcomputer.com) 212
This week the FBI arrested a 26-year-old southern California man for launching a DDoS attack against online chat service Chatango at the end of 2014 and in early 2015 -- part of a new crackdown on the customers of "DDoS-for-hire" services. An anonymous reader writes:
Sean Krishanmakoto Sharma, a computer science graduate student at USC, is now facing up to 10 years in prison and/or a fine of up to $250,000. Court documents describe a service called Xtreme Stresser as "basically a Linux botnet DDoS tool," and allege that Sharma rented it for an attack on Chatango, an online chat service. "Sharma is now free on a $100,000 bail," reports Bleeping Computer, adding "As part of his bail release agreement, Sharma is banned from accessing certain sites such as HackForums and tools such as VPNs..."
"Sharma's arrest is part of a bigger operation against DDoS-for-Hire services, called Operation Tarpit," the article points out. "Coordinated by Europol, Operation Tarpit took place between December 5 and December 9, and concluded with the arrest of 34 users of DDoS-for-hire services across the globe, in countries such as Australia, Belgium, France, Hungary, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States." It grew out of an earlier investigation into a U.K.-based DDoS-for-hire service which had 400 customers who ultimately launched 603,499 DDoS attacks on 224,548 targets.
Most of the other suspects arrested were under the age of 20.
"Sharma's arrest is part of a bigger operation against DDoS-for-Hire services, called Operation Tarpit," the article points out. "Coordinated by Europol, Operation Tarpit took place between December 5 and December 9, and concluded with the arrest of 34 users of DDoS-for-hire services across the globe, in countries such as Australia, Belgium, France, Hungary, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States." It grew out of an earlier investigation into a U.K.-based DDoS-for-hire service which had 400 customers who ultimately launched 603,499 DDoS attacks on 224,548 targets.
Most of the other suspects arrested were under the age of 20.
Re: (Score:2)
hey, how about you don't do that (Score:5, Insightful)
A couple of years sounds good to me. Reform, know that it's serious, and don't any of your freedom for granted. I think we're still decades away from the law and society catching up to finding the balance.
Re:hey, how about you don't do that (Score:5, Insightful)
A couple of years sounds good to me. Reform, know that it's serious, and don't any of your freedom for granted. I think we're still decades away from the law and society catching up to finding the balance.
A couple years is significant, although in the US it seems everyone wants everyone executed for anything. Of course we'd all be dead.
I wonder if we should start teaching civics again in schools. Seems a freaking CS graduate should know better, both socially and technically.
Re: (Score:1)
I wonder if we should start teaching civics again in schools.
No question about it. That's far better than the liberal BS they replaced it with.
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, there is quite a bit of evidence that the chance of being caught at all or rather the perception of it, has a lot more to do with modification of behaviour than harshness of punishment. We have been optimizing the wrong way then wondering why it fails.
The problem with the get tough on crime movement is that it escalates punishment so quickly that it very quicklys makes for people who aren't afraid to die because they have nothing to live for any more. Or become incredibly violent because that is how Law enforcement treats them. Enter the War on Drugs, which drugs have clearly won. Enter Prohibition, which was the best thing ever to happen to organized crime.
Because the "tough on crime" crowd breeds this weird chimera person who wants the most harsh p
Re:hey, how about you don't do that (Score:5, Informative)
now facing up to 10 years in prison and/or a fine of up to $250,000.
Doesn't mean he's going to get exactly that.
Re: (Score:3)
Those don't matter as much as the long term effects for a young CS graduate.
Re:hey, how about you don't do that (Score:5, Insightful)
Then perhaps NOT DOING THAT would be a good decision.
"It was just a prank, bro" isn't a valid defense. Ever.
Re: (Score:3)
Fuck valid defense.
I was 26, 45 years ago.
I'm an expert at doing stupid shit.
I just never got caught.
He'll grow up.
Re: hey, how about you don't do that (Score:2)
You didn't get caught that's the problem.... it's not an excuse.
I for one would like to see you discovered and punished appropriately (ok maybe a bit more than appropriate would be nice)
The world would have 1 less asshole and be less full of shit.
Re:hey, how about you don't do that (Score:5, Insightful)
Good for you?
Actions, even mistakes, have consequences.
It affects other people, so it's not harmless.
He'll grow up, but he'll have to suffer the consequences of his own actions and decisions.
I personally managed to never do stupid shit that happened to be a felony. Because you know, I understand the whole consequences thing.
Congratulations for getting away with it, I guess.
Re: (Score:2)
In EU countries stuff like this is eventually considered "spent", in that you don't have to tell employers or banks about it. The police keep a permanent record but it won't screw up your life forever.
Re: (Score:1)
> I personally managed to never do stupid shit that happened to be a felony.
I guarantee that you have, especially if you do anything computer related.
Have you ever sat down at somebody's computer and tried to help them figure out why something on a remote site didn't work? CFAA violation if they were logged in with their own credentials. Unauthorized use of blahblahblah.
Now, go be a stupid kid doing stupid kid stuff in the legal minefield of the internet these days.
May as well just execute this generat
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Shoot 'em all, eh?
Re: (Score:2)
Renting a botnet to DoS a site isn't just "stupid shit", this should have consequences.
Re: (Score:1)
It is "stupid shit" compared to the sentence he'll get for it.
He'd have been better off committing a violent crime.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
A couple of years sounds good to me. Reform, know that it's serious, and don't any of your freedom for granted. I think we're still decades away from the law and society catching up to finding the balance.
It's nice to know you've made that decision based on knowing all the facts of the case contained in a slashdot summary.
Jail is serious. Even the threat of jail can cause reform. He is facing ten years but depending on how much damage the attack actually did, they should let him plead it down to much less, especially if he's a first-time offender. Someone out early on probation who knows that they're going away for five years if they screw up can be more useful to society and more likely to reform than someo
Re: (Score:1)
they should let him plead it down to much less
Why, so that they get a guilty plea and don't have to actually find, assess and present evidence?
"Plead guilty and we'll only give you two years, or we'll be pushing for the full ten and a fine that you'll be working for another 8 years to pay off."
This isn't justice.
Re:hey, how about you don't do that (Score:5, Insightful)
You only get justice if you can afford it.
It's the American way.
Re: pipes and their dreams (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Paperwork you have to file, refile, pay to file, copy and send to someone else to file, etc...
Defendants don't have to pay to file, and the paperwork is not so much. I have represented myself in several cases (civil not criminal) that were too simple to waste money on a lawyer. I would never do that as a plaintiff, but as a defendant it worked out okay. All were settled out of court on reasonable terms.
Re: (Score:2)
I notice nobody bothered to discuss the bail amount - $100,000! That's outrageous, only people of means could possibly raise that, poor people just rot in prison until their trial eventually happens. In the mean time they can't earn an income and the bills keep coming in.
I guess you're not familiar with bail bonds?
Re: (Score:2)
>Why, so that they get a guilty plea and don't have to actually find, assess and present evidence?
That's not 'completely' true. The DA has to present the plea deal to a judge (in theory the same judge that you would have your trial in front of) and the judge tell the DA the plea is not accepted because of lack of evidence and that it must be brought to trial.
Re:hey, how about you don't do that (Score:5, Insightful)
Given that the estimated damage was $5000, I'd hope he just gets a rather stiff fine (maybe five to ten times the estimated damages). There's no need for him to be in prison, as he's not a danger to society, although he does need to be punished. The greater value is in letting people know they can't get away with hiring these services without consequences.
For people wishing for law enforcement to go after the botnets themselves, we just had a story from a week ago about international law enforcement removing a very large botnet. They seem to be attacking the problem from both ends, which seems like a reasonable approach.
Now we just need to figure out how to secure all these damned routers and IoT devices so they can't be used as botnets so easily. This wouldn't be nearly so much a problem if the fruit wasn't quite so low-hanging.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Prison is completely unsuitable for a first offence of this nature. It won't provide him with the skills to live a reformed life afterwards, he already has those it seems. A fine seems like the best option, because he could keep his career going and build a life to move past what he did and be a productive contributor to society, but still be punished and deterred from doing it again.
Re: (Score:2)
Now we just need to figure out how to secure all these damned routers and IoT devices so they can't be used as botnets so easily. This wouldn't be nearly so much a problem if the fruit wasn't quite so low-hanging.
Stronger product liability laws and rulings against manufacturers or distributors would probably be a good start. Make the source responsible for the ability to compromise the device, with financial penalities based on install base when vulnerabilities are not discovered. Use the recall process like most other products are subject to as well.
If it hurts their bottom lines, companies will actually start paying attention to security.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Jail is serious.
So it depriving a business of their livelihood. Someone walking into a store with a gun and robbing the cash register does a LOT less financial damage than these A-holes, but no one argues that armed robbers should be let off with a warning.
That said, I agree that no 18 year old should get multiple years in jail for a first time computer crime that didn't cause human harm. But there needs to be some SERIOUS repercussion, possibly including some (brief) jail time or everyone is going to think you get one g
Re: (Score:3)
I'd say a better analogy would be burglary instead of armed robbery, as threatening someone with a gun is serious because of the implied threat to human life. Also, it's a bit strange that he supposedly brought down this chat site for two months, yet damages are valued at $5000. One can only draw the conclusion that this was not a large, money-making operation.
I'm not making light of this, but this was the equivalent of some small time burglary or shoplifting, not some masterful hack bringing down million
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say a better analogy would be burglary instead of armed robbery, as threatening someone with a gun is serious because of the implied threat to human life. Also, it's a bit strange that he supposedly brought down this chat site for two months, yet damages are valued at $5000. One can only draw the conclusion that this was not a large, money-making operation.
Ok, sure. Felony burglary can get you 10-20 years in many states. Though it usually doesn't unless there are other circumstances. Still, breaking into someone's house and stealing $5000 is most definitely a felony (if the state wants to prosecute it as such). I'm just saying if you are going to give a black teenager 3 years for felony burglary, give a white teenager the same sentence for felony computer hacking. Or decide neither is worth that.
Re: (Score:2)
In my jurisdiction, at least, they don't. Black teenage burglars get time served and probation. We've got some local criminals who've gotten arrested literally ninety-plus times, and still can't get the judge to put them in actual prison for any significant length of time.
Re: (Score:2)
Anecdotes are useless in this case. And why should I even believe you have any idea what the real stats are? I prefer to trust actual research...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12... [nytimes.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't say black burglars weren't getting treated more harshly (i.e., unfairly) than white burglars, just that they were getting time served and probation instead of three years in prison. It's hard to tell though, because there aren't any white burglars around here to begin with (or maybe there are, but they don't even get arrested).
Re: (Score:2)
IMHO: Someone robbing a place at gunpoint should be sentenced to attempted murder, OTOH I think people that attempt to kill someone should be sentenced as if they succeeded.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah yes, money is more important than the threat of physical violence.
Re:hey, how about you don't do that (Score:4, Interesting)
Sure depends on the amount of each. I'd sure prefer a threat of physical violence over some douche bag stealing my life savings from an investment account, and would gladly argue the latter should pay more.
Re: (Score:1)
Prison isn't punishment. Prison is a training ground for future criminal behavior.
Re: (Score:1)
Not a punishment? You're fine with going to jail tomorrow then?
Re: (Score:2)
Sending criminals to hard labour with poor conditions makes them more productive.
Instead of making iPhones in China we should make them in the US prisons with the same pay and working conditions with anti suicide nets to ensure there is no escape from punishment.
It seems strange, but here in the US we have some sort of stigma against laws that set up slave labor or "indentured servitude."
Wonder why. Must be some relic of the past.
Re: hey, how about you don't do that (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing that is generally agreed upon is that prison separates the convicted from the rest of society. Beyond that, whether it's used to punish, or to rehabilitate, or to act as a deterrent, or as a form of cheap labor, or to "enforce the underclass" to maintain a population that must do the menial jobs that no one wants to ot
Re: (Score:2)
When you commit a crime, you deserve to be punished.
This means nothing. You've committed crimes.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Love the sig.
It would be funny to attack Russia, but what would it accomplish? If they really did perform the hack, what are you going to charge them with? All they did was expose the truth, what a horrible crime.
Re: (Score:2)
A couple of years sounds good to me.
Keep in mind that "a couple of years" has a tremendous lifetime impact. The problem is that any crime that carries a maximum sentence of one year or more is a felony. Felonies dog you for life, and in many cases make you unemployable in your chosen profession.
For Rent? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Still breaking the law by using other peoples devices without their consent.
The question here is, is it still breaking the law by NOT using other peoples devices without their consent?
Re: (Score:2)
Great idea! It seems legit. So, we will me setting multiple botnets shortly to take advantage of this great market opportunity. Shouldn't cost much either since the bots will never be used!
Thanks you!
Re: (Score:2)
If you can rent botnets, then maybe that would be useful to large corporations who do not want to be DDOSed. They rent the botnet, then don't use it. That way, those millions of bots aren't being used to attack their site.
Yes, I'm sure the people who control these botnets would not notice they weren't being used; or would notice but feel bound by their sense of ethics to not take advantage and simultaneously rent the botnet to someone else.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
that's not how botnets generally work. They're more like timehare services, and typically you can even get time on just a specific number of machines at a time - you pay by the hour by the cpu time. So if you rent a botnet and don't use it, you're just throwing your money away and someone else will use your time and pay for it too, making the bot herder more money.
This article is a little surprising in that it sounds like the FBI going after these people is a *new* thing. I thought it was part of their ma
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds like extortion to me. The mob uses the same strategy - "hey, pay us to protect you and we don't destroy your business".
Re: (Score:2)
Danegeld (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same reason any civil society should ban paying ransoms to terrorists etc. While you may personally benefit, society loses because you are funding the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Grown Up Children (Score:5, Insightful)
The immaturity of some of these graduate students is astonishing, they're essentially grown up children.
Modern society is such that people aren't often forced to grow up until their 20s or 30s.
Re: (Score:1)
Or, if they (which is to say, their parents) have money, they don't have to grow up at all.
Re: (Score:2)
The immaturity of some of these graduate students is astonishing, they're essentially grown up children.
Every adult is a grown up child! ;-)
https://english.stackexchange.... [stackexchange.com]
Re: (Score:2)
How about targeting the source? (Score:5, Informative)
Busting a few users sounds like the same failure that is the War On Drugs. They should go after the purveyors of these DDoS/stresser/booter services. Check out this recent list of them, all serviced by CloudFlare in the last year. This is who they need to arrest.
alphastress.com, anonymous-stresser.net, aurastresser.com, beststresser.com, boot4free.com, booter.eu, booter.org, booter.xyz, bullstresser.com, buybooters.com, cnstresser.com, connectionstresser.com, crazyamp.me, critical-boot.com, cstress.net, cyberstresser.org, darkstresser.info, darkstresser.net, databooter.com, ddos-fighter.com, ddos-him.com, ddos.city, ddosbreak.com, ddosclub.com, ddostheworld.com, defcon.pro, destressbooter.com, destressnetworks.com, diamond-stresser.net, diebooter.com, diebooter.net, down-stresser.com, downthem.org, exitus.to, exostress.in, free-boot.xyz, freebooter4.me, freestresser.xyz, grimbooter.com, heavystresser.com, hornystress.me, iddos.net, inboot.me, instabooter.com, ipstresser.co, ipstresser.com, jitterstresser.com, k-stress.pw, layer-4.com, layer7.pw, legionboot.com, logicstresser.net, mercilesstresser.com, mystresser.com, netbreak.ec, netspoof.net, networkstresser.com, neverddos.com, nismitstresser.net, onestress.com, onestresser.net, parabooter.com, phoenixstresser.com, pineapple-stresser.com, powerstresser.com, privateroot.fr, purestress.net, quantumbooter.net, quezstresser.com, ragebooter.net, rawlayer.com, reafstresser.ga, restricted-stresser.info, routerslap.com, sharkstresser.com, signalstresser.com, silence-stresser.com, skidbooter.info, spboot.net, stormstresser.net, str3ssed.me, stressboss.net, stresser.club, stresser.in, stresser.network, stresser.ru, stresserit.com, synstress.net, titaniumbooter.net, titaniumstresser.net, topstressers.com, ts3booter.net, unseenbooter.com, vbooter.org, vdos-s.com, webbooter.com, webstresser.co, wifistruggles.com, xboot.net, xr8edstresser.com, xtreme.cc, youboot.net
If CloudFlare would stop providing bulletproof hosting for criminals and spammers, the internet would be a better place. But CloudFlare apparently loves its criminal customers and the FBI loves CloudFlare. DDoS purveyors [ipaddress.com], terrorist websites [theepochtimes.com], malware distributors [malwareurl.com], CloudFlare seems to welcome them all to its hive of scum and villainy. Maybe it's time to revive the concept of the Usenet Death Penalty and apply it to all traffic to and from CloudFlare. They're the sewer of the internet and should be null routed and de-peered.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Without piracy sites, I doubt that services like Netflix or Apple Music would exist
Netflix is an example of where we've slid backwards -- lost freedom compared to what we had before. Strongly-controlled DRM platform, streaming that's not on your terms, no ownership by the end user, and high fees from the content companies.
Don't get me wrong, I like me some Netflix, but online streaming is an example of a power grab by the content companies that worked.
Agreed 110% & thanks (me?) (Score:1)
See subject: For providing 102 means to FURTHER "arrest operations" of 8 botnets this week by your providing those DDoS'ing sites to block via custom hosts files (the means I use to protect others online as well as speed them up + make their connections more reliable & more anonymous)
* MOD WHO I REPLIED TO UP TO +5 FOLKS!
(I may or MAY NOT have had those already but it never hurts to build those into hosts for tonite's build as blocked here if not)
APK
P.S.=> Per my subject's termination above? This is
Re: (Score:2)
Free speech means taking the good with the bad.
Re: (Score:1)
I never said it did, I meant Cloudflare.
Re: (Score:1)
The war on drugs is significantly different in that drugs are addictive. The users of drugs are victims of a sort themselves.
Arresting a botnet renter is much more like arresting people who try to hire hit-men. Both the purchaser and the purveyor should be arrested and treated harshly in these scenarios.
Actual Charges (Score:1)
Transmission of a Program, Information, Code, and Command to Cause Damage to a Protected Computer. -- Felony
Maximum Term 10 year. Maximum Fine $250,000
Re: (Score:2)
So no guns (legally) for this dude.
Unauthorised Access is already a US felony (Score:2)
Doh! Accessing a computer without the owners permission is a felony under 18 USC 1030 . Even if the vendors did not access/test their botnet, they are accessories-before-the-fact. DDoS on open, public ports may or may not be covered as contrary to 18 USC 1030 , however accessing all the little 'bots most certainly is.
Chatango (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He probably got kicked off Chatango for harassing some woman.
New ways to attack politicians (Score:2)
Requires remuneration and public service (Score:2)
So how did he get caught? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Computers hijacked for botnet (Score:1)
OMG, Arresting people that break the law... (Score:3)
There are very few applications for a DDoS attack that could be considered legal. The FBI, and other law enforcement agencies, should be arresting those that break the law. Maybe that will leave them less time to spy on the rest of us...
There are more victims in a DDoS attack than the target. They can include:
* The people or organisations with infected devices that launch the attack that can have actual costs due to the use of their connections.
* Internet service providers.
* The rest of us that just want to be able to surf the net without reduced performance.
* Those that have a legitimate reason and right to access the target of the attack.
I can't see any reason to feel sympathetic towards the customers of DDoS for hire that get caught. Lock them up like any other criminal.
Hey how about (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Misleading Title/Summary (Score:2)
So as I read this, you get busted for *using* a botnet, not just renting one. If you fancy renting a botnet to dos yourself to collect the IPs so you contact all the participants to help them fix their stuff, I think you'd be okay ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
P.S.=> It's NOT easy being "world-class"... apk
Maybe that's why you've never managed to achieve such a status, except in terms of "being a spammer".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're dismantling yourself YETI
Only you think so, and that's only because you cannot read and ignore the points that are made. You've addressed nothing in my posts, just repeated your usual claims.
The speedup of resolving a name via a hosts whitelist vs DNS cache is below human perception in most cases. The difference between operating in kernelmode vs usermode is imperceptible in most cases. You keep ignoring the fact that your big selling point - increased efficiency and speed is trivial for most users these days. It's unnoticeable. I
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)