Twitter Hack Zoom Court Hearing Interrupted by Loud Music and Porn (vice.com) 71
From a report: A judge was forced to suspend the virtual bond hearing of the 17-year-old accused of being the "mastermind" behind the recent massive Twitter hack, after several people got into the Zoom meeting posing as CNN and BBC staffers and played loud music and even a porn video. Multiple reporters who attended the hearing via Zoom on Wednesday confirmed the incident. According to independent security journalist Brian Krebs, the problem was that the judge and his clerks did not set up the meeting in a way that would mute attendees and prevent them from taking over the screen (these are features that can be easily set when one creates a Zoom meeting). "Judges holding hearings over Zoom need to get a clue," Krebs wrote on Twitter.
Can we stop coddling the illiterate now please? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's well past time for the burden of competence to be placed back on the user. This whole social experiment into allowing idiots to think they have a right to be cognitively lazy when using the internet for critical communications has proven to be a total failure and it needs to end.
Re: (Score:2)
The judge could possibly argue that if the UI had only the buttons and defaults that courts needed, mistakes would be rarer. It probably has a sea of features that are irrelevant to court work.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
It could be argued that if tens of thousands of judges use such a tool, then having a court-customized UI is economically justifiable. I'm not quite sure that's the case, but it can be raised. If there is a telework API available, then a customized UI could be glued around it.
Re:Can we stop coddling the illiterate now please? (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if you know what you're doing, without sensible defaults you're at the mercy of having an absent-minded moment or not. It's like when routers defaulted to an unsecured SSID or a universal standard default password.
Re: (Score:2)
Routers defaulted to an unsecured SSID and passwords to a standard default specifically because users are well-known to be cognitively lazy. They can't be bothered do even the barest amount of reading to set up their $THING properly, so the manufacturers have to cater to the absolute lowest common denominator. Basic security doesn't have to be hard but the user has to actively participate and most will completely (and aggressively) refuse.
Re: (Score:2)
OK, here's a future headline for you: "Town hall criticized for not allowing citizens to voice opinion".
It'll turn out that the council members had it on the "sensible default" of muting everyone else.
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone but the hosts, yes. That's a best practice. It's not like you can't unmute them when needed. You would never want to start out with everyone unmuted if it's open to the public.
Re: (Score:2)
What's a sensible default? Everyone is muted?
DON'T USE ZOOM!
For the love of everything, why does people keep using this crappy insecure 15 year late newcomer??
Re: (Score:3)
For the love of everything, why does people keep using this crappy insecure 15 year late newcomer??
Because the well-entrenched existent commercial video chat services sucked.
Re: (Score:2)
So we turn to the conspiracy nut logic? A isn't what I want, so B must be great, even if it's bigger bullshit?
Re: (Score:2)
I take it you haven't had to use Teams, then.
Re: (Score:3)
Each of the alternatives is b
Re: (Score:2)
* reilably acceptable sound - much better than skype / meeting / teams etc.
The only time I've tried using Zoom I couldn't get any sound at all.
Fucking shitshow of a product. Video conferencing with no working sound when every other piece of software I run on my systems have no issues at all.
Re: (Score:2)
You have probably met a simple UX Zoom bad design, but I wasn't answering the question "what could the zoom people fix if they want to make their product better". I was answering "why does people keep using this crappy insecure 15 year late newcomer??" with the hope that someone else wants to learn from my list and replace zoom as the leading communication platform.
If you work for Jitsi and think it's useful, tell me where to contact you and I'll happily tell you all the things wrong with zoom and some s
Re: (Score:2)
The only time I've tried using Zoom I couldn't get any sound at all.
Not having sound at all in the sensible default.
Re: (Score:1)
Come on, anyone can see that letting everyone talk at once wasn't any better here.
Re:Can we stop coddling the illiterate now please? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's well past time for the burden of competence to be placed back on the user.
I disagree. I think it's well past time for people to be decent and respectful enough to not interrupt court hearings no matter what medium they are in, and for violators to be charged and prosecuted. There are no requirements or barriers to walk into a court and just start yelling (nor should there be), except that the judge would declare you in contempt, with serious consequences. Holding court through an electronic forum should be no different: public, respectful, with intentional interference punished.
Re: (Score:1)
Well, I agree with you on the punishment part, and I hope and assume that is what will actually happen, but despite that time and money was still wasted over something entirely preventable ahead of time. If the judge has the authority to choose the product and administer the use of it they need the qualifications to do it as well.
Re: (Score:2)
spotted the statist
Re: (Score:3)
Yes.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it isn't. In the courts in my country at least you first have to go through a security screening that ensures you're not going to cause trouble in the court session. If you let any idiot barge into a virtual one, you should expect the odd oddball.
Re: (Score:2)
odd oddball.
I guess that makes it a... ball?
Re: (Score:2)
You generally go through a security screening here to make sure you have no weapons. I have no idea what kind of security screening would make "ensures you're not going to cause trouble" since these guys "caused trouble" without the use of weaponry.
Re: (Score:2)
The US legal system does little to justify respect, so why shouldn't I mock it?
the judge would declare you in contempt, with serious consequences
The judge can go fuck himself, I'm not in his jurisdiction and his inability to hold a hearing online securely means I absolutely have contempt for him.
Re: (Score:2)
One hopes that the idiots doing so continue to piss off the judge making sure that he is as riled as possible when considering defense motions and getting the FBI to track down and ruin the days of those who (wrongly) think themselves untouchable.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering that it's the internet we're talking here, I doubt the FBI will be responsible authority for a lot of those cases, maybe try the CIA. Or the military. Or who's right now the entity to enforce the US will globally?
Re: (Score:2)
I recognize your hyperbole but the principal responsible authority is still the FBI, just as it was in tracking down Graham Ivan Clark & his cohorts. "Internet" changes nothing herre.
Re: (Score:2)
When it comes to the FBI, I'm pretty much untouchable. I don't plan to put a foot into the USA as long as it's run by a bunch of loonies. And since it has been like that for the better part of the past decades and shows no signs of changing any time soon, I guess it's gonna stay that way for a while.
Re: (Score:2)
Strange words coming from someone whose sig talks about “we” in a uniquely American context.
Re: (Score:2)
That sig is older than me steering clear of the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
Fair enough, mine dates back to the first months of my /. account. Still strange to hear “we” on the Bill of Rights coming from a non American citizen.
Re: Can we stop coddling the illiterate now please (Score:1)
It makes me sick that courts would still be using (Score:3)
Chinese malware after an open FBI warning among many many other things.
Twitter Hack Zoom Court Hearing (Score:5, Funny)
That is not the easiest thing to parse. It almost looks like a random jumble of words that you'd use in a cognitive test.
Re:Twitter Hack Zoom Court Hearing (Score:5, Funny)
Instead, how about, "Loud Music and Porn Interrupted by Twitter Hack Zoom Court Hearing?"
Re: (Score:2)
Interior crocodile alligator I drive a Chevrolet movie theater
Re: (Score:2)
Purple monkey dishwasher!
Re: (Score:2)
man, women, person, tv
Re: (Score:2)
I think you missed the word camera so you are disqualified from being President.
Re: (Score:2)
Underrated comment.
Re: (Score:3)
The middle three words can all be verbs which is what makes it so cognitively confusing.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Twitter Hack Zoom Court Hearing (Score:5, Funny)
I am pretty sure that Twitter hacked a court hearing about Zoom.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's about a bad Twitter programmer who goes by the name of "Zoom Court" whose voice jury (a.k.a. recital hearing) was interrupted by loud music and porn.
[The] Twitter Hack [calling him/herself] Zoom Court['s recital] Hearing [was] Interrupted by Loud Music and Porn
I think the headline is perfectly clear, and I can't imagine how anyone could possibly interpret it in any other way.
I feel sorry for the kid. It's hard enough to spend all those hours practicing for your recital hearing without some jerk f
Re: (Score:2)
It took me a minute, too. The headline needs work.
Re: (Score:2)
We're a ways off before an AI can produce a headline THAT convoluted. Slashdot editor jobs remain safe for now.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds more like a pass phrase to me. It might be a good alternative to Correct Battery Horse Staple.
Re: (Score:2)
It's like the start of a more current verse line of "we didn't start the fire".
The wrong button (Score:1)
Isn't that being kind of ... judgmental?
Re: (Score:2)
*puts on sunglasses, cut to front credits*
id he bond out? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They very likely don't give a shit. They were strictly doing it "for the lulz"
The Vice headline is much, much better: (Score:4, Informative)
"Twitter Hack Zoom Court Hearing Interrupted by Ass-Eating Porn Video"
Although, the article didn't specify "which" Ass-Eating Porn Video it was.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it's not really a big deal, the storyline is pretty predictable, you've seen one, you've puked to all of them.
Why would the judge need a clue? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't they have minions to set these up properly?
Re: (Score:2)
Zoom video conferencing .. (Score:1)
Re: Zoom video conferencing .. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The company maybe in Florida, but the infrastructure resides in the Cloud.
“Zoom
Somehow, I don't think Cloud and Peer-to-Peer go in the one sentence.
Judges should be good at judging (Score:4, Insightful)
There is really no reason why the judge should be overseeing the video conference. That should be the job of some clerk who can be sent off for a weeks training to learn it all.
Re: (Score:2)
If a judge brings a camera into the courtroom, I expect him to be able to use it.
If a judge brings a laptop into the courtroom, I expect him to be able to use it.
The judge is in charge of his courtroom. If he allows something into the courtroom, he should understand the usage and ramifications of that device. If a spectator comes into his courtroom with a megaphone, he should understand the potential for disrupting
Re: (Score:2)
In this particular incident the judge was supposed to hold a bond hearing about a massive hacking spree, yet the judge proved utterly incompetent about this subject.
Gotta admit (Score:2)
Good. (Score:2)
Bring back Twitter Premium! Nobody wants to see what bluechecks have to say.
You deserve wht you ger. (Score:2)
For being such fucking off-the-scale retards, that you would use Zoom, at all, /ever/.
Let alone in a freaking *court hearing*.
Such people (I meant thst judge) NEED to be put in a hospital or the mentally disabled / criminally insane! Otherwise we are letting the idiocracy just come.