Anonymous Hacktivist

Anonymous hacktivist

see also big database, since progressives can use www too eg <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/05/anomaly-tracker.html">https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/05/anomaly-tracker.html</a>
zombie zoe 6 22

ethics of doxxing of alt rtanniv of charlottesville (interesting class divide: preppies with prof'l future do not want to be outed but atomwaffen proles do not care b/c see no prof future)<a href="https://kpfa.org/episode/letters-and-politics-august-8-2018/">https://kpfa.org/episode/letters-and-politics-august-8-2018/</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force</a>Israeli Elite Force (iEF) is a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacktivism" title="Hacktivism" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">hacktivism</a> group founded two days before <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpIsrael" title="OpIsrael" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">OpIsrael</a> on April 5, 2013<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-thedailybeast.com-1" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[1]</a> that is responsible for multiple high-profile computer attacks and large scale online vandalism. Targets include <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_service_provider" title="Internet service provider" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">ISPs</a>, domain registrars, commercial websites, educational institutions, and government agencies. The group's core members are: mitziyahu, Buddhax, amenefus, bl4z3, r3str1ct3d, Mute, Cyb3rS74r, Oshrio, Aph3x, xxtr, Kavim, md5c, Cpt|Sparrow, gal-, gr1sha, nyxman and TheGodOfHell.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-thedailybeast.com-1" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[1]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-2" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[2]</a><div id="toc" class="toc" style="border: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); background-color: rgb(248, 249, 250); padding: 7px; display: table; zoom: 1; color: rgb(34, 34, 34);"><ul style="margin: 0.3em 0px; padding: 0px; list-style-type: none; list-style-image: none;"><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#Views" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">1Views</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-2" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#OpIsrael_Opposition" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">2OpIsrael Opposition</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-3" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#OpIslam" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">3OpIslam</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-4" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#OpBirthControl-OpIsraelBirthday_opposition" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">4OpBirthControl - OpIsraelBirthday opposition</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-5" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#Palestinian_Population_Database_Leak" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">5Palestinian Population Database Leak</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-6" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#References" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">6References</a></li></ul></div><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); font-family: " linux="Linux" libertine="Libertine" georgia="Georgia" times="Times" serif="serif" line-height="line-height">Views[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_Elite_Force&action=edit&section=1" title="Edit section: Views" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">edit</a>]</h2>The group is led by Mitziyahu, naming himself co-ordinator, instead of leader. Stating in interviews for The Daily Beast, Israeli Channel 2 News, and more, that the mission of the iEF is to regain the Israeli citizen confidence of their hackers, and to fight Islamic cyber terrorism.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-thedailybeast.com-1" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[1]</a><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); font-family: " linux="Linux" libertine="Libertine" georgia="Georgia" times="Times" serif="serif" line-height="line-height">OpIsrael Opposition[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_Elite_Force&action=edit&section=2" title="Edit section: OpIsrael Opposition" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">edit</a>]</h2><div role="note" class="hatnote navigation-not-searchable" style="font-style: italic; padding-left: 1.6em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; color: rgb(34, 34, 34); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Main article: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpIsrael" title="OpIsrael" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">OpIsrael</a></div>OpIsrael was a coordinated <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberattack" title="Cyberattack" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">cyberattack</a> by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Israel" class="mw-redirect" title="Anti-Israel" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">anti-Israel</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-toi-3" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[3]</a> groups and individuals against <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Website" title="Website" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">websites</a> they perceived as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel" title="Israel" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">Israeli</a>, chiefly through <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial-of-service_attack" title="Denial-of-service attack" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">denial-of-service attacks</a>.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-jp-4" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[4]</a> Timed for 7 April 2013, the eve of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_HaShoah" title="Yom HaShoah" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">Holocaust Remembrance Day</a>,<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-5" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[5]</a> its stated goal was to "erase Israel from the internet".<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-rt-6" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[6]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-f24-7" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[7]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-ds-8" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[8]</a> Israeli Elite Force had an early start forming two days prior to the attack, taking down Iranian, Pakistani, Turkish government website and leaking information on Twitter. They received coverage in the world media, which stated the counterattack was more productive.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-thedailybeast.com-1" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[1]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-stream.aljazeera.com-9" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[9]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-10" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[10]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-11" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[11]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-12" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[12]</a><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); font-family: " linux="Linux" libertine="Libertine" georgia="Georgia" times="Times" serif="serif" line-height="line-height">OpIslam[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_Elite_Force&action=edit&section=3" title="Edit section: OpIslam" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">edit</a>]</h2>The groups has organized a preemptive attack known as OpIslam to start a day earlier of OpIsrael<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-13" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[13]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-14" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[14]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-15" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[15]</a>. Groups known to join iEF at the planned operations include: sTz Hackers, MiSa3L Hacker Team and some single <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker(computer_security)" class="mw-redirect" title="Hacker (computer security)" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">hackers</a>. Cyber War New website released a summary of attacks which lists the attacks and counterattacks, named Operation Israel Reloaded.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-16" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[16]</a> The OpIslam attack has received some criticism for being somewhat offensive with this said preemptive attack, as opposed to the groups usual defensive actions.<h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); font-family: " linux="Linux" libertine="Libertine" georgia="Georgia" times="Times" serif="serif" line-height="line-height">OpBirthControl - OpIsraelBirthday opposition[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_Elite_Force&action=edit&section=4" title="Edit section: OpBirthControl - OpIsraelBirthday opposition" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">edit</a>]</h2>Upon planning of the OpIsraelBirthday by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Israeli_government" title="Criticism of the Israeli government" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">anti-Israeli</a> teams on April 7, 2014, iEF launched OpBirthControl, having several groups and individuals joining them.On this op the Israeli Elite Force decided to focus its energy on exposing participants of the anti-Israel hacks. The iEF hacked named Buddhax published a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDF" title="PDF" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">PDF</a> document<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-17" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[17]</a> with a list of hackers and personal information including pictures of them taken from their computers. The PDF document has created a "<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing_buzz" title="Marketing buzz" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">buzz</a>" being twitted by famous hacker <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jester(hacktivist)" title="The Jester (hacktivist)" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">The Jester</a>,<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-18" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[18]</a> and celebrity <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roseanne_Barr" title="Roseanne Barr" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">Roseanne Barr</a>,<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-19" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[19]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-20" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[20]</a> and being talked about in the media.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-21" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[21]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-22" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[22]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-23" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[23]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-24" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[24]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-25" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[25]</a> The group also released 45,000 usernames and passwords of government officials at the Gaza Ministry of Health<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-26" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[26]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-27" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[27]</a><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); font-family: " linux="Linux" libertine="Libertine" georgia="Georgia" times="Times" serif="serif" line-height="line-height">Palestinian Population Database Leak[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_Elite_Force&action=edit&section=5" title="Edit section: Palestinian Population Database Leak" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">edit</a>]</h2>On another counter-op named #OpIsraelRetailiate, the IEF leaked a database file of the Palestinian Authority Population Registry.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-28" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[28]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-i24news.tv-29" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[29]</a> This action was referred to as unprecedented by Israeli data security experts.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-30" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[30]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Elite_Force#cite_note-31" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">[31]</a> At the same counter-op, the group also leaked Palestinian Authority unemployment office information containing 38,000 names and personal data of 700 job holders in the Palestinian Authority...<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous</a>...In December 2010, the document archive website <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks" title="WikiLeaks" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">WikiLeaks</a> (used by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower" title="Whistleblower" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">whistleblowers</a>) came under intense pressure to stop publishing <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_diplomatic_cables_leak" title="United States diplomatic cables leak" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">secret United States diplomatic cables</a>. In response, Anonymous announced its support for WikiLeaks,<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-69" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[69]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-70" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[70]</a> and Operation Payback changed its focus to support WikiLeaks and launched DDoS attacks against <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon.com" title="Amazon.com" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Amazon</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PayPal" title="PayPal" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">PayPal</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MasterCard" title="MasterCard" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">MasterCard</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_Inc." title="Visa Inc." style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Visa</a> and the Swiss bank PostFinance, in retaliation for perceived anti-WikiLeaks behavior. This second front in the December offensive was performed under the codename Operation Avenge Assange.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-71" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[71]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-72" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[72]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-73" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[73]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-74" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[74]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-75" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[75]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-76" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[76]</a> Due to the attacks, both MasterCard and Visa's websites were brought down on December 8.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-77" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[77]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-78" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[78]</a> A threat researcher at PandaLabs said Anonymous also launched an attack which brought down the Swedish prosecutor's website when WikiLeaks founder <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange" title="Julian Assange" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Julian Assange</a> was arrested in London and refused bail in relation to extradition to Sweden.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-79" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[79]</a>After suspected leaker <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Manning" title="Chelsea Manning" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Chelsea Manning</a> was transferred to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Corps_Brig,Quantico" title="Marine Corps Brig, Quantico" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Marine Corps Brig, Quantico</a> in July 2010, allegations of abuse arose around Manning's isolation in a maximum security area, and the suicide-watch she was put under which included constant verbal checks by guards and forced nudity.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-80" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[80]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-81" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[81]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-82" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[82]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-83" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[83]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-84" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[84]</a> Military officials denied the treatment was abuse or abnormal. In an event that led to his resignation, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assistant_Secretary_of_State_for_Public_Affairs" title="Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">State Department spokesman</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_J.Crowley" title="Philip J. Crowley" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Philip J. Crowley</a> made statements condemning the treatment.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-85" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[85]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-86" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[86]</a> In response to Manning's imprisonment and treatment, Anonymous threatened to disrupt activities at Quantico by cyber-attacking communications, exposing private information about personnel, and other harassment methods.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-87" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[87]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-88" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[88]</a> Dubbed "Operation Bradical",<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-89" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[89]</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spokesperson" title="Spokesperson" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Spokesperson</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalist" title="Journalist" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">journalist</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrett_Brown" title="Barrett Brown" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Barrett Brown</a> stated that this would be in direct response for the alleged mistreatment.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-90" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[90]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-91" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[91]</a> Military spokespersons have responded that the threat has been referred to law enforcement and counterterrorism officials and requested an investigation.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-92" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[92]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-93" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[93]</a>...Anonymous launched several Denial-of-Service attacks on the Visa, MasterCard and PayPal companies for cutting off their services to Wikileaks.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-95" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[95]</a> 2010...<div role="note" class="hatnote navigation-not-searchable" style="font-style: italic; padding-left: 1.6em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">See also: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HBGary#WikiLeaks.2C_Bank_of_America.2C_Hunton.26_Williams.2C_and_Anonymous" title="HBGary" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">WikiLeaks, Bank of America, Hunton & Williams, and Anonymous</a></div><table class="toccolours" cellspacing="5" style="border: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); background: rgb(198, 219, 247); padding: 5px; float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 2em; width: 25em; max-width: 25%;"><tbody><tr><td>One man, who calls himself Owen, says his Anonymous colleagues broke into the company's servers. Hackers have a name for what they did. "They decided to just rape his servers and take all the information they wanted," he says. "Forgive that term ... 'Rape' is an Internet term, you know, as to go in and take everything out of somebody's server." Whatever the term, it was not a nice thing that Anonymous did to HBGary Federal. But now that the company's e-mails are out, it appears it was also willing to do some not-nice things.</td></tr><tr><td>—E-Mails Hacked By 'Anonymous' Raise Concerns, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPR" title="NPR" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">NPR</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-npr_2-108" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[108]</a></td></tr></tbody></table>On the weekend of February 5–6, 2011, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Barr" class="mw-redirect" title="Aaron Barr" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Aaron Barr</a>, the chief executive of the security firm <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HBGary_Federal" class="mw-redirect" title="HBGary Federal" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">HBGary Federal</a>, announced that his firm had successfully infiltrated the Anonymous group, and although he would not hand over details to the police, he would reveal his findings at a later conference in San Francisco. In retaliation for Aaron Barr's claims, members of the group Anonymous hacked the website of HBGary Federal and replaced the welcome page with a message stating that Anonymous should not be messed with, and that the hacking of the website was necessary to defend itself. Using a variety of techniques, including <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_engineering(security)" title="Social engineering (security)" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">social engineering</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL_injection" title="SQL injection" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">SQL injection</a>,<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-109" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[109]</a> Anonymous also went on to take control of the company's e-mail, dumping 68,000 e-mails from the system, erasing files, and taking down their phone system.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-110" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[110]</a> The leaked emails revealed the reports and company presentations of other companies in computer security such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endgame_systems" class="mw-redirect" title="Endgame systems" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Endgame systems</a> who promise high quality offensive software, advertising "subscriptions of $2,500,000 per year for access to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-day_exploit" class="mw-redirect" title="Zero-day exploit" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">0day exploits</a>".<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-111" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[111]</a>Among the documents exposed was a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerPoint" class="mw-redirect" title="PowerPoint" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">PowerPoint</a> presentation entitled "The Wikileaks Threat", put together by HBGary Federal along with two other data intelligence firms for Bank of America in December.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-CB1-112" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[112]</a> Within the report, these firms created a list of important contributors to WikiLeaks; they further developed a strategic plan of attack against the site. As TechHerald explains, "the plan included pressing a journalist in order to disrupt his support of the organization, cyber attacks, disinformation, and other potential proactive tactics." The report specifically claims that <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Greenwald" title="Glenn Greenwald" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Glenn Greenwald</a>'s support was key to WikiLeaks' ongoing survival.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-113" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[113]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-114" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[114]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-115" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[115]</a>Anonymous also personally attacked Aaron Barr by taking control of his Twitter account, posting Mr Barr's supposed home address and social security number.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-independent.co.uk-116" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[116]</a>In response to the attacks, founder of HBGary Federal, Greg Hoglund, responded to journalist Brian Krebs, "They didn't just pick on any company, we try to protect the US Government from hackers. They couldn't have chosen a worse company to pick on."<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-independent.co.uk-116" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[116]</a> After the attacks, Anonymous continued to clog up HBGary Federal fax machines, and made threatening phone calls.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-117" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[117]</a>...On December 24, [2011?] claims were made that Anonymous stole thousands of e-mail addresses and credit card information from security firm <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratfor" title="Stratfor" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Stratfor</a>. Reportedly, Anonymous commented that this is because the data was unencrypted, however Anonymous put out a press-release stating "This hack is most definitely not the work of Anonymous".<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous#cite_note-201" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[201]</a>8/16Lauri Love is a British activist facing extradition to the U.S. and decades in prison for protesting the persecution of U.S. internet activist Aaron Swartz. He needs our help! RootsAction Education Fund and the Courage Foundation, based in the U.S. and Europe, respectively, are teaming up to support Love, who faces potential extradition in a hearing later this month. <a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=G5UkT1UVTgG%2BLPecEmIXpIM8wVCjbHtE" style="-webkit-padding-start: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; background: transparent;">Click here to help fund Love's legal expenses.</a> Half of the proceeds raised will go to RootsAction Education Fund, and the other half will be a charitable donation to help fund Love's legal defense, to keep him from the exacerbation of illnesses that an extradition would certainly bring on. Donations are tax-deductible in the United States. Lauri Love is a computer scientist from Stradishall in the UK who has a long history of political activism. He played a prominent role in the student and Occupy movements in Glasgow, Scotland, during 2011-2012. Love is facing potential extradition to the United States for his alleged involvement in #OpLastResort, the series of online protests that followed the persecution and suicide of Aaron Swartz. Love is being pursued by the U.S. criminal justice system for allegedly protesting abuses by that same system, with prosecutors in three U.S. court districts accusing Love of hacking into various government websites. Love's extradition hearing thus far has shown that justice would mean keeping him at home, and that any trial should happen in the UK. The U.S. must not be allowed to extradite without showing evidence, without proving damage, and for a crime allegedly committed on UK soil. <a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=3oMRXjuK0PHwl%2BP4aPHhv4M8wVCjbHtE" style="-webkit-padding-start: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Click here to help make the difference needed.</a> Sarah Harrison, Courage's acting director, said: "With RootsAction's help, we can bring much needed attention to Lauri Love's case on both sides of the Atlantic. Remember that while awaiting a ruling, Lauri Love needs to prepare for trial in the U.S. and the UK, needing two legal teams to work together. Lauri has already taken a stand for the encryption rights of British citizens -- now it's our turn to take a stand for him." Britain's National Crime Agency (NCA) has seized Lauri's computers, held them for years, and attempted to force him to turn over encryption keys — all without charging him with a crime. Lauri has never been to the United States, but that's where he faces charges that could amount to a total of 99 years in jail. In May, Judge Nina Tempia rejected the NCA's attempt to "circumvent" statutory safeguards in its grab for Lauri's keys. Lauri refused to provide his keys in order to take a stand for encryption nationwide, as an NCA victory would have set a dangerous precedent for Britons' information security. Then in June, Lauri's extradition hearing heard testimony from his parents, doctors, and professors who warned about the mental health risks Lauri would face in a U.S. prison. Lauri has Asperger Syndrome and depression, and in the U.S. he'd likely be thrown into solitary confinement, an ocean away from his support network, and without proper medical attention. Witnesses also testified to the good work Lauri is currently doing in the UK, as Chief Hacking Officer for My Hacker House, where he puts his computer skills to socially helpful use. <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=mo7W9x0L2a3xD4bd7U7uTGsDsLEiXGw4" style="-webkit-padding-start: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Click here to help.</a> (Tax-deductible in the United States.) Judge Tempia will issue her ruling on Lauri's extradition on September 16. Her decision will finally test the "forum bar," enacted in the UK in an attempt to rectify problems with the US-UK extradition treaty, which has historically been one-sided, sending vulnerable defendants to the United States without a need to demonstrate a prima facie case. Lauri argues that, if he has allegations to answer, he should be able to face them in the United Kingdom, where he lives and where digital activsts face much smaller sentences than they do in the U.S. Lauri Love said: “Computer trials in the U.S. are Sisyphean. Because I'm facing three separate indictments, with decades of jail looming over my head on each one, they can force me into a plea deal in one jurisdiction, sentence me to several years, close that case and then do it all over again. In the UK there's at least a sense of proportionality to the alleged offense." hmmn opposing views wwww<div class="article-author" style="line-height: 26px; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">By <a href="https://www.opposingviews.com/user/0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none;" /><a href="https://www.opposingviews.com/user/0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none;">, <time pubdate="" datetime="2012-11-20T04:21:27+00:00" style="box-sizing: border-box;">Mon, November 19, 2012</time></a></div><div class="article-body" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><div class="field-items" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="https://www.opposingviews.com/user/0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none;">The 2012 presidential election kind of looked rigged from the get-go. Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted had installed an untested, unapproved software patch for ballot counting just a week before the election. When various groups protested to the courts, Husted responded that the software patch ran outside of the federally-approved voting machinery. Therefore, it did not need testing and did not to be reviewed by the state election commission. The courts went along with him. A few days later, the international hacker group Anonymous released a video. In it Anonymous warned that they were monitoring all the computers of Fox News analyst and Republican chief fundraiser Karl Rove. Anonymous warned Rove personally to not interfere with the election results. That made sense. This was because Craig Unger warned Americans about the possibility of electioneering in his book, Boss Rove. That is where Unger argued that Rove’s software hackers hijacked the Ohio election results at 11:14 pm EST in 2004. That was when the Ohio vote-tallying computers all went offline. When they came back up, the vote counters had switched thousands of votes in favor of Senator John Kerry to President George W. Bush’s column. Then, during election night in 2012, it was suddenly Unger’s story all over again—almost. This time the Ohio, statewide, vote-tallying computers went down at 11:13 pm EST. That was thirteen minutes after voter analyst Karl Rove had begun to throw his 30-minute tantrum live on Fox News. Rove was angry that the Fox analysts had called the Ohio election in favor of President Obama at 11:00 pm EST. During his rant, Rove went into a detailed analysis about how that part of the yet uncounted voter—25%—would throw the election to Romney. And then, bingo— The Ohio computers went down in the middle of Rove’s rant. But when they came back up there was no change in the vote. Obama still led. Rove looked even more perplexed. He then argued for another 15 minutes that Romney could still win Ohio. Finally, Rove conceded that perhaps Romney might lose the state. Then, two days after the 2012 election, Anonymous released another video. The hackers explained that they had inserted a firewall into Secretary of State Husted’s software patch. That had stopped the Ohio election counters from using it. The hackers said that they had analyzed the patch and that it would have flip-flopped the vote in the same counties that Karl Rove, of Fox, had argued would eventually swing the Ohio election to Romney. Interesting, on election night, when the Ohio computers came back online, the vote tallying went on without the patch, and Obama won.</a><a href="https://www.opposingviews.com/user/0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none;">This whole thing might mean that the patch should be subpoenaed into court and examined for its potential to rig an election—especially since no one dared to complain that it did not work. And the counting kept on going, anyway, unquestioned. But that’s not all. Anonymous claims that Mitt Romney’s Orca program was a fake, also. It was not meant to be used as a get-out-the-vote program as stated by the Romney campaign. Rather, it was meant to be used to divert and flip flop the vote in two other states, Florida and Virginia. Like Ohio, both states have Republican Secretaries of state who resolve voting issues. Makes you wonder, right? But there is more. Mitt Romney was so sure of winning that he did not have anyone prepare a concession speech for him ahead of time. If that sounds a little suspicious, consider this. The election had already been called a week earlier in Obama’s favor by the best known poll analyst in the U.S., Nate Silver. There are a dozen reports concerning these events. The Humboldt Sentinel, in its online version, ran a video showing talk radio host Thom Hartmann’s report on Rove’s supposed election rigging. The Drudge Report also covered it in its online version. What is more, The Daily Kos reported on this story. Yet most all of the major media won’t touch this story about Anonymous and Karl Rove. That is because it contradicts what Americans believe about their elections—that they are generally just and fair. Congress also would have to be pushed pretty hard before it ever touches the story. As far as the Congress is concerned, the election is over. And after all, the committee it voted in to law to fix the problems with national elections has no sitting members and goes unfunded. This shows that Congress is deadlocked about issues that would regulate U.S. national elections. Yet, if you are a concerned voter, please contact the U.S. senators from your state at</a><a href="http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm/" rel="nofollow" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none;">http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm/</a>. This egregious attempt at vote rigging by Karl Rove and the Romney campaign—if true—must not go unpunished. At the minimum, Ohio, Virginia, and Florida should be forced to have a ballot paper trail. This would allow for a verifiable recount if this same thing turns up in 2016. The current electronic voting systems in those states cannot be used to do a legitimate recount.https://www.opposingviews.com/i/politics/2012-election/did-hacker-group-anonymous-stop-karl-rove-hijacking-election</div></div></div><span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">=<span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">wages of r:<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;"> hedges:
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">ch vii 7 the rebel defiant
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">australian diplom cables reveals big unprecedented assault on Julian A; at least a dozen US agencies
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">collateral damage in sweep:aaron schwartz CFAAct
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">Barrett sic Brown journalist (?) specializes in mil and intel contractors; arrest 9/12
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">Jeremy Hammond gave WL 5.5 stratfor emails w/ clients
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">Sabu trapped both hammond and BB (tried for assange and WL JA says); manning trapped by another fbi informant 175.
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">govt says sabi helped in 20 pvy and public entity hacks est at 50M$ damage, but Preska let him walk after giving JH ten years 175.<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">b/c of his "extraordinary cooperation" 175 ie rolled om 8, convicted; worked for fbi 3 yrs, max sent 26 yrs; 176
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">Anon understood problem before the rest of us, stopped at airports and induced to 180. eg lawyer Jennifer Robinson.
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">icelander thordarson emailed fbi, next day pvt plane; gov't tossed them, but guy went to US; got 5K$ fort stolen WK files 176
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">JA says laptop and luggage stolen,account shut down?, ISP pressed for info;  US denounced WL, and australia and US banks pulled; DoS against WL;
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">contortions of 4th amend to go after JA? 177...<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">manning<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">....
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">HAMMOND  189
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">sentenced NYC? 11/13 10 yrs (4 UK co-def combined got less time) <span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">scary b/c 5 mill emails showed corp/nat sec state blend? and anti-terror laws use to quash dissent 190;
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">Hedges used stratfor leaked docs in his lawsuit v VO over section 1021(b)2 of nat def authorization act; co-plaintiff alexa o'brien, fdr Day of Rage to reform elections, Stratfor tried to assoc her with jihadist, so could be detained under new law 190; US district judge katherine Forrest sic said they have credible fear, nullied the law, but overturned in appellate.
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">JGH 10 year one of largest for hacking, and was max 8under plea deal 190.  Preska fedsoc, hubby email and pzwrd; partner at Cahill (she used to work there too) <span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">, and their client Merrill L 191; National Lawyer's Guild filed a motion for recusal, she refused;
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">judge quoted from Anon chat on bankruptcy and max mayhem; pvt phone # retired Az cop who claims he got threatening calls 191;
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">10 years PLUS 3 years supervised control?; had to submit to random warrantless searches; no contact with electronic disobedience websites or orgs" 191.
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">hedges said in order to so rule, judge had to ignore lots, including intel agencies (pvt?) work to attack dissidents, and that JH made no $ from hack 192;
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">jh called himself an anarchist communist" and know the history; hacks and leaks as ways of exposing wrong-doing but to disrupt corps too; 192
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">organized HS protests ~ gulf 2 but saw protesters ignored and beaten, arrested, called traitors 193;
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">univ of illinois frosh hacked comp sci dept, bounced ; did a talk at defcon in Las vegas; fbi's #1 wanted cybercriminal; <span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">inspired by ballsy manning, cd not just work on Food Not Bombs website; 
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">hacked rw Protest Warrior (2 yrs fed prison)<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">goal is to build leaderless collectives, mutual aid, self suff, green. 195
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">thot occupy too vague, so included ron paul ppl and TP and reformist dems, just going for a nicer form of capitalism;<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">thinks civil disobedience dumb; better to NOT get caught 195;<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">peace patrols to stop black bloc are just "2ndary police force" 195
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">knew anon hack cd put him back in jail but felt obligated to use his skills
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">tried trad protest/methods, ignored; power struct does not respect it own checks and bal, never mind rights of cits or the int'l community" 198
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">targeted cops b/c racist and inequality; also mil and pol gear mfg who help suppress in US and int'l. went after pvt intel b/c the protect corps and govy and attack indiv rights, activists, journalists and other truthseekers [whistleblowers?] 196
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">puzzled about why fbi would intru us to sabu (did they?] who found the initial vuln and allow the hack 197??
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">went after turkey, iran, brazil [climate talks?]
<span style="font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: transparent;">in jail H appalled that 80% never went to trial, pled b/c scared; smoked pot and lost social visits 2 yrs and in the box
sarah harrison: we mist // // courage is contagious 199<a id="recordDisplayLink2Component_20" href="http://discover.sjlibrary.org/iii/encore_sjpl/record/CRb4367555SmachineP0%2C21OrightresultUX6?lang=eng&suite=sjpl" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none;">This machine kills secrets : how WikiLeakers, cypherpunks, and hacktivists aim to free the world's information</a> <span class="additionalFields customSecondaryText" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">/ Andy Greenberg<div class="dpBibAuthor" style="margin: 2px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a id="authorDisplayLinkComponent_17" href="http://discover.sjlibrary.org/iii/encore_sjpl/search/CSGreenberg%2C%20Andy.Orightresult?lang=eng&suite=sjpl" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none;">Greenberg, Andy.</a></div><div class="recordDetailValue" style="margin: 4px 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><img class="itemMediaIcon" title="Book" src="http://catalog.sjlibrary.org/screens/print.gif" alt="Book" id="mediaURLImageAnyComponent_20" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: middle; max-width: 30px; max-height: 22px;" /> <span class="itemMediaDescription" id="mediaTypeInsertComponent_20" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: middle;">Book <span class="pipeDivider" style="margin: 0px; padding: 5px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: middle;">| <span class="itemMediaYear" id="searchResultPubYearInsertComponent_20" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: middle;">2012</div><div id="ItemsContainer-b4367555" class="ItemsContainer" style="margin: 3px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="availabilitySummaryArea" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="dpBibHoldingStatement" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><span class="availabilityMessage" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 5px 0px 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><span class="itemsAvailable" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Available at Bascom Nonfiction (<span class="availCallNumber" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: nowrap;">364.168 Greenber) plus 5 more <span class="itemsContainerPopUpTrigger" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">see all</a></div></div></div>==

<a href="http://grist.org/list/the-hacker-collective-anonymous-is-punishing-people-for-dolphin-deaths/">http://grist.org/list/the-hacker-collective-anonymous-is-punishing-people-for-dolphin-deaths/</a>

==

pirate bay, FBI turned sabu and bought servers, sabu told Hammond about vulnerabiliy and gave servers to use, maybe honeyhole to catch assange? 8/26/13 10 am BB only posted  LINK!

aaron s , mit says he did not use computers unauth access CFandA

==

<h1 class="print-title">The Strange Case of Barrett Brown</h1>

<div class="print-created">Peter Ludlow | June 18, 2013</div>

Read more: <a href="http://www.thenation.com/print/article/174851/strange-case-barrett-brown#ixzz2Y7cW5HE2" style="">The Strange Case of Barrett Brown</a> <a href="http://www.thenation.com/print/article/174851/strange-case-barrett-brown#ixzz2Y7cW5HE2" style="">http://www.thenation.com/print/article/174851/strange-case-barrett-brown#ixzz2Y7cW5HE2</a>

Follow us: <a href="http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=caN4nSSpSr4RB7acwqm_6l&u=thenation" target="blank" style="">@thenation on Twitter</a> | <a href="http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=caN4nSSpSr4RB7acwqm_6l&u=TheNationMagazine" target="blank" style="">TheNationMagazine on Facebook</a>

In early 2010, journalist and satirist Barrett Brown was working on a book on political pundits, when the hacktivist collective Anonymous caught his attention. He soon began writing about its activities and potential. In a <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barrett-brown/anonymous-australia-and-t_b_457776.html" style="">defense</a> [2] of the group’s anti-censorship operations in Australia published on February 10, Brown declared, “I am now certain that this phenomenon is among the most important and under-reported social developments to have occurred in decades, and that the development in question promises to threaten the institution of the nation-state and perhaps even someday replace it as the world’s most fundamental and relevant method of human organization.”

By then, Brown was already considered by his fans to be the Hunter S. Thompson of his generation. In point of fact he wasn’t like Hunter S. Thompson, but was more of a throwback—a sharp-witted, irreverent journalist and satirist in the mold of Ambrose Bierce or Dorothy Parker. His acid tongue was on display in his co-authored 2007 book, Flock of Dodos: Behind Modern Creationism, Intelligent Design and the Easter Bunny, in which he declared: “This will not be a polite book. Politeness is wasted on the dishonest, who will always take advantage of any well-intended concession.”

But it wasn’t Brown’s acid tongue so much as his love of minutiae (and ability to organize and explain minutiae) that would ultimately land him in trouble. Abandoning his book on pundits in favor of a book on Anonymous, he could not have known that delving into the territory of hackers and leaks would ultimately lead to his facing the prospect of spending the rest of his life in prison. In light of the bombshell revelations published by Glenn Greenwald and Barton Gellman about government and corporate spying, Brown’s case is a good—and underreported—reminder of the considerable risk faced by reporters who report on leaks.

In February 2011, a year after Brown penned his defense of Anonymous, and against the background of its actions during the Arab Spring, Aaron Barr, CEO of the private intelligence company HBGary, claimed to have identified the leadership of the hacktivist collective. (In fact, he only had screen names of a few members). Barr’s boasting provoked a brutal hack of HBGary by a related group called Internet Feds (it would soon change its name to “LulzSec”). Splashy enough to attract the attention of <a href="http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/426198/may-09-2013/colbert-s-book-club%E2%80%94-learning%E2%80%94the-great-gatsby-" style="">The Colbert Report</a> [3], the hack defaced and destroyed servers and websites belonging to HBGary. Some 70,000 company e-mails were downloaded and posted online. As a final insult to injury, even the contents of Aaron Barr’s iPad were remotely wiped.

The HBGary hack may have been designed to humiliate the company, but it had the collateral effect of dropping a gold mine of information into Brown’s lap. One of the first things he discovered was a plan to neutralize Glenn Greenwald’s defense of Wikileaks by undermining them both. (“Without the support of people like Glenn, wikileaks would fold,” read one slide.) The plan called for “disinformation,” exploiting strife within the organization and fomenting external rivalries—“creating messages around actions to sabotage or discredit the opposing organization,” as well as a plan to submit fake documents and then call out the error.” Greenwald, it was argued, “if pushed,” would “choose professional preservation over cause.”

Other plans targeted social organizations and advocacy groups. Separate from the plan to target Greenwald and WikiLeaks, HBGary was part of a consortia that submitted a proposal to develop a “<a href="http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/hbgarys-high-volume.html" style="">persona management</a> [4]” system for the United States Air Force, that would allow one user to control multiple online identities for commenting in social media spaces, thus giving the appearance of grassroots support or opposition to certain policies.

The data dump from the HBGary hack was so vast that no one person could sort through it alone. So Brown decided to crowdsource the effort. He created a wiki page, called it <a href="http://wiki.echelon2.org/wiki/Main_Page" style="">ProjectPM</a> [5], and invited other investigative journalists to join in. Under Brown’s leadership, the initiative began to slowly untangle a web of connections between the US government, corporations, lobbyists and a shadowy group of private military and information security consultants.

One connection was between Bank of America and the Chamber of Commerce. WikiLeaks had claimed to possess a large cache of documents belonging to Bank of America. Concerned about this, Bank of America approached the United States Department of Justice. The DOJ directed it to the law and lobbying firm <a href="http://www.hunton.com/">Hunton and Williams</a> [6], which does legal work for Wells Fargo and General Dynamics and also lobbies for Koch Industries, Americans for Affordable Climate Policy, Gas Processors Association, Entergy among many other firms. The DoJ recommended that Bank of America hire Hunton and Williams, explicitly suggesting <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/19/chamber-of-commerce-still_n_768076.html" style="">Richard Wyatt</a>[7] as the person to work with. Wyatt, famously, was the lead attorney in the Chamber of Commerce’s lawsuit against the Yes Men.

In November 2010, Hunton and Williams organized a number of private intelligence, technology development and security contractors—HBGary, plus Palantir Technologies, Berico Technologies and, according to Brown, a secretive corporation with the ominous name Endgame Systems—to form “Team Themis”—‘themis’ being a Greek word meaning “divine law.” Its main objective was to discredit critics of the Chamber of Commerce, <a href="http://images2.americanprogress.org/ThinkProgress/ProposalForTheChamber.pdf" style="">like Chamber Watch</a> [8], using such tactics as creating a “false document, perhaps highlighting periodical financial information,” giving it to a progressive group opposing the Chamber, and then subsequently exposing the document as a fake to “prove that US Chamber Watch cannot be trusted with information and/or tell the truth.” In addition, the group proposed creating a “fake insider persona” to infiltrate Chamber Watch. They would “create two fake insider personas, using one as leverage to discredit the other while confirming the legitimacy of the second.” The leaked e-mails showed that similar disinformation campaigns were being planned against WikiLeaks and Glenn Greenwald.

It was clear to Brown that these were actions of questionable legality, but beyond that, government contractors were attempting to undermine Americans’ free speech—with the apparent blessing of the DOJ. A group of Democratic congressmen <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/28/AR2011022805810.html" style="">asked for an investigation</a> [9] into this arrangement, to no avail.

By June 2011, the plot had thickened further. The FBI had the goods on the leader of LulzSec, one Hector Xavier Monsegur, who went under the nom de guerre Sabu. The FBI arrested him on June 7, 2011, and (according to court documents) turned him into an informant the following day. Just three days before his arrest, Sabu had been central to the formation of a new group called AntiSec, which comprised his former LulzSec crew members, as well as members as Anonymous. In early December AntiSec hacked the website of a private security company called Stratfor Global Intelligence. On Christmas Eve, it released a trove of some 5 million internal company e-mails. AntiSec member and Chicago activist <a href="http://www.dailydot.com/news/lulzsec-jeremy-hammond-bail-denied-hacker/" style="">Jeremy Hammond</a> [10] has pled guilty to the attack and is currently facing ten years in prison for it.

The contents of the Stratfor leak were even more outrageous than those of the HBGary hack. They included discussion of opportunities for renditions and assassinations. For example, in one video, Statfor’s vice president of intelligence, Fred Burton, suggested taking advantage of the chaos in Libya to render Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who had been released from prison on compassionate grounds due to his terminal illness. Burton said that the case “was personal.” When someone pointed out in an e-mail that such a move would almost certainly be illegal—“This man has already been tried, found guilty, sentenced…and served time”—another Stratfor employee responded that this was just an argument for a more efficient solution: “One more reason to just bugzap him with a hellfire. :-)”

(Stratfor employees also seemed to take a keen interest in Jeremy Scahill’s writings about Blackwater in The Nation, copying and circulating entire articles, with comments suggesting a principle interest was in the question of whether Blackwater was setting up a competing intelligence operation. E-mails also showed grudging respect for Scahill: “Like or dislike Scahill’s position (or what comes of his work), he does an amazing job outing [Blackwater].”)

When the contents of the Stratfor leak became available, Brown decided to put ProjectPM on it. A link to the Stratfor dump appeared in an Anonymous chat channel; Brown copied it and pasted it into the private chat channel for ProjectPM, bringing the dump to the attention of the editors.

Brown began looking into <a href="http://wiki.echelon2.org/wiki/Endgame_Systems" style="">Endgame Systems</a> [11], an information security firm that seemed particularly concerned about staying in the shadows. “Please let HBGary know we don’t ever want to see our name in a press release,” one leaked e-mail read. One of its products, available for a $2.5 million annual subscription, gave customers access to “zero-day exploits”—security vulnerabilities unknown to software companies—for computer systems all over the world. <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/cyber-weapons-the-new-arms-race-07212011.html" style="">Business Week</a> [12] published a story on Endgame in 2011, reporting that “Endgame executives will bring up maps of airports, parliament buildings, and corporate offices. The executives then create a list of the computers running inside the facilities, including what software the computers run, and a menu of attacks that could work against those particular systems.” For Brown, this raised the question of whether Endgame was selling these exploits to foreign actors and whether they would be used against computer systems in the United States. Shortly thereafter, the hammer came down.

The FBI acquired a <a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/mhastings/exclusive-fbi-escalates-war-on-anonymous" style="">warrant</a> [13] for Brown’s laptop, gaining the authority to seize any information related to HBGary, Endgame Systems, Anonymous and, most ominously, “email, email contacts, ‘chat’, instant messaging logs, photographs, and correspondence.” In other words, the FBI wanted his sources.

When the FBI went to serve Brown, he was at his mother’s house. Agents returned with a warrant to search his mother’s house, retrieving his laptop. To turn up the heat on Brown, the FBI initiated charges against his mother for obstruction of justice for concealing his laptop computer in her house. (Facing criminal charges, on March 22, 2013, his mother, Karen McCutchin, pled guilty to one count of obstructing the execution of a search warrant. She faces up to twelve months in jail. Brown maintains that she did not know the laptop was in her home.)

By his own admission, the FBI’s targeting of his mother made Brown snap. In September 2012, he uploaded an incoherent YouTube <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOW7GOrXNZI" style="">video</a> [14], in which he explained that he had been in treatment for an addiction to heroin, taking the medication Suboxone, but had gone off his meds and now was in withdrawal. He threatened the FBI agent that was harassing his mother, by name, warning:

“I know what’s legal, I know what’s been done to me.… And if it’s legal when it’s done to me, it’s going to be legal when it’s done to FBI Agent Robert Smith—who is a criminal.”

“That’s why [FBI special agent] Robert Smith’s life is over. And when I say his life is over, I’m not saying I’m going to kill him, but I am going to ruin his life and look into his fucking kids…. How do you like them apples?”[barr never charged?]

The media narrative was immediately derailed. No longer would this be a story about the secretive information-military-industrial complex; now it was the sordid tale of a crazy drug addict threatening an FBI agent and his (grown) children. Actual death threats against agents are often punishable by a few years in jail. But Brown’s actions made it easier for the FBI to sell some other pretext to put him away for life.

The Stratfor data included a number of unencrypted credit card numbers and validation codes. On this basis, the DOJ accused Brown of credit card fraud for having shared that link with the editorial board of ProjectPM. Specifically, the FBI charged him with traffic in stolen authentication features, access device fraud and aggravated identity theft, as well as an obstruction of justice charge (for being at his mother’s when the initial warrant was served) and charges stemming from his threats against the FBI agent. All told, Brown is looking at century of jail time: 105 years in federal prison if served sequentially. He has been denied bail.

Considering that the person who carried out the actual Stratfor hack had several priors and is facing a maximum of ten years, the inescapable conclusion is that the problem is not with the hack itself but with Brown’s journalism. As Glenn Greenwald remarked inThe Guardian: “It is virtually impossible to conclude that the obscenely excessive prosecution he now faces is unrelated to that journalism and his related activism.”

Today, Brown is in prison and ProjectPM is under increased scrutiny by the DOJ, even as its work has ground to a halt. In March, the DOJ served the domain hosting service CloudFlare with a <a href="http://leaksource.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/doj-issues-subpoena-for-info-on-barrett-browns-project-pm-site/" style="">subpoena</a> [16] for all records on the ProjectPM website, and in particular asked for the IP addresses of everyone who had accessed and contributed to ProjectPM, describing it as a “forum” through which Brown and others would “engage in, encourage, or facilitate the commission of criminal conduct online.” The message was clear: Anyone else who looks into this matter does so at their grave peril.

Some journalists are now understandably afraid to go near the Stratfor files. The broader implications of this go beyond Brown; one might think that what we are looking at is Cointelpro 2.0—an outsourced surveillance state—but in fact it’s worse. One can’t help but infer that the US Department of Justice has become just another security contractor, working alongside the HBGarys and Stratfors on behalf of corporate bidders, with no sense at all for the justness of their actions; they are working to protect corporations and private security contractors and give them license to engage in disinformation campaigns against ordinary citizens and their advocacy groups. The mere fact that the FBI’s senior cybersecurity advisor has recently moved to Hunton and Williams shows just how incestuous this relationship has become. Meanwhile, the Department of Justice is also using its power and force to trample on the rights of citizens like Barrett Brown who are trying to shed light on these nefarious relationships. In order to neutralize those who question or investigate the system, laws are being reinterpreted or extended or otherwise misappropriated in ways that are laughable—or would be if the consequences weren’t so dire.

While the media and much of the world have been understandably outraged by the revelation of the NSA’s spying programs, Barrett Brown’s work was pointing to a much deeper problem. It isn’t the sort of problem that can be fixed by trying to tweak a few laws or by removing a few prosecutors. The problem is not with bad laws or bad prosecutors. What the case of Barrett Brown has exposed is that we confronting a different problem altogether. It is a systemic problem. It is the failure of the rule of law.

Journalist Michael Hastings, 33, died in a car crash yesterday. Read Greg Mitchell’s obituary <a href="http://www.thenation.com/blog/174870/journalist-michael-hastings-33-dies-car-crash" target="_self" style="">here</a> [17].

</div>

<div class="print-source_url">Source URL: <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/174851/strange-case-barrett-brown" style="">http://www.thenation.com/article/174851/strange-case-barrett-brown</a></div>

Links:

[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOW7GOrXNZI

[2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barrett-brown/anonymous-australia-and-t_b_457776.html

[3] http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/426198/may-09-2013/colbert-s-book-club—-learning—the-great-gatsby-

[4] http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/hbgarys-high-volume.html

[5] http://wiki.echelon2.org/wiki/Main_Page

[6] http://www.hunton.com/

[7] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/19/chamber-of-commerce-still_n_768076.html

[8] http://images2.americanprogress.org/ThinkProgress/ProposalForTheChamber.pdf

[9] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/28/AR2011022805810.html

[10] http://www.dailydot.com/news/lulzsec-jeremy-hammond-bail-denied-hacker/

[11] http://wiki.echelon2.org/wiki/Endgame_Systems

[12] http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/cyber-weapons-the-new-arms-race-07212011.html

[13] http://www.buzzfeed.com/mhastings/exclusive-fbi-escalates-war-on-anonymous

[14] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOW7GOrXNZI

[15] https://subscribe.thenation.com/servlet/OrdersGateway?cds_mag_code=NAN&cds_page_id=122425&cds_response_key=I12SART1

[16] http://leaksource.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/doj-issues-subpoena-for-info-on-barrett-browns-project-pm-site/

[17] http://www.thenation.com/blog/174870/journalist-michael-hastings-33-dies-car-crash

</div>

Read more: <a href="http://www.thenation.com/print/article/174851/strange-case-barrett-brown#ixzz2Y7YhAbgh" style="">The Strange Case of Barrett Brown</a> <a href="http://www.thenation.com/print/article/174851/strange-case-barrett-brown#ixzz2Y7YhAbgh" style="">http://www.thenation.com/print/article/174851/strange-case-barrett-brown#ixzz2Y7YhAbgh</a>

==

2/1/13

Bank of America customers were unable to access their online banking accounts, mobile payment systems or the company’s telephone call centers on Friday.

“We’re aware of the issue and are addressing,” Mark Pipitone, a Bank of America spokesman, said in a statement. “We’re also working closely with our customers to help alleviate any concerns.”

A customer service representative said that the bank’s online and mobile payment systems had been down since 11 a.m. Eastern time. The customer service telephone lines were also down Friday morning but were restored hours later. The representative described the outage as a “whole system failure” and said that even Bank of America employees were not able to see customers’ accounts for several hours.

A person close to Bank of America said the problem appeared to stem from an internal breakdown, rather than a cyberattack, but the bank continued to investigate.

American banks have been hit by a wave of computer attacks in recent months. Starting last September, intruders have caused intermittent disruptions to the online banking sites of more than a dozen American banks, including Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, U.S. Bancorp, PNC, Capital One, Fifth Third Bank, BB&T and HSBC.

But those earlier attacks caused online banking sites to hiccup or fall offline for several minutes at a time. The outage at Bank of America lasted for several more than four hours. Also, this appeared to be the first outage that affected a bank’s telephone lines.

Previous outages, representatives for banks have confirmed, were the result of DDoS, or distributed denial of service attacks, so named because attackers deny customer service by directing a large volume of traffic to a site until it falls offline. There were no breaches of bank accounts and no customers’ money was taken.

Security researchers who have studied those attacks say that the attackers flooded each site with traffic that was more than 10 orders of magnitude larger than the amount of traffic that Russia directed at Estonia in a monthlong online assault in 2007 that nearly crippled the Baltic nation.

They were able to do so by infecting data centers and then using multiple data centers to fire unprecedented amounts of traffic at each bank simultaneously until they fell offline. And then firing unprecedented amounts of traffic at each banking site until it fell offline.

Affected banks have been working closely with each other and with Internet service providers to conduct forensics on the attacks. Government officials in the United States have accused Iran of orchestrating the attacks in retaliation for American computer attacks against Iran and for Western economic sanctions, but they have offered no proof to back up their claims.

A hacker group calling itself Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Cyber Fighters has claimed responsibility for the attacks in online posts, but deny that they are affiliated with any particular nation state.

On Friday, Bank of America customers seemed less concerned with the origin of the outage then when it would be fixed. Several took to online forums and Twitter to vent.

“Bank of America website and app down going on 4 hours now,” tweeted one customer. Why does this happen so often?”

“I don’t always shutdown worldwide, but when I do… I make sure it’s on the 1st of the month when my clients bills are due,” another tweeted, half-joking.

democ now hammond pleads guilty

MICHAEL RATNER: Jeremy Hammond pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy, of hacking into a protected computer. That count finishes the case in terms of any other charges. It carries up to a maximum of 10 years in prison. He doesn’t have to get that, and in fact the demand is that he get time served. This is part of the sledgehammer of what the government is doing to people who expose corporate secrets, government secrets, and really the secrets of an empire. And the people who should have been on that trial are the very people who Jeremy admitted to hacking into, which is the Stratfor people who have engaged in corporate spying, along with government cooperation, the public safety people in Arizona, the FBI, etc.

<a href="http://www.democracynow.org/2013/5/29/julian_assange_stratfor_hacker_jeremy_hammond">http://www.democracynow.org/2013/5/29/julian_assange_stratfor_hacker_jeremy_hammond</a>

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act</a>

<div id="siteSub">From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</div>

<div id="jump-to-nav" class="mw-jump">Jump to: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#mw-navigation">navigation</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#p-search">search</a></div>

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1984 (CFAA)<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-FirstEnacted-1">[1]</a> was intended to reduce <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_cracking" title="Security cracking" class="mw-redirect">cracking</a> of computer systems and to address federal computer-related offenses. The Act was approved by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress" title="United States Congress">U.S. Congress</a>, signed by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States" title="President of the United States">President</a> and is now codified as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_18_of_the_United_States_Code" title="Title 18 of the United States Code">18 U.S.C.</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1030.html">§ 1030</a>. It governs cases that implicate a compelling federal interest, where U.S. government computers, or those of certain financial institutions are involved, where the crime itself is interstate in nature, or where computers are used in interstate and foreign commerce.

The Act has been amended a number of times—in 1986, 1989, 1994, 1996, in 2001 by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act" title="USA PATRIOT Act" class="mw-redirect">USA PATRIOT Act</a>, 2002, and in 2008 by the Identity Theft Enforcement and Restitution Act. Subsection (b) of the Act makes it a crime not only to commit (or attempt to commit) an offense under the Act, but also to conspire to do so.

<h2>Contents</h2>

</div>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#Protected_computers">1 Protected computers</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-2"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#Criminal_offenses_under_the_Act">2 Criminal offenses under the Act</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-3"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#Specific_sections">3 Specific sections</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-4"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#Notable_cases_and_decisions_referring_to_the_Act">4 Notable cases and decisions referring to the Act</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-5"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#Aaron.27s_Law_proposal">5 Aaron's Law proposal</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-7"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#References">7 References</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-8"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#External_links">8 External links</a></li>

</ul>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

<h2>Protected computers</h2>

The AAFC defines a “<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_computer" title="Protected computer">protected computer</a>” under <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_18_of_the_United_States_Code" title="Title 18 of the United States Code">18 U.S.C.</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1030%28e%29%282%29.html">§ 1030(e)(2)</a> to mean a computer:

<ul>

<li>exclusively for the use of a financial institution or the United States Government, or any computer, when the conduct constituting the offense affects the computer's use by or for the financial institution or the Government; or</li>

<li>which is used in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or communication, including a computer located outside the United States that is used in a manner that affects interstate or foreign commerce or communication of the United States...</li>

</ul>

<h2>Criminal offenses under the Act</h2>

(a) Whoever—

<dl>

<dd>(1) having knowingly accessed a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access, and by means of such conduct having obtained information that has been determined by the United States Government pursuant to an Executive order or statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense or foreign relations, or any restricted data, as defined in paragraph y. of section 11 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, with reason to believe that such information so obtained could be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation willfully communicates, delivers, transmits, or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it;</dd>

<dd>(2) intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains—

<dl>

<dd>(A) information contained in a financial record of a financial institution, or of a card issuer as defined in section 1602 (n) [1] of title 15, or contained in a file of a consumer reporting agency on a consumer, as such terms are defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.);</dd>

<dd>(B) information from any department or agency of the United States; or</dd>

<dd>(C) information from any protected computer;</dd>

</dl>

</dd>

<dd>(3) intentionally, without authorization to access any nonpublic computer of a department or agency of the United States, accesses such a computer of that department or agency that is exclusively for the use of the Government of the United States or, in the case of a computer not exclusively for such use, is used by or for the Government of the United States and such conduct affects that use by or for the Government of the United States;</dd>

<dd>(4) knowingly and with intent to defraud, accesses a protected computer without authorization, or exceeds authorized access, and by means of such conduct furthers the intended fraud and obtains anything of value, unless the object of the fraud and the thing obtained consists only of the use of the computer and the value of such use is not more than $5,000 in any 1-year period;</dd>

<dd>(5)

<dl>

<dd>(A) knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;</dd>

<dd>(B) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, recklessly causes damage; or</dd>

<dd>(C) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damage and loss.</dd>

</dl>

</dd>

<dd>(6) knowingly and with intent to defraud traffics (as defined in section 1029) in any password or similar information through which a computer may be accessed without authorization, if—

<dl>

<dd>(A) such trafficking affects interstate or foreign commerce; or</dd>

<dd>(B) such computer is used by or for the Government of the United States;</dd>

</dl>

</dd>

<dd>(7) with intent to extort from any person any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any—

<dl>

<dd>(A) threat to cause damage to a protected computer;</dd>

<dd>(B) threat to obtain information from a protected computer without authorization or in excess of authorization or to impair the confidentiality of information obtained from a protected computer without authorization or by exceeding authorized access; or</dd>

<dd>(C) demand or request for money or other thing of value in relation to damage to a protected computer, where such damage was caused to facilitate the extortion<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-2">[2]</a></dd>

</dl>

</dd>

</dl>

<h2>Specific sections</h2>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_18_of_the_United_States_Code" title="Title 18 of the United States Code">18 U.S.C.</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1030.html#a_1">§ 1030(a)(1)</a>: Computer Espionage. This section takes much of its language from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917" title="Espionage Act of 1917">Espionage Act of 1917</a>, with the notable addition being that it also covers information related to "Foreign Relations", not simply "National Defense" like the Espionage Act.</li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_18_of_the_United_States_Code" title="Title 18 of the United States Code">18 U.S.C.</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1030.html#a_5">§ 1030(a)(5)</a>: Damaging a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_computer" title="Protected computer">protected computer</a> (including viruses, worms)</li>

</ul>

<h2>Notable cases and decisions referring to the Act</h2>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Riggs" title="United States v. Riggs">United States v. Riggs</a>, brought against people associated with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrack" title="Phrack">Phrack</a> magazine for obtaining a document (known as the "E911 document") about information on BellSouth products implementing 911 emergency telephone services, a case described in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Sterling" title="Bruce Sterling">Bruce Sterling</a>'s "Hacker Crackdown of 1990." The government dropped the case after it was revealed that the document was on sale by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T" title="AT&T">AT&T</a> for $13.</li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v.Morris%281991%29" title="United States v. Morris (1991)">United States v. Morris (1991)</a>, 928 F.2d 504, decided March 7, 1991. After the release of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_worm" title="Morris worm">Morris worm</a>, an early <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_worm" title="Computer worm">computer worm</a>, its creator was convicted under the Act for causing damage and gaining unauthorized access to "federal interest" computers. The Act was amended in 1996, in part, to clarify language whose meaning was disputed in the case.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-usvmorris505-3">[3]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li>Theofel v. Farey Jones, 2003 U.S. App. Lexis 17963, decided August 28, 2003 (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit), holding that the use of a civil subpoena which is "patently unlawful," "in bad faith," or "at least gross negligence" to gain access to stored email is a breach of both the CFFA and the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stored_Communications_Act" title="Stored Communications Act">Stored Communications Act</a>.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-4">[4]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Airport_Centers,L.L.C.v._Citrin" title="International Airport Centers, L.L.C. v. Citrin">International Airport Centers, L.L.C. v. Citrin</a>, 2006, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_18_of_the_United_States_Code" title="Title 18 of the United States Code">18 U.S.C.</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1030.html#a_5_A_i">§ 1030(a)(5)(A)(i)</a>, in which Jacob Citrin <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_erasure" title="Data erasure">deleted files</a> from his company computer before he quit, in order to conceal alleged bad behavior while he was an employee.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-5">[5]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LVRC_Holdings_v._Brekka" title="LVRC Holdings v. Brekka">LVRC Holdings v. Brekka</a>, 2009 1030(a)(2), 1030(a)(4), in which LVRC sued Brekka for allegedly taking information about clients and using it to start his own competing business.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-6">[6]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-7">[7]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbins_v._Lower_Merion_School_District" title="Robbins v. Lower Merion School District">Robbins v. Lower Merion School District</a> (U.S. Eastern District of Pennsylvania), where plaintiffs charged two suburban Philadelphia high schools secretly spied on students by surreptitiously and remotely activating webcams embedded in school-issued laptops the students were using at home, violating the Act. The schools admitted to secretly snapping over 66,000 webshots and screenshots, including webcam shots of students in their bedrooms.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-USATODAY-8">[8]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-autogenerated5-9">[9]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Lori_Drew" title="United States v. Lori Drew">United States v. Lori Drew</a>, 2008. The 'cyberbullying' case involving the suicide of a girl harassed on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myspace" title="Myspace">myspace</a>. Charges were under 18 USC 1030(a)(2)(c) and (b)(2)(c). Judge Wu decided that using <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_18_of_the_United_States_Code" title="Title 18 of the United States Code">18 U.S.C.</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1030.html#a_2_C">§ 1030(a)(2)(C)</a> against someone violating a 'terms of service' agreement would make the law overly broad. 259 F.R.D. 449 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-10">[10]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-11">[11]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li>People v. SCEA, 2010. Class action lawsuit against SCEA for removing <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OtherOS" title="OtherOS">OtherOS</a>, the ability to install and run Linux (or other operating systems) on the PlayStation 3. Consumers were given the option to either keep OtherOS support or not. SCEA was allegedly in violation of this Act because if the consumers updated or not, they would still lose system functionality.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-autogenerated6-12">[12]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Computer_Entertainment_America_v._George_Hotz" title="Sony Computer Entertainment America v. George Hotz">Sony Computer Entertainment America v. George Hotz</a> and Hotz v. SCEA, 2011. SCEA sued 'Geohot' and others for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privilege_escalation" title="Privilege escalation">jailbreaking</a> the PlayStation 3 system. The lawsuit alleged, among other things, that Hotz violated <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_18_of_the_United_States_Code" title="Title 18 of the United States Code">18 U.S.C.</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1030.html#a_2_c">§ 1030(a)(2)(c)</a> ([by] taking info from any <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_computer" title="Protected computer">protected computer</a>). Hotz denied liability and contested the Court's exercise of personal jurisdiction over him.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-13">[13]</a> The parties settled out of court. The settlement caused Geohot to be unable to legally <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hack" title="Hack">hack</a> the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3" title="PlayStation 3">PlayStation 3</a> system furthermore.</li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Nosal" title="United States v. Nosal">United States v. Nosal</a>, 2011. Nosal and others allegedly accessed a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_computer" title="Protected computer">protected computer</a> to take a database of contacts from his previous employer for use in his own business, violating 1030(a)(4)<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-14">[14]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-15">[15]</a> On April 12, 2012, an en banc panel of the Court of Appeals reversed that ruling, dismissing all charges against Nosal. <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2012/04/10/10-10038.pdf">[2]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Andrews_Drake" title="Thomas Andrews Drake">United States v. Drake</a>, 2010. Drake was part of a whistle-blowing effort inside the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA" title="NSA" class="mw-redirect">NSA</a> to expose waste, fraud, and abuse with the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trailblazer_Project" title="Trailblazer Project">Trailblazer Project</a>. He talked to a reporter about the project. He was originally charged with five <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act" title="Espionage Act" class="mw-redirect">Espionage Act</a> counts for doing this. These charges were dropped just before his trial was to begin, and instead he pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor count of violating the CFAA, (a)(2), unauthorized access.</li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v.Bradley_Manning" title="United States v. Bradley Manning">United States v. Bradley Manning</a>, 2010-. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning" title="Bradley Manning">Bradley Manning</a> was a soldier who allegedly disclosed tens of thousands of documents to those 'not entitled to receive' them. Among the 34 counts against him, there are several under (a)(1) and (a)(2) of the CFAA, some specifically linked to files like the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reykjavik_13" title="Reykjavik 13" class="mw-redirect">Reykjavik 13</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Department" title="State Department" class="mw-redirect">State Department</a> cable and a video of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_12,2007_Baghdad_airstrike" title="July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike">July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike</a>.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-16">[16]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li>Grand Jury investigation in Cambridge, 2011. Unknown persons in Cambridge, Massachusetts, were ordered to attend Grand Jury hearings regarding charges under the CFAA, as well as the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act" title="Espionage Act" class="mw-redirect">Espionage Act</a>. Journalist <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Greenwald" title="Glenn Greenwald">Glenn Greenwald</a> has written these were likely related to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikileaks" title="Wikileaks" class="mw-redirect">Wikileaks</a>.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-17">[17]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Aaron_Swartz" title="United States v. Aaron Swartz">United States v. Aaron Swartz</a>, 2011. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz" title="Aaron Swartz">Aaron Swartz</a> allegedly entered an MIT wiring closet and set up a laptop to mass-download articles from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSTOR" title="JSTOR">JSTOR</a>. He allegedly avoided various attempts by JSTOR and MIT to stop this, such as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAC_address_spoofing" title="MAC address spoofing" class="mw-redirect">MAC address spoofing</a>. He was indicted for violating CFAA privisions (a)(2), (a)(4), (c)(2)(B)(iii), (a)(5)(B), and (c)(4)(A)(i)(I),(VI).<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-18">[18]</a> The government dropped the charges after Swartz committed <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide" title="Suicide">suicide</a> in January 2013.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-19">[19]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisco_Systems#Antitrust_lawsuit" title="Cisco Systems">United States v. Peter Alfred-Adekeye</a> 2011. Adekeye allegedly violated (a)(2), when he allegedly downloaded <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CISCO" title="CISCO" class="mw-redirect">CISCO</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisco_IOS" title="Cisco IOS">IOS</a>, allegedly something that the CISCO employee who gave him an access password did not permit. Adekeye was CEO of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiven" title="Multiven">Multiven</a> and had accused CISCO of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-competitive" title="Anti-competitive" class="mw-redirect">anti-competitive</a> practices.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-20">[20]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li>Pulte Homes v. Laborers' International Union of North America et al. 2011. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulte_Homes" title="Pulte Homes">Pulte Homes</a> brought a CFAA suit against <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laborers%27_International_Union_of_North_America" title="Laborers' International Union of North America">Laborers' International Union of North America</a> (LIUNA). Pulte had fired a LIUNA employee, resulting in a labor dispute with LIUNA. LIUNA told its members to email and phone the company with their opinions, resulting in an overload of the company's email system.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-21">[21]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-22">[22]</a></li>

<li>United States v <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Aleynikov" title="Sergey Aleynikov">Sergey Aleynikov</a>, 2011. Aleynikov was a programmer at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldman_Sachs" title="Goldman Sachs">Goldman Sachs</a> accused of copying code, like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-frequency_trading" title="High-frequency trading">high-frequency trading</a> code, allegedly in violation of 1030(a)(2)(c) and 1030(c)(2)(B)i-iii and 2. This charge was later dropped, and he was instead charged with theft of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_secret" title="Trade secret">trade secrets</a> and transporting stolen property.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-23">[23]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-24">[24]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nada_Nadim_Prouty" title="Nada Nadim Prouty">United States v Nada Nadim Prouty</a>, circa 2010.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-25">[25]</a> Prouty was an FBI and CIA agent who was prosecuted for having a fraudulent marriage to get US residency. She claims she was persecuted by a US attorney who was trying to gain media coverage by calling her a terrorist agent and get himself promoted to a federal judgeship.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-frogs1-26">[26]</a></li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Neil_Scott_Kramer" title="United States v. Neil Scott Kramer">United States v. Neil Scott Kramer</a>, 2011. Kramer was a court case where a cellphone was used to coerce a minor into engaging sex with an adult. Central to the case was whether a cellphone constituted a computer device. Ultimately, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit found that a cell phone can be considered a computer if "the phone perform[s] arithmetic, logical, and storage functions," paving the way for harsher consequences for criminals engaging with minors over cellphones.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-us_v_neil_scott_kramer-27">[27]</a></li>

</ul>

<h2>Aaron's Law proposal</h2>

<div>

The government was able to bring such disproportionate charges against Aaron because of the broad scope of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and the wire fraud statute. It looks like the government used the vague wording of those laws to claim that violating an online service’s user agreement or terms of service is a violation of the CFAA and the wire fraud statute.

Using the law in this way could criminalize many everyday activities and allow for outlandishly severe penalties.

When our laws need to be modified, Congress has a responsibility to act. A simple way to correct this dangerous legal interpretation is to change the CFAA and the wire fraud statutes to exclude terms of service violations. I will introduce a bill that does exactly that.

</div>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Rep. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoe_Lofgren" title="Zoe Lofgren">Zoe Lofgren</a>, Jan 15, 2013 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-huffingtonpost.com-28">[28]</a></div>

</div>

In the wake of the prosecution and subsequent suicide of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz" title="Aaron Swartz">Aaron Swartz</a>, lawmakers have proposed to amend the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Representative <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoe_Lofgren" title="Zoe Lofgren">Zoe Lofgren</a> has drafted a bill that would help "prevent what happened to Aaron from happening to other Internet users".<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-huffingtonpost.com-28">[28]</a> The bill would exclude <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_service" title="Terms of service">terms of service</a> violations from the 1984 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and from the wire fraud statute, despite the fact that Swartz was not prosecuted based on Terms of Service violations.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-29">[29]</a>

In addition to Lofgren, Representative <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darrell_Issa" title="Darrell Issa">Darrell Issa</a> and Representative <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Polis" title="Jared Polis">Jared Polis</a>—all on the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Judiciary_Committee" title="House Judiciary Committee" class="mw-redirect">House Judiciary Committee</a>, raised questions about the government's handling of the case. Polis called the charges "ridiculous and trumped up," while referring to Swartz as a "martyr."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-Hill-30">[30]</a> Issa, also chair of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Committee_on_Oversight_and_Government_Reform" title="United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform">House Oversight Committee</a>, announced that he is investigating the actions of the Justice Department's prosecution.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-Hill-30">[30]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act#cite_note-31">[31]</a>[

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Secrets_Act_of_1911" title="Defense Secrets Act of 1911">Defense Secrets Act of 1911</a> / <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917" title="Espionage Act of 1917">Espionage Act of 1917</a> / <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarran_Internal_Security_Act" title="McCarran Internal Security Act">McCarran Internal Security Act</a> 1950</li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Comprehensive_Computer_Data_Access_and_Fraud_Act" title="California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act">California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Communications_Privacy_Act" title="Electronic Communications Privacy Act">Electronic Communications Privacy Act</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LVRC_Holdings_v._Brekka" title="LVRC Holdings v. Brekka">LVRC Holdings v. Brekka</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_re_DoubleClick" title="In re DoubleClick">In re DoubleClick</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTA_v._Anderson" title="MBTA v. Anderson" class="mw-redirect">MBTA v. Anderson</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_technology_audit" title="Information technology audit">Information technology audit</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_security_audit" title="Computer security audit" class="mw-redirect">Computer security audit</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_fraud_case_studies" title="Computer fraud case studies" class="mw-redirect">Computer fraud case studies</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hacker_Crackdown" title="The Hacker Crackdown">The Hacker Crackdown</a> (mentions the law, & the eponymous Chicago task force)</li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_Computer" title="Protected Computer" class="mw-redirect">Protected Computer</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikileaks" title="Wikileaks" class="mw-redirect">Wikileaks</a></li>

</ul>

<h2>References</h2>

</div>

===

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/12/inside-the-stratfor-attack/

NYT

March 12, 2012, 6:44 pm

<h3 class="entry-title">Inside the Stratfor Attack</h3>

<address class="byline author vcard">By <a href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/author/nicole-perlroth/" class="url fn" title="See all posts by NICOLE PERLROTH">NICOLE PERLROTH</a></address>

1:58 p.m. | Updated Adding clarification from the F.B.I. regarding how much of Stratfor’s data it was able to salvage.

Last December, a group of hackers quietly orchestrated an attack on Stratfor Global Intelligence Service, a company based in Austin, Tex., that analyzes geopolitical risk and publishes a newsletter for various clients, among them the Departments of Homeland Security and Defense. The hackers breached the company’s network and, once inside, confided in their fellow hacker, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/09/technology/hacker-informant-and-party-boy-of-the-projects.html?ref=technology">Hector Xavier Monsegur, and, as it turns out, the Federal Bureau of Investigation</a>.

Six months earlier, in June, the F.B.I. had arrested Mr. Monsegur and turned him into an informant. With his help, four hackers in Britain and Ireland were charged last Tuesday with computer crimes; a fifth man was arrested Monday in Chicago. Using the information he passed along, F.B.I. officials said it was able to thwart attacks on roughly 300 private companies and government agencies.

But with Stratfor, they were not so lucky.

<a href="http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/03/08/federal-bureau-of-facilitation-what-was-the-fbi-doing-with-stratfor-and-wikileaks/">Conspiracy theorists across the Internet</a> surmise that federal agents sat back and let the Stratfor attack occur to collect evidence, or perhaps net a juicier target — say, Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, which later released the five million internal e-mails that hackers obtained in the Stratfor hack.

“That’s patently false,” said one F.B.I. official, who would speak only on anonymity because the investigation was continuing. “We would not have let this attack happen for the purpose of collecting more evidence.”

F.B.I. officials said they learned of the Stratfor breach on Dec. 6, after hackers had already infiltrated the company’s network and were knee-deep in Stratfor’s confidential files. On that date, F.B.I. officials said, Jeremy Hammond, suspected as the attack’s ringleader, informed Mr. Monsegur he had found a way into Stratfor’s network and was already working to decrypt its data.

The F.B.I. said that it immediately notified Stratfor, but said that at that point it was too late. Over the next several weeks, hackers rummaged through Stratfor’s financial information, e-mail correspondence and subscribers’ personal and financial information, occasionally deleting its most valuable data — all in full view of  F.B.I. agents.

In addition to monitoring hackers’ chat logs, the F.B.I. managed, with Mr. Monsegur’s help, to persuade Mr. Hammond and Stratfor’s other attackers to use one of the agency’s own computers to store data stolen from Stratfor. The hackers complied and transferred “multiple gigabytes of confidential data,” including 60,000 credit card numbers, records for 860,000 Stratfor clients, employees’ e-mails and financial data, to the F.B.I.’s computers, according to the complaint against Mr. Hammond.

In an interview, F.B.I. officials clarified that they were able to salvage the Stratfor data that hackers transferred to its servers. Officials said this included some, but not all, of Stratfor’s data. As for why the F.B.I. was not able to stop hackers from siphoning five million Stratfor e-mails to Wikileaks later on, the F.B.I. said hackers had also stored data on their own servers.

The F.B.I. said it told Stratfor to delay notifying customers while it completed its investigation — a demand that later made Stratfor the target of a class-action lawsuit from subscribers who complained the company did not inform them of the breach until it was too late. Stratfor had little choice but to go public with the breach on Dec. 24, when hackers defaced its Web site and began posting receipts online for donations they had made with customers’ stolen credit card information.

Over the following days, hackers released credit card details for thousands of Stratfor clients, made at least $700,000 in fraudulent purchases using their credit cards, and exploited their e-mail addresses for malware attacks. Stratfor was forced to stop charging for subscriptions to its newsletter — its principal source of revenue. All told, Stratfor estimates the breach cost it $2 million in damages and lost revenue, according to the complaint.

And that’s just the financial cost. Two weeks ago, the company suffered further embarrassment when, three months after the breach, hackers funneled its internal e-mails to WikiLeaks, for widespread publication.

Conspiracy theorists wonder why, with ample evidence, the F.B.I. waited three months to arrest Mr. Hammond after the Stratfor breach. Some suggest that the F.B.I. purposely waited to net a bigger fish: Mr. Assange.

But F.B.I. officials said it simply took that long to collect the evidence to support their case. Cybercrime investigators and former federal prosecutors say that this makes sense, and that the time frame between Stratfor’s attack and subsequent arrests is not unusual.

“It’s not surprising it would take them that long to make arrests,” said Mark Seiden, a cybercrime investigator. “They have to collect evidence, and the paperwork takes between three and six months. If you don’t know exactly how hackers attacked a site, it’s difficult to bring them to justice. There’s no point in picking an unripe fruit.”

That news might disappoint the conspiracy theorists, but not nearly as much as it does Stratfor and its subscribers, whose personal and financial information was compromised as a result of the attack.

“It’s extremely frustrating,” said David White, a subscriber. Mr. White said he and his company were debating whether to renew their subscription. “At this point, it’s up in the air.”

</div>

===

http://www.salon.com/2013/02/21/jeremy_hammond_speaks_out_from_solitary_confinement/

On Thursday morning, the judge overseeing Jeremy Hammond’s trial for his alleged involvement in the famed LulzSec Stratfor hack refused to step down from presiding over the case, despite a reported conflict of interest. Hammond’s attorneys<a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/11/28/judge_in_hacker_case_is_married_to_a_stratfor_client/"> had filed a motion</a> to have Judge Loretta Preska recuse herself from the case after it emerged that her husband had been a Stratfor client with data released by the hack.

The legal system is such that it was up to Preska herself to step down — she opted against it, and Hammond will appear in court in April with the judge presiding. The same judge denied the activist bail (he has been held in a Manhattan federal prison for over a year, regularly placed in solitary confinement) and told the defendant that he could face life in jail for his alleged involvement in the hack.

On the same morning Judge Preska announced that she would not be stepping down from the case, Hammond released a statement of his own through his lawyers. The tract decries the criminal justice system’s treatment of cyber activists, condemns government’s persecution of dissent, and above all celebrates the work of the late Aaron Swartz.

In the statement, <a href="http://www.sparrowmedia.net/2013/02/jeremy-hammond-on-aaron-swartz-the-criminalization-of-digital-dissent/">posted in full </a>by SparrowMedia.net, Hammond writes:

The tragic death of internet freedom fighter Aaron Swartz [STRONGBOX] reveals the government’s flawed “cyber security strategy” as well as its systematic corruption involving computer crime investigations, intellectual property law, and government/corporate transparency…

It is not the “crimes” Aaron may have committed that made him a target of federal prosecution, but his ideas – elaborated in his “Guerrilla Open Access Manifesto” – that the government has found so dangerous. The United States Attorney’s aggressive prosecution, riddled with abuse and misconduct, is what led to the death of this hero. This sad and angering chapter should serve as a wake up call for all of us to acknowledge the danger inherent in our criminal justice system.

</blockquote>

Hammond’s words echo those of, among others, Swartz’s family and partner who blamed overzealous prosecutors and a flawed criminal justice system for driving the online activist to suicide over charges relating to downloading academic articles. Hammond sees Swartz’s case in the context of growing persecution of online activism and dissent under the dangerously broad Computer Fraud and Abuse Act:

The rise in effectiveness of, and public support for, movements like Anonymous and Wikileaks has led to an expansion of computer crime investigations – most importantly enhancements to 18 U.S.C § 1030, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). Over the years the CFAA has been amended five times and has gone through a number of important court rulings that have greatly expanded what the act covers concerning “accessing a protected computer without authorization.” It is now difficult to determine exactly what conduct would be considered legal.

… The sheer number of everyday computer users who could be considered criminals under these broad and ambiguous definitions enables the politically motivated prosecution of anyone who voices dissent.

</blockquote>

The 27-year-old alleged hacker then frames his own case in terms of a “fundamentally flawed and corrupt” legal system:

I am currently facing multiple computer hacking conspiracy charges due to my alleged involvement with Anonymous, LulzSec, and AntiSec, groups which have targeted and exposed corruption in government institutions and corporations such as Stratfor, The Arizona Department of Public Safety, and HB Gary Federal. My potential sentence is dramatically increased because the Patriot Act expanded the CFAA’s definition of “loss.” This allowed Stratfor to claim over 5 million dollars in damages, including the exorbitant cost of hiring outside credit protection agencies and “infosec” corporations, purchasing new servers, 1.6 million dollars in “lost potential revenue” for the time their website was down, and even the cost of a 1.3 million dollar settlement for a class action lawsuit filed against them. Coupled with use of “sophisticated means” and “affecting critical infrastructure” sentence enhancements, if convicted at trial I am facing a sentence of 30-years-to-life.

Dirty trial tactics and lengthy sentences are not anomalies but are part of a fundamentally flawed and corrupt two-tiered system of “justice” which seeks to reap profits from the mass incarceration of millions, especially people of color and the impoverished. The use of informants who cooperate in exchange for lighter sentences is not just utilized in the repressive prosecutions of protest movements and manufactured “terrorist” Islamophobic witch-hunts, but also in most drug cases, where defendants face some of the harshest sentences in the world.

For Aaron Swartz, himself facing 13 felony CFAA charges, it is likely that it was this intense pressure from relentless and uncompromising prosecutors, who, while being aware of Aaron’s psychological fragility, continued to demand prison time, that led to his untimely death.

</blockquote>

As<a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/16/federal_justice_and_aaron_swartzs_death/"> noted here numerous times</a>, following Swartz’s death, efforts have arisen to reform the CFAA. Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., has proposed legislation, titled “Aaron’s law,” that aims to stop the government bringing disproportionate charges in cases like Swartz’s. However, as I noted at the time, “the structural problems plaguing federal justice go far beyond Swartz’s prosecutors and cyber crime law.” Hammond expresses similar skepticism about the effectiveness of such reforms when it comes to ending government persecution under the CFAA, which he argues must be “found unconstitutional under the void-for-vagueness doctrine of the due process clause”:

Due to widespread public outrage, there is talk of congressional investigations into the CFAA. But since the same Congress had proposed increased penalties not even one year ago, any efforts at reform are unlikely to be more than symbolic. What is needed is not reform but total transformation; not amendments but abolition. Aaron is a hero to me because he did not wait for those in power to realize his vision and change their game, he sought to change the game himself, and he did so without fear of being labeled a criminal and imprisoned by a backwards system of justice.

</blockquote>

Meanwhile, following Judge Preska’s decision not to recuse herself Thursday morning, anger at the government’s treatment of Hammond is set to foment. In advance of Preska’s decision, Heidi Boghosian, executive director of the National Lawyers Guild which is putting support behind Hammond’s defense, <a href="http://www.nlg.org/news/releases/jeremy-hammond-judge-decide-recusal-nlg-will-hold-press-conference-hearing">said</a>, “The conflict of interest here is clear cut … Judge Preska is required to avoid the appearance of bias so that, even if she owned one share of Stratfor stock, she would be obligated to recuse herself. How can she be impartial when the case directly affects the man she wakes up to every morning?”

Hammond’s twin, Jason, said of Preska overseeing his brother’s case, “There’s no way he can get a fair trial in her courtroom.”

</div>

</a><a id="yui_3_8_0_11_1368807473110_1605" class="toggle-group toggleOnScroll trigger remember refreshAds gaTrackPageEvent on" data-toggle-group="story-13207458" href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/21/jeremy_hammond_speaks_out_from_solitary_confinement/"> </a>

<a id="yui_3_8_0_11_1368807473110_1605" class="toggle-group toggleOnScroll trigger remember refreshAds gaTrackPageEvent on" data-toggle-group="story-13207458" href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/21/jeremy_hammond_speaks_out_from_solitary_confinement/">Natasha Lennard is an assistant news editor at Salon, covering non-electoral politics, general news and rabble-rousing. Follow her on Twitter @natashalennard, email nlennard@salon.com.

===

</a>

<h1>The Rise and Fall of Jeremy Hammond: Enemy of the State</h1>

<h2>As a devastating series of cyberattacks struck the heart of the national-security establishment, the Feds set out to destroy the legendary hacker and radical anarchist by any means necessary</h2>

<h3 class="byline">by Janet Reitman</h3>

<div class="date">DECEMBER 07, 2012</div>

On a cold day in mid-December 2011, a hacker known as "sup_g" sat alone at his computer – invisible, or so he believed. He'd been working on the target for hours, long after the rest of his crew had logged off: an epic hack, the "digital equivalent of a nuclear bomb," as it later would be described, on the servers of a Texas-based intelligence contractor called Strategic Forecasting Inc. Stratfor served as a sort of private CIA, monitoring developments in political hot spots around the world and supplying analysis to the U.S. security establishment.

A member of the online activist movement Anonymous, sup_g was part of a small team of politically motivated hackers who had breached Stratfor's main defenses earlier that month – ultimately "rooting," or gaining total access to, its main web servers. In them, they had found a cornucopia of treasure: passwords, unencrypted credit-card data and private client lists revealing Stratfor's deep ties to both big business and the U.S. intelligence and defense communities. But perhaps the most lucrative find of all was Stratfor's e-mail database: some 3 million private messages that exposed a wide array of nefarious and clandestine activities – from the U.S. government's monitoring of the Occupy movement to Stratfor's own role in compiling data on a variety of activist movements, including PETA, Wikileaks and even Anonymous itself.

And now, finally, it was done. Logging on to a secure Web chat, sup_g sent a message to a fellow activist. "We in business, baby," he said. "It's over with."

One of the most radical and committed hackers in the shadowy world of Anonymous – a leaderless, nonhierarchical federation of activists with varying agendas – sup_g kept a low profile within the group, carefully concealing his real name and maintaining a number of aliases. That June, he had joined a new faction within Anonymous known as Operation Antisec, or #Antisec, which described itself as a "popular front" against the "corrupt governments, corporations, militaries and law enforcement of the world." Though hundreds of activists may have frequented its internal communication channels, known as Internet relay chats, Antisec had less than a dozen core members: hackers, anarchists, free-speech activists and privacy crusaders, as well as "social engineers" – skilled manipulators whose talents lay in tricking even the most security-conscious into giving up their passwords or other data. The founder and most prominent member of Antisec was a bloviating, heavyset 29-year-old hacker, self-proclaimed revolutionary and social engineer known as "Sabu," who had a special loathing, it seemed, for the intelligence industry. "Let us show them we can spy on them too," he'd tweeted to his more than 35,000 followers in early December.

For three weeks, sup_g and his crew had worked steadily to ruin Stratfor, one of their biggest and richest targets yet. In addition to supplying geopolitical analysis to everyone from the Pentagon to the United Nations, the firm provided customized security services for leading companies like Raytheon and Dow Chemical, often compiling dossiers on activists and others viewed as threats to corporate profits. By Christmas – which Antisec dubbed "LulzXmas" for the "lulz," or mocking enjoyment, they intended to have at Stratfor's expense – the group had made off with more than 200 gigabytes of data. They then destroyed the company's databases and defaced Stratfor's website with a triumphant message promising a "week of mayhem" that would include posting the firm's secrets online – some 860,000 names, e-mails and passwords, including several dozen belonging to top-secret ?? operators whose identities were now leaked for the very first time. Antisec also planned to use the hacked credit cards to make donations to groups like CARE and the American Red Cross. As an added flourish, the group ended its communiqué with the full text of the influential French anarchist tract The Coming Insurrection. "It's useless to wait . . . for the revolution," the treatise reads. "The catastrophe is not coming, it is here."

Three months later, on the evening of March 5th, 2012, more than a dozen federal law-enforcement officers broke down the door of a small brick house on the southwest side of Chicago and arrested Jeremy Hammond, a 27-year-old anarchist and computer hacker they believed to be sup_g. Six feet tall and lanky, dressed in a purple T-shirt and ratty trousers – a signature style one of his female friends noted was less Salvation Army than "the free box outside the Salvation Army" – Hammond looked more like a crusty punk than a computer nerd. In fact, he was both, as well as many other things: an inveterate "black hat" hacker, an irrepressible agitator and enemy of the "rich, ruling class" who identified with the ideas of the Weather Underground and considered the Occupy movement too tame.

Even before the arrest broadcast his name worldwide, Hammond was well-known in extreme-left circles. An early champion of "cyber-liberation," he had been described by Chicago magazine at the age of 22 as an "electronic Robin Hood" after he was sentenced to two years in federal prison for hacking a conservative website and making off with 5,000 credit-card numbers, intending to charge donations to progressive causes. But unique within the hacking subculture, Hammond was also a real-life revolutionary: a "modern-day Abbie Hoffman," in the words of his friend Matt Muchowski. He possessed a shrewd intelligence as well as a certain impulsivity – a fellow hacker referred to it as "urgency" – that had led to a long string of civil-disobedience arrests dating back 10 years, for offenses ranging from defacing a wall with anti-war slogans to banging a drum during a "noise demo" at the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York. (He later called his brief stint in the Tombs his "best prison experience.") Hammond was even busted once, in 2005, for trying to join a protest, against a group of white supremacists in Toledo, Ohio. "They hadn't even gotten out of the car when they were arrested," says Muchowski, a Chicago union organizer who bailed Hammond out.

His arrest, the most prominent bust to date of a U.S. hacktivist, was also a major coup for the FBI. Before Hammond was locked up, Anonymous had engaged in a year-and-a-half-long hacking spree, waging a full-scale war against the "rich and powerful oppressors." The group shut down the websites of the CIA, major banks and credit-card companies. They took up the cause of the Arab Spring by attacking the government websites of Libya, Tunisia and Egypt; they broke into computers belonging to NATO and the GEO Group, one of the world's largest private prison corporations. They hacked defense contractor Booz Allen Hamilton – an attack, dubbed "Military Meltdown Monday," that yielded 90,000 military and civilian e-mail accounts and passwords. They even attacked the FBI itself.

But none of these attacks had the political resonance of Stratfor. The computer breach not only cost the company millions, but focused worldwide attention on the murky world of private intelligence after Anonymous provided the firm's e-mails to WikiLeaks, which has been posting them ever since. It was, by any estimate, an audacious hack – and one for which Hammond may face decades in prison....

In Chicago, Hammond was aware of Anonymous but had dismissed it. "I didn't take them seriously. These weren't, like, super-voodoo hackers," he says. But he began to realize the political potential of Anonymous once they launched Operation Avenge Assange in December 2010, shortly after PayPal, Visa, MasterCard and several other financial institutions abruptly stopped processing donations to Wikileaks, which had come under fire for publishing the diplomatic cables leaked by Bradley Manning. Organizing online, Anonymous held what electronic-freedom activists call a "digital sit-in," encouraging thousands of people to download an online tool called the Low Orbit Ion Cannon, or LOIC, to bombard the companies' websites and knock them offline.

"This spontaneous gathering was one of the first large-scale demonstrations conducted on the Internet," says Gabriella Coleman, a professor at McGill University considered the foremost expert on Anonymous. It also marked the beginning of a new chapter for the group, "providing a paradigm for general online protest that would soon allow individuals to unite and organize to express their deep disenchantment over any and every issue." EXTENSION OF ONLInE PETITION?

Hammond was impressed. "They were taking on credit-card companies and banks," he says. "I thought maybe there were people there who recognized who the bigger enemy was and how to fight them."

One of those people who seemed drawn to the larger struggle was a hacker named Sabu. Born Hector Xavier Monsegur in 1983, he'd grown up in a family of drug dealers – both his father and his aunt went to prison for heroin trafficking in 1997 – and was raised by his grandmother Irma in the Jacob Riis projects of New York's Lower East Side. A husky, bookish kid, he'd never really fit in among the gangsters and street hustlers of his mostly Puerto Rican neighborhood, but he had a natural gift for computers, as well as a rebellious streak. At 14, around the age that Hammond was wowing the Apple "geniuses," Monsegur, whose family couldn't afford an Internet connection, had figured out a way to get on EarthLink for free and proceeded to teach himself Linux, Unix and open-source networking. When he was 16, he defaced several Puerto Rican government websites after a U.S. Navy live-fire exercise on the island of Vieques accidentally killed a local civilian. But he was also an opportunist.

Where Hammond saw hacking as a tool in the larger struggle, Monsegur saw hacking, and its legitimate counterpart, white-hat Internet security consulting, as a way out of the struggle he lived day to day. He craved "respect," as he frequently noted online, and as a kid had landed coveted spots in several New York City-run IT programs for underprivileged teens. In his early 20s, he'd freelanced for a Swedish Internet security firm and later worked for the peer-to-peer file-sharing company LimeWire. But by 2010, Monsegur, now 26 and the sole guardian of two small cousins he called his "daughters," was drifting, living on public assistance in the same projects in which he'd grown up. He sold marijuana on the street, and fenced stolen goods. He also began hacking for profit: stealing credit-card numbers to pay his bills, and hacking into an automotive-parts company, where he ordered four engines worth close to $3,500 for his cars, including a vintage Toyota AE86, which he named "Revolution."

Before long, Anonymous gave Monsegur a mission – he'd later say it was a movement he had been waiting for his entire life. Calling himself Sabu, he began working his way through the various Internet relay chats (IRCs) in Anonops, the IRC network where hacktivists gathered, into the smaller, private chat rooms where illegal actions were planned. When the Middle East exploded in January 2011, he eagerly took part in what Anonymous called the "Freedom Ops": waging war, from his computer, on the websites of the oppressive governments of Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Libya and Bahrain. Yet, unlike Hammond, whose revolutionary ideology infused every aspect of his life, Sabu's nobility of purpose was limited. His main cause, now as always, was himself. "Sabu," one hacker later noted, "believes in Sabu."

FBI surveillance of Anonymous began, by most accounts, around 2010. "In the beginning, nobody in law enforcement even knew who Anonymous was," says one former member. "To the FBI, they'd just been this Scientology nuisance. So when Anonymous started coming out in support of Assange and Bradley Manning, they were really behind. They didn't understand the culture at all."

To help the government – and, he hoped, to win contracts for his firm, HBGary Federal – a digital-security analyst named Aaron Barr decided that he would figure out the secret "leadership" of Anonymous. In early 2011, after studying the group for weeks and lurking in Anonymous chat rooms, Barr drew up a 20-page document with the names and contact information of a number of people he believed formed Anonymous' central core. He then went public, telling a reporter from The Financial Times that he'd unlocked the mystery of Anonymous, which he intended to broadcast widely.

Though Barr's document turned out to be riddled with mistakes, Anonymous took his threat seriously. On Super Bowl Sunday, February 6th, 2011, Sabu and his crew, which called themselves the "Internet Feds," hacked into HBGary's website, Barr's Twitter account and also the company's e-mail database, extracting 68,000 e-mails, which they posted to popular file-sharing site the Pirate Bay. Within a day, news of the hack was everywhere – Steven Colbert famously devoted a segment of The Colbert Report to the hack: "To put that in hacker terms," he said, "Anonymous is a hornet's nest, and Barr said, 'I'm going to stick my penis in that thing.'"

The HBGary hack wound up being more than a bit of payback: Barr, it turned out, had been gearing up a "dirty tricks" campaign against pro-WikiLeaks journalists like Salon's Glenn Greenwald. He'd also pitched the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on how to discredit labor unions and liberal groups. The leak of Barr's e-mails resulted in his resignation and also caused 17 members of Congress to push for an investigation into HBGary's activities.

Watching this go down, Hammond was amazed. "It was an epic hack," he says. Sabu, who took credit – a bit too much credit, many thought -- intrigued Hammond. Unlike other Anons, Sabu talked a tough game, using ghetto slang like "my nigga," and shared Hammond's loathing for the police. He even hinted at a criminal past. "I've been to jail before – I don't fear it," he wrote in one online post. "I've been in the game for over a decade."

Says one of Hammond's Chicago friends, "I can totally imagine Jeremy digging the fact that he befriended a hacker from the hood."

Few people in the movement expressed themselves with such passion, and all Hammond could see was a fellow hacktivist down for the cause. "He put the work in; that's why I respected him," Hammond says. "And I trusted him too." It wasn't initially clear why. Most longtime hackers prefer to work in the shadows, never letting anyone know who they are. Sabu bragged about his talents, awing younger Anons, many of them teenagers, with tales of his "Puerto Rican hacking crew" from the late 1990s and his subsequent years "underground." "He made it seem like you were in this supersecret revolutionary group and portrayed himself as this silent underground hero who was risking everything to make a difference," says one former acolyte.

Hammond, too, was drawn in by Sabu's rhetoric. "He seemed to understand, more than most Anons, what the root of the problem really was," Hammond says. "I'd sit in IRC watching these arguments go down – just stupid shit people would say. But there were some people who got to the baseline element and said things like, 'We must destroy capitalism. We must destroy their systems.' That interested me."

But the random malice that Anonymous, and Sabu's crew in particular, unleashed turned off many, including a 40-year-old Michigan mom and longtime Internet denizen named Jennifer Emick, who had come to believe that some of the more ideologically driven Anons might be dangerous. Shortly after HBGary, Emick decided to do what Aaron Barr had failed to do: She outed, or "doxed," a number of key Anons, including Sabu, publicly listing his name and the neighborhood he lived in. This was perhaps the worst thing that could happen to a hacker, striking a blow to his pride, as well as to his much cherished invisibility – removing the protection that's made Anonymous so powerful to begin with, and leaving him vulnerable to government tracking and, ultimately, arrest.

Sabu denied she'd gotten him, taking to Twitter and issuing a passionate cri de coeur, in which he reminded all Anons that they were "part of something powerful," urging them not to "succumb to fear tactics" and to "stay free."

In many ways, Anonymous, with its nonhierarchical structure, was the realization of what Hammond had always wanted to create – indeed, his 2004 DefCon speech provided the blueprint for what the hacktivist collective became. But Anonymous activism was different than real-world activism, where flesh-and-blood true believers like Hammond could develop passionate followings. In the faceless, nameless online world where no one knew who anyone was, it was the trolls and the liars, the social engineers like Sabu, with a remarkable capacity for duplicity, who spoke the loudest. "It's extremely easy to manipulate people online if you just know how," says one former Anon. "The whole point of IRC is that you can be anyone you want: a revolutionary, a troll, an FBI agent."

Over the coming months, as Hammond's interest grew, Internet Feds morphed into a splinter group called Lulz Security, or Lulzsec. It was led by Sabu with support from a talented propagandist named Topiary. Between May 7th and June 25th, 2011 – dubbed the "50 Days of Lulz" – Lulzsec attacked multinational corporations, gaming sites and several porn sites. Each action was announced with splashy, theatrical bits of PR: a fancifully worded press release and hyped-up Tweets, all designed to garner maximum attention. The media rushed to declare Lulzsec "cyber-vigilantes." New York magazine would later describe them as the Internet's "SEAL Team Six."...?

The data was not due to one Anonymous hack, but the group found a misconfigured server in Israel, where BofA was practically open and accessible.

One Anonymous subgroup, identifying itself as Par:AnoIA (Anonymous Intelligence Agency) released a press report on Wednesday to discuss some of the details of the hacking. The information suggests that Bank of America is running an online intelligence gathering operation against hacktivists.

“The source of this release has confirmed that the data was not acquired by a hack but because it was stored on a misconfigured server and basically open for grabs,” Par:AnoIA <a href="http://www.par-anoia.net/releases2013.html#bofa">said</a>. “Looking at the data it becomes clear that Bank of America, TEKSystems and others (see origins of reports) gathered information on Anonymous and other activists’ movement on various social media platforms and public Internet Relay Chat (IRC) channels.”

The hack data includes information on social network reconnaissance, memos from IT contractor TEKsystems to the bank’s security staff, and reporting chat room, a list of more than 10,000 words, phrases, Wikipedia entries — everything from “jihad” to “keg stand.” The <a href="http://par-anoia.net/assessment/us/bofa/bofa-press-release.pdf">group alleged</a> that the data clearly shows that the research was sloppy, random and valueless. Apparently a keyword list was used to match items of interest on IRC, Twitter and other social media.

“We were amused by the fact that there are actually paid analysts sitting somewhere reading the vast amount garbage that scrolls by in large public channels like #anonops and #voxanon,” Par:AnoIA <a href="http://www.par-anoia.net/releases2013.html#bofa">said</a> in a statement accompanying the leak. “Even more amusing is the keyword list that was found, containing trigger words like ‘jihad’ or ‘homosexual’.”

The bank had instructed security experts to identify specific groups’ threats to spy and monitor. Thus it appears from the data that the Wall Street activists were screened by third-party companies.

“Anonymous has become well known for small groups carrying the banner of the hactivism collective against perceived enemies of the people,” says HackANGLE editor Kyt Dotson. “In 2011, <a href="http://siliconangle.com/blog/2011/10/26/november-fifth-looms-large-with-anonymous-plot-vs-fox-news-banks/">Anonymous attempted to use Nov 5</a>–a date close to the provacteur nature of the collective due to its connection to Guy Fawkes and the V for Vendetta mask used in their propaganda–as a rally point to unleash on Fox News alongside a call for customers to transfer money out of international banks. Needless to say, nothing much happened then either.”

The Bank of America was linked to efforts to collect information about members of Anonymous and its partner organizations, especially Aaron Barr, who previously announced that he had succeeded in unmasking the key figures in the organization. In retaliation, Anonymous hacked into the HB Gary Federal System, took over its Twitter account and revealed 68,000 emails, including a presentation made to Bank of America by HB Gary Federal in cooperation with other intelligence agencies.

The Wall Street bank raised the ire of Anonymous in 2010, when it announced it would stop processing payments to WikiLeaks. Similar movements made by MasterCard, Visa and PayPal also triggered retaliatory cyber-attacks by the hacker group.

<a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/27/anonymous_group_claims_to_show_bofa_monitored_hackers_activists/">http://www.salon.com/2013/02/27/anonymous_group_claims_to_show_bofa_monitored_hackers_activists/</a>

An Anonymous group, identifying itself as Par:AnoIA (aka Anonymous Intelligence Agency) has released 14 Gigabytes of data, code and software that it claims shows how Bank of America employed security firms to monitor hackers and activists.

In a Wednesday <a href="http://par-anoia.net/assessment/us/bofa/bofa-press-release.pdf">press release</a>, Par:AnoIA stated that the data “shows that Bank of America and others are contracting other companies to spy and collect information on private citizens.” The release also notes, however, that the “overall quality of the research is poor and potentially false.”

The data was not obtained through any hack, but was “stored on a misconfigured server and basically open for grabs.”

Leaked documents reveal that TEKSystems assembled  reports on both<a href="http://par-anoia.net/assessment/us/bofa/allTexts/emails/372.%207_24_2012%20-%20EWT%20TACTO%20-%20Occupy%20Tactical%20Breifing.txt"> Occupy  Wall Street online activity </a>and <a href="http://par-anoia.net/assessment/us/bofa/allTexts/emails/04.%2010_24_2012%20-%20Daily%20Cyber%20Threat%20Highlights%20-%2024%20October%202012.txt">hackers</a> throughout 2012. But  the hackers group called such “intelligence” “sloppy, random and valueless”:

Apparently a key word list was used to match for items of interest on IRC, Twitter and other social media. While the list has over 10.000 entries only 1125 keywords seem to be genuine, the rest are simply Wikipedia references.

</blockquote>

<div>This aspect of leaked information is reminiscent of internal DHS reports obtained revealing the agency’s monitoring of Occupy in late 2011. <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/29/was_dhs_really_spying_on_occupy/">At the time</a> I noted “my shock… at the cursory and complacent nature of the document. This is spying? The sources cited for Occupy information are almost entirely mainstream media reports (from the AP, CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, Reuters and others).”</div>

<div><a href="http://www.justiceonline.org/commentary/fbi-files-ows.html">FBI documents obtained</a> earlier this year through FOIA by the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund <a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/02/the_irony_of_joint_fbi_private_sector_ows_policing/">revealed</a> that an FBI program specifically dedicated to the partnership between the FBI, DHS and the private sector monitored the Occupy protests, providing information and tips to corporate partners on interacting with and combating Occupy groups.</div>

</div>

</div>

</div>

</div>